DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on January 28th, 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign mentioned in the description: “C” (Page 5, Line 26). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “first link having a lateral portion defining a first side of the first link” (Claim 1, Lines 4-5) and “A watch comprising at least said modular element” (Claim 26, Line 1) must be shown or the features canceled from the claim. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
In addition to Replacement Sheets containing the corrected drawing figure(s), applicant is required to submit a marked-up copy of each Replacement Sheet including annotations indicating the changes made to the previous version. The marked-up copy must be clearly labeled as “Annotated Sheets” and must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change(s) to the drawings. See 37 CFR 1.121(d)(1). Failure to timely submit the proposed drawing and marked-up copy will result in the abandonment of the application.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation is: “one or more elements” in Claim 23 (Lines 5-6).
Because this claim limitation is being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it is being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this limitation interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation recites sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7, 9-17, 19-21, 23-24, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “to/from the lateral portion” in Line 14. It is unclear if “to/from” refers to “to and from” or “to or from” or to something else, thus, rendering the claim indefinite since the metes and bounds of the claim have not been established.
Claims 2, 4-5, 7, 9-17, 19-21, 23-24, and 26, which depend on claim 1, are equally rejected.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “the movement” in Lines 8-9 and Lines 9-10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “the mutual position” in Line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “the movement” in Line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “the direction of extension” in Line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “the movement” in Lines 9-10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “the direction of extension” in Lines 10-11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “normally attached” in Line 12. The term “normally” is a relative and/or subjective term that renders the claim indefinite since metes and bounds for the term have not been established.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “the axial movement” in Line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “the elastic means” in Line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “the first hole” in Lines 4-5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “the connection” in Line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 19 recites the limitation “the plurality of positions” in Line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recites the limitation “the movement” in Lines 17 and 18-19. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recites the limitation “the direction of extension” in Lines 17-18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 21 recites the limitation “the fixed element” in Line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 21 recites the limitation “the central body” in Line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 24 recites the limitation “and at least a second link” in Lines 4-5. It is unclear if “and at least a second link” is referring to the second link of claim 1 or an additional second link. Thus, rendering the claim indefinite because the metes and bounds of the claim have not been established.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7, 9, 11-12, 16-17, 19-20, 24, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Catheline et al. (US9462857B2), hereinafter “Catheline”. Examiner Note: While the embodiment used for these rejections are the embodiments of Fig. 10 and Fig. 11, the second embodiment, references to the first embodiment are made when the elements are the same (Column 6, Lines 62-65).
Regarding Claim 1, Catheline discloses a modular element (Fig. 1) for an adjustable strap for watches, the modular element comprising: a first link (Fig. 1, Element M2) configured to be associated with at least a second link (Fig. 1, Element M1c) arranged consecutively (Fig. 1), the first link having a lateral portion (Fig. 1, Element M1b) defining a first side (see annotated Fig. 1 of Catheline reproduced below) of the first link, and a movable element (Fig. 1, Element M1a) arranged at an opposite second side (see annotated Fig. 1 of Catheline reproduced below) of the first link, a first pin (see annotated Fig. 6 of Catheline reproduced below) extending from the lateral portion towards the movable element (Fig. 5) and passing through a first through channel (see annotated Fig. 6 of Catheline reproduced below) formed in the second link, a second pin (Fig. 6, Element 3) extending from the lateral portion towards the movable element through a second channel (Fig. 6, Element 21) formed in the first link, the second pin being movable within the second channel to/from the lateral portion (Column 5, Lines 39-53; Column 6, Lines 47-50; by means of screwing or unscrewing Element 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
421
439
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1 of Catheline
PNG
media_image2.png
368
490
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 6 of Catheline
Regarding Claim 2, Catheline anticipates the modular element of claim 1 as explained above.
Catheline further discloses wherein the second pin extends along a direction of extension (see annotated Fig. 1 of Catheline reproduced above) between a first end (see annotated Fig. 2 of Catheline reproduced below) arranged in the second channel (Fig. 5) and an opposite end (see annotated Fig. 2 of Catheline reproduced below) connected to the movable element (Fig. 5by means of Elements 420 and 110; Column 5, Lines 39-43), and wherein the first end of the second pin is movable with respect to the first link and to the lateral portion within the second channel (Column 5, Lines 39-53; by means of screwing or unscrewing Element 3), the opposite end of the second pin being fixed in a first hole (Fig. 5, Element 11) of the movable element.
PNG
media_image3.png
283
439
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2 of Catheline
Regarding Claim 4, Catheline anticipates the modular element of claim 1 as explained above.
Catheline further discloses wherein the second pin extends along a direction of extension (see annotated Fig. 1 of Catheline reproduced above) between a first end (see annotated Fig. 2 of Catheline reproduced above) arranged in the second channel (Fig. 5) and an opposite end (see annotated Fig. 2 of Catheline reproduced above) connected to the movable element (Fig. 5by means of Elements 420 and 110; Column 5, Lines 39-43), and wherein the first end of the second pin is movable with respect to the first link and to the lateral portion within the second channel Column 5, Lines 39-53; by means of screwing or unscrewing Element 3), the opposite end of the second pin (see annotated Fig. 2 of Catheline reproduced above) being fixed in a first hole (Fig. 5, Element 11) of the movable element wherein the first hole of the movable element is threaded (Fig. 4, Elements 11 and 110; Column 5, Lines 39-43), the opposite end of the second pin being screwed within said first hole (Fig. 5; Column 5, Lines 39-43).
Regarding Claim 5, Catheline anticipates the modular element of claim 1 as explained above.
Catheline further discloses wherein the second pin is movable among a plurality of positions (Column 5, Lines 39-48, during screwing moving along Element 12 and 21 towards Element 11) comprising a position of maximum extension of the second pin within the second channel (Column 5, Lines 39-48, when it is moved through Element 21 towards Element 11 to be screwed in and it is screwed in) and a position of minimum extension of the second pin within the second channel (Column 5, Lines 39-48, when it is moved through Element 12 towards Element 21 to be screwed in as it enters Element 21), wherein each position of the plurality of positions of the second pin is associated with a non-zero extension (Column 5, Lines 39-48; Column 6, Lines 47-49, during movement) of the second pin within the second channel, and wherein the first end (see annotated Fig. 2 of Catheline reproduced above) is configured for the movement (Column 5, Lines 39-48; Column 6, Lines 47-49) along the direction of extension (see annotated Fig. 1 of Catheline reproduced above) within the second channel (Fig. 5, Element 21) in the movement of the second pin among the plurality of positions (Column 5, Lines 39-48, during screwing), the extension associated with each position being defined by the mutual position between the first end and the lateral portion of the first link (Column 5, Lines 39-48, during screwing as the first end moves through Element 12).
Regarding Claim 7, Catheline anticipates the modular element of claim 1 as explained above.
Catheline further discloses wherein the second pin is movable among a plurality of positions (Column 5, Lines 39-48, during screwing moving along Element 12 and 21 towards Element 11) comprising a position of maximum extension of the second pin within the second channel (Column 5, Lines 39-48, when it is moved through Element 21 towards Element 11 to be screwed in and it is screwed in) and a position of minimum extension of the second pin within the second channel (Column 5, Lines 39-48, when it is moved through Element 12 towards Element 21 to be screwed in as it enters Element 21), wherein each position of the plurality of positions of the second pin is associated with a non-zero extension (Column 5, Lines 39-48; Column 6, Lines 47-49, during movement) of the second pin within the second channel, and wherein the first link comprises elastic means (Fig. 10, Element 6’; Column 7, Lines 3-5 and Lines 59-61) arranged between the second pin and the second channel (as seen in Fig. 10), and wherein the elastic means are configured to counteract (Figs. 10-11; Column 1, Lines 43-50; Column 6, Line 66-Column 7, Line 17) the movement of the second pin within the second channel along the direction of extension (see annotated Fig. 1 of Catheline reproduced above).
Regarding Claim 9, Catheline anticipates the modular element of claim 1 as explained above.
Catheline further discloses wherein the second pin is movable among a plurality of positions (Column 5, Lines 39-48, during screwing moving along Element 12 and 21 towards Element 11) comprising a position of maximum extension of the second pin within the second channel (Column 5, Lines 39-48, when it is moved through Element 21 towards Element 11 to be screwed in and it is screwed in) and a position of minimum extension of the second pin within the second channel (Column 5, Lines 39-48, when it is moved through Element 12 towards Element 21 to be screwed in as it enters Element 21), wherein each position of the plurality of positions of the second pin is associated with a non-zero extension (Column 5, Lines 39-48; Column 6, Lines 47-49, during movement) of the second pin within the second channel, and wherein the elastic means (Fig. 10, Element 6’; Column 7, Lines 3-5 and Lines 59-61) are configured to counteract (Figs. 10-11; Column 1, Lines 43-50; Column 6, Line 66- Column 7, Line 17) the movement of the second pin within the second channel along the direction of extension (see annotated Fig. 1 of Catheline reproduced above), and wherein said elastic means are configured to keep said movable element normally attached to the second side (see annotated Fig. 1 of Catheline reproduced above) at the position of maximum extension within the second channel (Figs. 10-11; Column 1, Lines 43-50; Column 6, Line 66- Column 7, Line 17).
Regarding Claim 11, Catheline anticipates the modular element of claim 1 as explained above.
Catheline further discloses wherein the second channel (Fig. 5, Element 21) of the first link is through (Fig. 5, Element 21).
Regarding Claim 12, Catheline anticipates the modular element of claim 1 as explained above.
Catheline further discloses wherein the second channel (Fig. 5, Element 21) of the first link is through (Fig. 5, Element 21), and wherein the first end (see annotated Fig. 2 of Catheline reproduced above) has a head (Fig. 10, Element 40) adapted to be coupled to a screwdriver for screwing the second pin within the first hole (Fig. 5, Element 11) of the movable element (Column 5, Lines 31-34 and Lines 39-43 ).
Regarding Claim 16, Catheline anticipates the modular element of claim 1 as explained above.
Catheline further discloses wherein the first link comprises a central body (Fig. 1, Element M2) and a fixed element (Fig. 1, Element M1b) arranged laterally to the central body (Fig. 1), the lateral portion (Fig. 1, Element M1b) of the first link being defined by the fixed element (Fig. 1, Element M1b).
Regarding Claim 17, Catheline anticipates the modular element of claim 1 as explained above.
Catheline further discloses wherein the first link comprises a central body (Fig. 1, Element M2) and a fixed element (Fig. 1, Element M1b) arranged laterally to the central body (Fig. 1), the lateral portion (Fig. 1, Element M1b) of the first link being defined by the fixed element (Fig. 1, Element M1b), wherein the fixed element has a first cavity (Fig. 5, Element 12)
defining at least partly said second channel of the first link (as seen in Fig. 10), the first end (see annotated Fig. 2 of Catheline reproduced above) of the second pin being arranged at least partly within said first cavity of the fixed element (as seen in Fig. 10), and wherein the first end of the second pin is movable within the first cavity of the fixed element (Column 5, Lines 39-53).
Regarding Claim 19, Catheline anticipates the modular element of claim 1 as explained above.
Catheline further discloses wherein the first link comprises a central body (Fig. 1, Element M2) and a fixed element (Fig. 1, Element M1b) arranged laterally to the central body (Fig. 1), the lateral portion (Fig. 1, Element M1b) of the first link being defined by the fixed element (Fig. 1, Element M1b), wherein the fixed element has a first cavity (Fig. 5, Element 12) defining at least partly said second channel of the first link (as seen in Fig. 10), the first end (see annotated Fig. 2 of Catheline reproduced above) of the second pin being arranged at least partly within said first cavity of the fixed element (as seen in Fig. 10), and wherein the first end of the second pin is movable within the first cavity of the fixed element (Column 5, Lines 39-53), and wherein each position of the plurality of positions (Column 5, Lines 39-48, during screwing moving along Element 12 and 21 towards Element 11) of the second pin is associated with a non-zero extension (Column 5, Lines 39-48; Column 6, Lines 47-49, during movement) of the second pin within the first cavity of the fixed element (Column 5, Lines 39-48, during screwing the second pin moving through Elements 12, 21, and 11).
Regarding Claim 20, Catheline anticipates the modular element of claim 1 as explained above.
Catheline further discloses wherein the second pin is movable among a plurality of positions (Column 5, Lines 39-48, during screwing moving along Element 12 and 21 towards Element 11) comprising a position of maximum extension of the second pin within the second channel (Column 5, Lines 39-48, when it is moved through Element 21 towards Element 11 to be screwed in and it is screwed in) and a position of minimum extension of the second pin within the second channel (Column 5, Lines 39-48, when it is moved through Element 12 towards Element 21 to be screwed in as it enters Element 21), wherein each position of the plurality of positions of the second pin is associated with a non-zero extension (Column 5, Lines 39-48; Column 6, Lines 47-49, during movement) of the second pin within the second channel, and wherein the first link comprises a central body (Fig. 1, Element M2) and a fixed element (Fig. 1, Element M1b) arranged laterally to the central body (Fig. 1), the lateral portion (Fig. 1, Element M1b) of the first link being defined by the fixed element (Fig. 1, Element M1b), wherein the fixed element has a first cavity (Fig. 5, Element 12) defining at least partly said second channel of the first link (as seen in Fig. 10), the first end (see annotated Fig. 2 of Catheline reproduced above) of the second pin being arranged at least partly within said first cavity of the fixed element (as seen in Fig. 10), and wherein the first end of the second pin is movable within the first cavity of the fixed element (Column 5, Lines 39-53), and wherein each position of the plurality of positions (Column 5, Lines 39-48, during screwing moving along Element 12 and 21 towards Element 11) of the second pin is associated with a non-zero extension (Column 5, Lines 39-48; Column 6, Lines 47-49, during movement) of the second pin within the first cavity of the fixed element (Column 5, Lines 39-48, during screwing the second pin moving through Elements 12, 21, and 11), and wherein the first end is configured for the movement along the direction of extension (see annotated Fig. 1 of Catheline reproduced above) within the cavity (Column 5, Lines 39-48, during screwing the second pin moving through Elements 12, 21, and 11) of the fixed element in the movement of the second pin among the plurality of positions (Column 5, Lines 39-48, during screwing moving along Element 12 and 21 towards Element 11).
Regarding Claim 24, Catheline anticipates the modular element of claim 1 as explained above.
Catheline further discloses the adjustable strap (Column 2, Lines 35-39, “bracelet”) for said watches (Column 2, Lines 35-39, “wristwatch”) comprising a plurality of central modules (Column 2, Lines 35-39; Examiner Note: It is understood that to form the bracelet for the wristwatch band, the modular element disclosed by Catheline is consecutively arranged in a row as many times as needed for the desired length of the bracelet, thus repeating the same assembly/elements present in the discussed modular element) comprising at least said modular element according to claim 1 (as explained above) and at least a second link (Fig. 1, Element M1c) arranged consecutively (Fig. 1), a second lateral portion (Fig. 1, Element M1b) arranged at a first side of the first link (see annotated Fig. 1 of Catheline reproduced above), an additional movable element (Fig. 1, Element M1a) set alongside said second lateral portion arranged at a second side opposite the second link (see annotated Fig. 1 of Catheline reproduced above), and an additional first pin (see annotated Fig. 6 of Catheline reproduced above) extending from the second lateral portion towards said additional movable element (Fig. 5) and passing through a an additional first through channel (see annotated Fig. 6 of Catheline reproduced above) formed in a third link (as the assembly is being repeated to form the bracelet of the wristwatch).
Regarding Claim 26, Catheline anticipates the modular element of claim 1 as explained above.
Catheline further discloses a watch (Column 2, Lines 35-39, “wristwatch”) comprising at least said modular element (Fig. 1) for said adjustable strap (Column 2, Lines 35-39, “bracelet”) according to claim 1 (as explained above).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Catheline in view of Chen et al. (WO2017096593A1), hereinafter “Chen”. For text citation of Chen refer to the machine translation provided by the Examiner.
Regarding Claim 10, Catheline anticipates the modular element of claim 1 as explained above.
Catheline fails to disclose wherein the second channel has a shoulder to counteract the axial movement of the elastic means towards said movable element and/or of the first end of the second pin away from the lateral portion.
Nonetheless, Chen teaches wherein the second channel (see annotated Fig. 4 of Chen reproduced below) has a shoulder (Fig. 4, Element 15) to counteract the axial movement of the elastic means (Fig. 4, Element 14) towards a movable element (Fig. 4, Element 10b).
Catheline and Chen are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor of modular links. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to incorporate the teachings of Chen of using a shoulder to counteract the axial movement of the elastic means towards said movable element into the modular element disclosed by Catheline so that one of the end of the elastic means abut against the shoulder and prevent the second pin from coming out of the second channel (Page 17, Lines 11-19).
PNG
media_image4.png
404
738
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 4 of Chen
Claims 13, 15, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Catheline in view of Yeung (CH718175A2), hereinafter “Yeung”. For text citation of Yeung refer to the machine translation provided by the Examiner.
Regarding Claim 13, Catheline anticipates the modular element of claim 1 as explained above.
Catheline further discloses wherein the first pin (see annotated Fig. 6 of Catheline reproduced above) is partly inserted into a second cavity (see annotated Fig. 6 of Catheline reproduced above) formed in the lateral portion and locked therein (Fig. 6), engageable in a second hole (see annotated Fig. 6 of Catheline reproduced above) formed in the movable element.
Catheline fails to disclose engageable in a second hole formed in the movable element in a removable manner.
Nonetheless, Yeung teaches a first pin (Figs. 1 and 3, Element 31) engageable in a second hole (see 1st annotated Fig. 3 of Yeung reproduced below) formed in the movable element (Fig. 3, Element 11) in a removable manner (Figs. 2A-2C).
Catheline and Yeung are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor of modular links. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to incorporate the teachings of Yeung of using a first pin engageable in a second hole formed in the movable element in a removable manner into the modular element disclosed by Catheline to provide an additional adjustment mechanism that is simple in its design and easy to use (¶0025, Line 5).
PNG
media_image5.png
290
646
media_image5.png
Greyscale
1st annotated Fig. 3 of Yeung
Regarding Claim 15, Catheline anticipates the modular element of claim 1 as explained above.
Catheline further discloses wherein the second pin is movable among a plurality of positions (Column 5, Lines 39-48, during screwing moving along Element 12 and 21 towards Element 11) comprising a position of maximum extension of the second pin within the second channel (Column 5, Lines 39-48, when it is moved through Element 21 towards Element 11 to be screwed in and it is screwed in) and a position of minimum extension of the second pin within the second channel (Column 5, Lines 39-48, when it is moved through Element 12 towards Element 21 to be screwed in as it enters Element 21), wherein each position of the plurality of positions of the second pin is associated with a non-zero extension (Column 5, Lines 39-48; Column 6, Lines 47-49, during movement) of the second pin within the second channel, wherein the first pin (see annotated Fig. 6 of Catheline reproduced above) is partly inserted into a second cavity (see annotated Fig. 6 of Catheline reproduced above) formed in the lateral portion and locked therein (Fig. 6), engageable in a second hole (see annotated Fig. 6 of Catheline reproduced above) formed in the movable element.
Catheline fails to disclose engageable in a second hole formed in the movable element in a removable manner.
Nonetheless, Yeung teaches a first pin (Figs. 1 and 3, Element 31) engageable in a second hole (see 1st annotated Fig. 3 of Yeung reproduced below) formed in the movable element (Fig. 3, Element 11) in a removable manner (Figs. 2A-2C).
Catheline and Yeung are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor of modular links. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to incorporate the teachings of Yeung of using a first pin engageable in a second hole formed in the movable element in a removable manner into the modular element disclosed by Catheline to provide an additional adjustment mechanism that is simple in its design and easy to use (¶0025, Line 5).
After modifications, the prior art combination of Catheline and Yeung teaches wherein the movable element is movable between a first position (Yeung, Fig. 2A), wherein the second pin is in the position of maximum extension (Catheline - Column 5, Lines 39-48, when it is moved through Element 21 towards Element 11 to be screwed in and it is screwed in) and the movable element is moved close to the first link and to the second link (Yeung, Fig. 2B), and a second position (Yeung - Fig. 2B-2C), wherein the second pin is in the position of minimum extension (Column 5, Lines 39-48, when it is moved through Element 12 towards Element 21 to be screwed in as it enters Element 21) and the movable element is moved away from the first link and from the second link (as it is allowed to move with and/or through the second pin) to allow to disengage the first pin (Yeong - Figs. 1 and 3, Element 31) from the second hole ((see 1st annotated Fig. 3 of Yeung reproduced above), slide the second link off the first pin (Yeong - ¶0031) and remove the second link from the adjustable strap.
Regarding Claim 21, Catheline anticipates the modular element of claim 1 as explained above.
Catheline fails to disclose comprising a third pin that extends from the fixed element towards the first link to be inserted into a first opening made in the central body of the first link, and/or a fourth pin that extends from the fixed element towards the first link to be inserted into a second opening made in the central body of the first link, and wherein: the third pin is partly inserted into a third cavity made in the fixed element and locked therein, and/or the fourth pin is partly inserted into a fourth cavity made in the fixed element and locked therein.
Nonetheless, Yeung teaches a third pin (see 2nd annotated Fig. 3 of Yeung reproduced below that extends from the fixed element (Figs. 1 and 3, Element 13) towards the first link (see 2nd annotated Fig. 3 of Yeung reproduced below) to be inserted into a first opening (see 2nd annotated Fig. 3 of Yeung reproduced below ) made in the central body (see 2nd annotated Fig. 3 of Yeung reproduced below ) of the first link, and a fourth pin (see annotated 2nd Fig. 3 of Yeung reproduced below) that extends from the fixed element towards the first link to be inserted into a second opening (see annotated 2nd Fig. 3 of Yeung reproduced below) made in the central body of the first link, and wherein: the third pin is partly inserted into a third cavity (Fig. 1, Element 133; ¶0029, Lines 1-5) made in the fixed element and locked therein, and the fourth pin is partly inserted into a fourth cavity (Fig. 1, Element 133; ¶0029, Lines 1-5) made in the fixed element and locked therein.
Catheline and Yeung are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor of modular links. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to incorporate the teachings of Yeung of using a third pin that extends from the fixed element towards the first link to be inserted into a first opening made in the central body of the first link, and a fourth pin that extends from the fixed element towards the first link to be inserted into a second opening made in the central body of the first link, and wherein: the third pin is partly inserted into a third cavity made in the fixed element and locked therein, and the fourth pin is partly inserted into a fourth cavity made in the fixed element and locked therein into the modular element disclosed by Catheline to contribute to the stability of the modular link (¶0014).
PNG
media_image6.png
377
646
media_image6.png
Greyscale
2nd annotated Fig. 3 of Yeung
Claims 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Catheline in view of Yeung and Boucard et al. (US11523662B2), hereinafter “Boucard”.
Regarding Claim 14, Catheline anticipates the modular element of claim 1 as explained above.
Catheline further discloses wherein the first pin (see annotated Fig. 6 of Catheline reproduced above) is partly inserted into a second cavity (see annotated Fig. 6 of Catheline reproduced above) formed in the lateral portion and locked therein (Fig. 6), engageable in a second hole (see annotated Fig. 6 of Catheline reproduced above) formed in the movable element.
Catheline fails to disclose engageable in a second hole formed in the movable element in a removable manner, and wherein the second cavity of the lateral portion has a thread for the connection to the first pin, the first pin being screwed within the second cavity.
Nonetheless, Yeung teaches a first pin (Figs. 1 and 3, Element 31) engageable in a second hole (see 1st annotated Fig. 3 of Yeung reproduced below) formed in the movable element (Fig. 3, Element 11) in a removable manner (Figs. 2A-2C).
Catheline and Yeung are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor of modular links. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to incorporate the teachings of Yeung of using a first pin engageable in a second hole formed in the movable element in a removable manner into the modular element disclosed by Catheline to provide an additional adjustment mechanism that is simple in its design and easy to use (¶0025, Line 5).
The prior art combination of Catheline and Yeung fails to teach wherein the second cavity of the lateral portion has a thread for the connection to the first pin, the first pin being screwed within the second cavity.
Nonetheless, Boucard teaches wherein the second cavity (Fig. 1, Element 27) of the lateral portion (Fig. 1, Element 3) has a thread (Fig. 1, Element 15’; Column 3, Lines 54-65) for the connection to the first pin (Fig. 1, Element 11’), the first pin being screwed within the second cavity (Fig. 1; Column 3, Lines 54-65).
Catheline, Yeung, and Boucard are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor of watch links. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to incorporate the teachings of Boucard wherein the second cavity of the lateral portion has a thread for the connection to the first pin, the first pin being screwed within the second cavity into the modular element disclosed by Catheline and modified by Yeung to secured the pin in the blind recess with a screw connection (Abstract).
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Catheline in view of Günster et al. (US6622469B2), hereinafter “Günster”.
Regarding Claim 23, Catheline anticipates the modular element of claim 1 as explained above.
Catheline further discloses wherein the first link comprises a central body (Fig. 1, Element M2) and a fixed element (Fig. 1, Element M1b) arranged laterally to the central body (Fig. 1), the lateral portion (Fig. 1, Element M1b) of the first link being defined by the fixed element (Fig. 1, Element M1b).
Catheline fails to disclose wherein the central body of the first link comprises one or more elements connected to each other having respective aligned trough channels to define said second channel of the first link.
Nonetheless, Günster teaches wherein the central body of the first link (see annotated Fig. 4 of Günster reproduced below) comprises one or more elements (Fig. 4, Elements 32-34) connected to each other having respective aligned trough channels (see annotated Fig. 4 of Günster reproduced below) to define said second channel of the first link (see annotated Fig. 4 of Günster reproduced below).
Catheline and Günster are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor of modular links. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to incorporate the teachings of Günster of using a central body of the first link comprising one or more elements connected to each other having respective aligned trough channels to define said second channel of the first link into the modular element disclosed by Catheline to form a wristband including five rows of link (Column 2, Element 29-37).
PNG
media_image7.png
505
642
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 4 of Günster
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US20070104035A1 & US20090113870A1 - Adjustable strap for watch
EP2915445B1 - Axial translation of second pin
EP1428451A1 - One or more central elements
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALONDRA MICHELLE ORTIZ-ORTIZ whose telephone number is (571)272-9539. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7-5PM ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christopher Templeton can be reached at (571) 270-1477. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/A.M.O./
Examiner, Art Unit 3725
/Christopher L Templeton/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3725
