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 .
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it exceeds 150 words. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claims 1-16 are objected to because of the following informalities: independent claims 1, 14 and 16 lack a colon after comprising and do not have an “a” to begin the claim, and dependent claims 2-13 and 14 should begin with “the” so it is clear the adjustable link or wristwatch recited therein is the previously recited link or wristwatch. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
In claim 4, the phrase “additional coupling means” uses the term “means” and is modified by a function (“guiding the relative displacement of the first and second link elements and/or absorbing mechanical stress between said first and second link elements”) without being modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. The corresponding structure is interpreted as the guiding parts 49a, 49b (Paras. [0052]-[0053]) and equivalents thereof.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are 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/these limitation(s) 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(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them 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 10-11 and 14-16 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.
Regarding claim 10, the claim recites “so as to form two gaps for receiving therein the lugs of a watch case or a fastening part of an adjacent link” which renders the claim indefinite because the claims are directed to an adjustable link, so a watch case or an adjacent link are not part of the invention. Further, there is a lack of antecedent basis for “the lug” of the watch case. For the purpose of examination, this phrase will be interpreted as the two gaps are configured to receive a fastening member of another link or a watch case. Claim 11 depends from claim 10 and fails to clarify the indefinite language.
Regarding claim 11, the claim recites “the central portion further comprises a blind hole in the axial extension of the opening of the lock” which renders the claim indefinite because it recites the central portion of the of the link element including features of the lock, which is a separate feature. For the purpose of examination, this phrase will be interpreted as the lock includes a blind hole.
Regarding claim 14, the claim recites a “wristwatch comprising at least one adjustable link according to claim 1” and fails to disclose any watch components which renders the claim indefinite because it is not clear if wristwatch is only the adjustable links or if a watch component is also required. For the purpose of examination, this claim will be interpreted as a wristwatch including a bracelet comprising a plurality of adjustable links and a watch connected to the links. Claim 15 depends from claim 14 and fails to clarify the indefinite language.
Regarding claim 16, the claim also recites a wristwatch and fails to recite a watch, thus this claim is indefinite for the same reasons discussed above with respect to claim 14. For the purpose of examination, this claim will be interpreted as a wristwatch including a bracelet comprising a plurality of adjustable links and a watch connected to the links.
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 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CH 695 656 A5 to Wenger.
Regarding claim 1, Wenger teaches an adjustable link for a bracelet (Figs. 1-3), comprising
a first 6 and a second 8 link element interconnected by a telescopic adjustment mechanism 18, 20, 22 so as to be able to move in translation with respect to one another in to take up at least two separate indexed positions (Figs. 1-3; P. 3, Paragraphs starting “The setting of the link 1 is carried out” through the paragraph starting “The link 1 then has a second length L2”; the first and second link elements 6,8 are connected by a locking member 20 that allows the links to be moved relative to each other in different indexed positions related to grooves 22, and it is noted that “a telescopic adjustment mechanism” is interpreted as a mechanism that allows the link to move telescopically, i.e., it is not the telescopic adjustment mechanism itself that moves telescopically),
the mechanism comprising an actuator 18 accessible from the outside of the adjustable link (Figs. 1-4; P. 3, Paragraphs starting “The setting of the link 1 is carried out” through the paragraph starting “The link 1 then has a second length L2”), a lock 20 that is rigidly attached to the actuator and arranged in a cavity 44 of one of the first 6 and second 8 link elements (Figs. 1-4; P. 3, Paragraphs starting “The setting of the link 1 is carried out” through the paragraph starting “The link 1 then has a second length L2”; the member 20 is positioned within the cavity of link 6), and an indexing member 22 arranged to cooperate with the lock and that is rigidly attached to the other of the first 6 and second 8 link elements while extending in the direction of translation movement of the first link element with respect to the second link element (Figs. 1-4; P. 3, Paragraphs starting “The setting of the link 1 is carried out” through the paragraph starting “The link 1 then has a second length L2”; the cavities 22 are rigidly formed within the link 6 and extend in the direction of the translation motion so as to hold the links between the indexed positions), wherein said first 6 and second link 8 elements are further configured to conceal the indexing member 22 independently of whether they are in one or the other of said at least two indexed positions (Fig. 1 shows that the indexing member is concealed when the links are in one of the indexed positions, i.e., it is not visible when viewed from the top).
Regarding claim 2, Wenger teaches the adjustable link according to claim 1 (Figs. 1-4), wherein the actuator 18 is arranged on a face extending between two lateral sides of the adjustable link (Figs. 2-3 show the actuator is one a bottom side face that extends between the two lateral sides of the link) and accessible when the bracelet comprising said adjustable link is worn (Figs. 2-4; the actuator is accessible from the exterior of the bracelet, i.e., it could be accessed while being worn depending on how tight the bracelet is).
Regarding claim 3, Wenger teaches the adjustable link (Fig. 1) according to claim 1, wherein one of the first 6 and second 8 link elements comprises a connecting body configured to slide in a housing of complementary shape, arranged in the other of the first and second link elements, and to conceal therein the indexing member 22 regardless of the indexed position selected (Figs. 2-3 show that the first link 6 includes a housing, i.e., the cavity 34 within the link in which link 8 is received, configured to receive a complementary shaped body on link 8, and the links 6, 8 conceal the indexing element when the body is inserted into the housing, as shown in Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, Wenger teaches the adjustable link (Fig. 1) according to claim 1, wherein the mechanism further comprises additional coupling means for guiding the relative displacement of the first and second link elements 6, 8 and/or for absorbing mechanical stresses between said first and second link elements 6, 8 (Figs. 2-4 show that the flanges 36 extend over opening 34 to form a female coupling means in link 6 to receive protrusions that form male coupling means on link 8 to guide the displacement of links 6, 8).
Regarding claim 5, Wenger teaches the adjustable link (Fig. 1) according to claim 4, wherein said additional coupling means are formed by at least one female element arranged within the connecting body of one of the first and second link elements 6, 8, to receive a complementary male element rigidly connected to the other of the first and second link elements (Figs. 2-4 show the female element on link 6 that receives the male element on link 8).
Regarding claim 6, Wenger teaches the adjustable link (Fig. 1) according to claim 4, wherein the additional coupling means are arranged symmetrically with respect to a longitudinal axis of the indexing member 22 (Figs. 2-4 show that the longitudinal axis of the indexing member 22 would extend along the center of the links 6, 8 when connected, and the additional coupling means are symmetrical about the center of the links 6, 8).
Regarding claim 7, Wenger teaches the adjustable link (Fig. 1) according to claim 1, wherein the actuator 18 is in the form of a pusher arranged to move the lock 20 from a locking position in which it is at rest and engaging with the indexing member 22, to an unlocking position in which the lock 22 is actuated and no longer engages with the indexing member 22 (Figs. 2-4; P. 3, Paragraphs starting “More precisely, the latch 20” and “A return spring 46”; the actuator 18 is a push button that moves the lock 20 in or out of engagement with the indexing member 22 so that it may be adjusted to different notches of the indexing member).
Regarding claim 8, Wenger teaches the adjustable link (Fig. 1) according to claim 1, wherein the lock 20 further comprises an opening arranged to receive a part of the indexing member 22 (Figs. 2-4 show that the lock 20 includes a recessed opening at the top, i.e., the portion between the top of button 18 and the top of lock 20, that is configured to receive the protrusion between the notches 22 of the indexing member when the lock 20 is being adjusted between the notches).
Regarding claim 9, Wenger teaches the adjustable link (Fig. 1) according to claim 1, wherein the lock 20 is traversed from one side to the other by the indexing member 22 when the link is in a retracted or partially retracted configuration (Figs. 2-4; P. 3, Paragraphs starting “The setting of the link 1” and “The second link element 8”).
Regarding claim 10, Wenger teaches the adjustable link (Fig. 1) according to claim 1, wherein one of the first and second link elements 6, 8 comprises a fastening part 4a, 4b comprising a central portion and two lateral portions 4a, 4b arranged on either side of the central portion so as to form two gaps for receiving therein the lugs of a watch case or a fastening part of an adjacent link (Figs. 1-4; P. 3, Paragraph starting “The second fastening means 4”; the central portion is not recited as having any structure, e.g., it may be any structure positioned centrally to the two fastening parts, and therefore the central portion is interpreted as the central body of link 8 that connects the the two fastening members 4a, 4b that extend outwardly, and these structures form 3 gaps, which is interpreted as break in a structure, that are configured to receive the lugs of a watch or adjacent link), the central portion comprising the cavity 44 receiving the lock 20 (Figs. 2-4).
Regarding claim 11, Wenger teaches the adjustable link (Fig. 1) according to claim 10, wherein the central portion further comprises a blind hole in the axial extension of the opening of the lock in order to receive therein the free end of the indexing member when the link is in a retracted or partially retracted configuration (Figs. 2-4; show that the lock 20 includes a recessed opening at the top, i.e., the portion between the top of button 18 and the top of lock 20, that is configured to receive the protrusion between the notches 22 of the indexing member when the lock 20 is being adjusted between the notches).
Regarding claim 12, Wenger teaches the adjustable link (Fig. 1) according to claim 1, wherein the indexing elements consist of two adjacent radial extensions providing three indexing positions (P. 4, Paragraph starting “It may in particular provide to use a number of notches 22 greater than two”; Wenger teaches an embodiment in which more than two notches are provided, i.e., at least three, and this embodiment is relied upon for this claim for teaching two adjacent radial extensions that provide three indexing positions).
Regarding claim 13, Wenger teaches the adjustable link (Fig. 1) according to any of claim 1, wherein the indexing member is in the form of a notched bar comprising a plurality of notches 22 intended to cooperate with the lock 20 to lock the link in said at least two indexed positions (Figs. 2-4).
Regarding claim 14, Wenger teaches a wristwatch comprising at least one adjustable link according to claim 1 (Abstract; P. 2, Paragraph starting “The link 1 comprises means”; the links may be used for a wristwatch strap) wherein the actuator 18 is arranged on the visible face of the bracelet when it is worn (Figs. 1-4; the face of the bracelet on which the actuator is positioned may be visible depending on the tightness of the bracelet, i.e., if the bracelet is loose then the actuator is visible).
Regarding claim 15, Wenger teaches the adjustable link (Fig. 1) according to claim 14, wherein the notched bar further comprises a longitudinal slot 22 oriented in the direction of translational displacement of the first link element 6 with respect to the second link element 8 (Figs. 2-4), and in that a stop is arranged inside the longitudinal slot 22 to limit the relative displacement between said first and second link elements 6, 8 (Figs. 2-4; the notches 22 include stops to keep the links in place when the indexing member 20 is within the notch).
Regarding claim 16, Wenger teaches a wristwatch comprising at least one adjustable link according to claim 1 (Fig. 1) wherein the actuator 18 is arranged on the visible face of the bracelet when it is worn (Figs. 1-4; the face of the bracelet on which the actuator is positioned may be visible depending on the tightness of the bracelet, i.e., if the bracelet is loose then the actuator is visible).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2017/0105493 A1 (Figs. 1-4), US 2015/0107299 A1 (Figs. 1-6) and US 2013/0319042 A1 (Figs. 1-10) each teach an adjustable link for a bracelet including two link elements and a telescopic adjustment mechanism.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW STEPHENS whose telephone number is (571)272-6722. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 930-630.
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, Chris 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.
/MATTHEW STEPHENS/Examiner, Art Unit 3725
/BOBBY YEONJIN KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725
Prosecution Insights