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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-5, 7, 9, and 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicolas US 2022/0382221 in view of Lamarche, US 9,292,000.
Regarding claim 1, Nicolas discloses a device for setting the time for a timepiece, comprising:
- at least one hand which is movable around a first axis in order to indicate a time (“hands” [0020] and [0021]); and
- a sensor assembly (50) for detection of one or a plurality of discrete positions of at least one hand;
- an element for determination of a current time ([0009] “correct time” [0021] the processor updates the time of the watch);
- a processing logic unit adapted to control the actuator according to data received from the sensor assembly and the element for determination of a current time ([0021] the processor updates the time of the watch);
- a casing (4, 5), and
- a movable part (4, “the first part 4 of the case can be rotatably mounted by hinges or articulations on the second part 5 of the case to be in an open position for the mounting of the watch 20 on the support 10 or a sealed closed position with the first part 4 closing the second part 5 of the case.”), the movable part comprising a masking element (3) which is opaque to visible light and transparent to radiation detected by the sensor assembly (“the electronic shutter 3 or the optical valve 3 is deactivated to be in an opaque state in order to not disturb the measurement in the vision system 50.” It can also be transparent to radiation detected by camera 15).
Nicolas teaches detecting time shown by the watch and resetting the watch to the correct time ([0009] “specific means”) but does not explicitly disclose a manipulable unit for setting the time or an actuator adapted to actuate a manipulable unit for setting the time.
Lamarche discloses a device for setting the time on a timepiece including a manipulable unit (crown 13) and an actuator (14) for manipulating the crown.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use an actuator as taught by Lamarche for actuating the crown on the watch in Nicolas because Nicolas does not specifically teach what means are used for resetting the watch to the correct time and actuators are commonly used for this purpose as taught by Lamarche.
Regarding claim 2, Nicolas and Lamarche disclose the sensor assembly is of an optical nature but do not explicitly disclose a plurality of sensors.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use more than one sensor since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Multiple cameras would also provide for redundancy in case of failure.
Regarding claim 3, Nicolas and Lamarche disclose the casing comprises a receptacle (10) for receipt and positioning of a timepiece on the casing, and wherein the sensor assembly is arranged on the movable part (fig 2B shows 50 is arranged on movable part 4).
Regarding claim 4, Nicolas and Lamarche disclose the casing comprises first positioning elements (motorization means 2, carrier assembly 30), and wherein the movable part comprises second positioning elements (dome 16, wall 4), the first and second positioning elements being able to position the sensor assembly relative to the receptacle (Fig 2B).
Regarding claim 5, Nicolas and Lamarche disclose the device is a presentation box or a case (Fig 2B).
Regarding claim 7, Nicolas and Lamarche disclose a battery (“power supply” [0021]).
Regarding claim 9, Nicolas and Lamarche disclose the device comprises a man-machine interface provided with one or more sources of light indicating an operating state of the device according to a state of the one or more sources of light (Lamarche, LCD screen 17).
Regarding claim 11, Nicolas and Lamarche disclose a method for operation of the device as claimed in claim 1, the method comprising a phase of setting the time comprising:
- actuating a chain of correction of the timepiece using an actuator (Fig 2 of Lamarche);
- detecting at least one passage of the at least one hand in front of a sensor assembly (col. 4 lines 51-64 of Lamarche);
- deducing, from the detecting, a time displayed by the timepiece (col. 4 line 65- col 5. line 10) ;
- determining a current time (col. 5 lines 11-16);
- defining an amplitude of actuation of the chain of correction of the timepiece (col. 4 lines 5-30);
- actuating the chain of correction of the timepiece from the amplitude using the actuator by actuating the manipulable unit for setting the time (fig 2).
Regarding claim 12, Nicolas and Lamarche disclose the phase of setting the time is launched automatically or after a specific action by a user (by use of touch screen, col. 2 lines 24-27).
Regarding claim 13, Nicolas and Lamarche disclose wherein the phase of setting the time is launched only if the movable part is in a given position relative to the casing (Nicolas teaches the movable part must be in the closed position before the time is set because the camera is attached to the movable part and is out of position if not closed).
Regarding claim 14, Nicolas and Lamarche disclose the phase of setting the time comprises controlling emission of a signal (Nicolas controls lights to illuminate the watch face for the camera which is necessary for setting the time [0020]. Lamarche has an LCD display which emits light displaying the status of the watch).
Regarding claim 15, Nicolas and Lamarche disclose the phase of setting the time comprises controlling switching on of one or more sources of light indicating that the phase of setting the time is in progress (Nicolas controls lights to illuminate the watch face for the camera which is necessary for setting the time [0020]. Lamarche has an LCD display which emits light displaying the status of the watch).
Regarding claim 16, Nicolas and Lamarche disclose the phase of setting the time is launched only if a cover of the case is closed (Nicolas teaches the movable part must be in the closed position before the time is set because the camera is attached to the movable part and is out of position if not closed).
Regarding claim 17, Nicolas and Lamarche disclose the element for determination of a current time is a reference clock (Lamarche col. 5 lines 50-51).
Regarding claim 18, Nicolas and Lamarche disclose the movable part is movable in rotation around a second axis relative to the casing between a first position and a second position (the case open on hinges and rotates between open and closed [0030].
Regarding claim 19, Nicolas and Lamarche disclose the masking element is a window (Fig 2A, 2B window 3).
Regarding claim 20, Nicolas and Lamarche do not explicitly disclose the sensors are positioned according to a regular angular distribution around the first axis.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange the sensors in a regular angular distribution around the first axis to increase the accuracy of the detection and because this is a common and well known technique in the art.
Claims 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicolas and Lamarche as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Buehler, US 2019/0121297.
Regarding claim 6, Nicolas and Lamarche do not explicitly disclose the device comprises a sensor for detection of a position of the movable part relative to the casing.
Buehler discloses a sensor (16) for sensing closure of the lid (movable part 14).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a sensor as taught by Buehler in the device of Nicolas for the purpose of detecting if the lid is closed to prevent outside light from interfering with the measurements and operations on the watch and because the camera is mounted on the movable part and therefore needs to be in a closed position.
Regarding claim 8, Nicolas and Lamarche do not explicitly disclose the reference clock is a quartz oscillator clock.
However, a quartz oscillator clock such as the one taught by Buehler [0046] is an obvious choice available to one skilled in the art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a quartz oscillator as a reference clock as taught by Buehler because Buehler states “A remote reference system includes, for example, the reception, by receiver 22, of a radio or GPS signal, or the reception, by communication means 20, of a signal from a computer network, or the reception, by receiver 21, of a mobile telephone signal. The reception of one or more of these signals allows the time reference stored in microprocessor 26 or in printed circuit 42 to be updated. For example, such a time reference can be provided by a precision quartz placed on printed circuit 42.”
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art fails to disclose or suggest the case base comprises a lower face and feet projecting relative to the lower face, the one or more sources of light being arranged on the lower face.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON COLLINS whose telephone number is (571)270-3994. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 AM - 6:00 PM.
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, Renee Luebke can be reached at 571-272-2009. 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.
/JASON M COLLINS/ Examiner, Art Unit 2831
/EDWIN A. LEON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831
