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 Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: “…comprising an inclined surface that is provided at at least one of the sliding…” should be “…comprising an inclined surface that is provided[ at] at least one of the sliding…“. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by van de LOO, (From IDS: US Patent No 6,322,221).
Regarding claim 1: van de LOO teaches a vehicle visual recognition device, comprising: a visual recognition mechanism that assists visual recognition of an occupant of a vehicle [Col 1, Lines 10-12 teach: a wing or side mirror used on motor vehicles. However, it should be realised that the operating mechanism may be for use with other devices not necessarily mirrors]; a sliding body provided at a side of a vehicle body and provided with a sliding surface [Col 2, lines 20-21 teach: where one element is to move with respect to the other (i.e. sliding); and Col 2, Lines 22-24 teach: The movement (i.e. sliding) of the mirror head may be in a direction that is either parallel to the longitudinal axis of the spigot, or transversed to the longitudinal axis of the spigot.]; a rotating body that is rotated by being slid with respect to the sliding surface [Col 2, Lines 4-5 teach: to rotate said mirror head with respect to said spigot], whereby the visual recognition mechanism is rotated; a restriction member disposed inside the sliding surface; and a biasing member disposed inside the sliding surface, causing the restriction member to restrict rotation of the rotating body by biasing force [Col 2, Lines 8-16 teach: therefore resisting rotation of said mirror head, said actuator movement applying a force to said resilient means to in turn compress said resilient means to allow movement of said mirror head with respect to said mirror mounting bracket so that said detent may disengage whereupon said actuator ceases movement and said drive means in turn rotates said mirror head with respect to said spigot once said detent is disengaged], and causing the restriction member to allow rotation of the rotating body against the biasing force [Col 2, Lines 6-16: an actuator incorporated within said drive means that is moved by said drive means upon its initial operation while said detent engaged and therefore resisting rotation of said mirror head, said actuator movement applying a force to said resilient means].
Regarding claim 2: the essence of the claim is taught above in the rejection of claim 1.
In addition, van de LOO teaches further comprising an action member which is supported by the sliding surface and to which driving force is applied to rotate the rotating body [Col 2, Lines 3-16 teach: drive means operatively coupling said spigot to said mirror head to rotate said mirror head with respect to said spigot, and an actuator incorporated within said drive means that is moved by said drive means upon its initial operation while said detent engaged and therefore resisting rotation of said mirror head, said actuator movement applying a force to said resilient means to in turn compress said resilient means to allow movement of said mirror head with respect to said mirror mounting bracket so that said detent may disengage whereupon said actuator ceases movement and said drive means in turn rotates said mirror head with respect to said spigot once said detent is disengaged.].
Regarding claim 3: the essence of the claim is taught above in the rejection of claim 1.
In addition, van de LOO teaches further comprising a fixing portion that is provided at the sliding body further inside than the sliding surface and that is fixed to the side of the vehicle body. whereby the sliding body is fixed to the side of the vehicle body [Col 2, Line 18 teaches: a mirror head attached to a mounting bracket].
Regarding claim 4: the essence of the claim is taught above in the rejection of claim 1.
In addition, van de LOO teaches further comprising a locking portion which is provided at the sliding body further inside than the sliding surface, and to which the biasing member is locked [Col 3, Lines 29-35: (27) In addition, the clutch plate may be positioned so that, even though the clutch detent is disengaged through either manual operation or movement of the mirror head being restrained, the spring still applies a constant down load force to the detent. This enables positive re-engagement of the detent through manual movement of the mirror head even though the clutch plate remains disengaged.].
Regarding claim 5: the essence of the claim is taught above in the rejection of claim 1.
In addition, van de LOO teaches further comprising an inclined surface that is provided at at least one of the sliding body or the side of the vehicle body and that restricts movement of the sliding body [Col 2, Lines 57-67 teach: the actuator preferably comprises at least a first ramp surface on the gear wheel that engages a corresponding second ramp surface that is held with respect to the spigot. Upon initial operation of the drive means, the ramp surfaces engage and cause a linear movement of the gear wheel with respect to the longitudinal axis of the spigot as the first ramped surface slides up the second ramped surface. The coil spring resists the lifting of the gear wheel, however continued movement of the first ramp surface with respect to the second ramp surface causes compression of the coil spring and in turn lifts the gear wheel away from its engagement with the mirror head. This in turn relieves the amount of force applied to the detents and upward movement of the mirror head to eventually allow disengagement of the detent.].
Conclusion
Prior art not relied upon: Please refer to the references listed in an attached PTO-892 and that are not relied upon for the claim rejections detailed above. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
In particular, IZABEL et al., (US 2006/0256459) teaches a rear viewing device for an automobile;
WHITEHEAD, (US Patent No. 6,243,218) teaches a mirror actuator for a vehicle;
GILBERT et al., (US Patent No 5,432,640) teaches a spigot type break away mirror; and
DEL VAN REDONDO (US 2026/0152132) teaches a system for attaching an indirect vision device to a vehicle.
In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Marnie Matt whose telephone number is (303)297-4255. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30-5:00.
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, Jay Patel can be reached at 571-272-2988. 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.
/MARNIE A MATT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2485
Prosecution Insights