`Interview Summary Dated: March 13, 2014
`
`‘
`
`BPO—107US
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`Application No:
`Applicants:
`Filed:
`Title:
`
`12/810,596
`Takashi KAWAKAMI et al.
`June 25, 2010
`MUSCLE FORCE ASSISTING DEVICE
`
`3771
`TC/A.U.:
`Christopher E. Miller
`Examiner:
`Confirmation No.: 7832
`Docket No.:
`BPO—107US
`
`INTERVIEW SUMMARY
`
`MAIL STOP AMENDMENT
`Commissioner for Patents
`PO. Box 1450
`
`Alexandria, VA 22313—1450
`
`Sir:
`
`Applicants’ representatives conducted a telephone interview with the Examiner on
`
`January 29, 2014. Applicants’ representative discussed the inventive feature of the
`
`device wherein the position of the spring joint axis is in the negative Y—axis range when
`
`the second attachment is rotated by the actuator. The Examiner asked how the spring
`
`joint is not bent entirely, and why the portion of the spring joint near the first attachment
`is not bent as well.
`It was agreed upon that the amendments appear to introduce
`
`structural features which are not present
`
`in the prior art used in the most recent
`
`rejection, and therefore overcome the previous rejection. However, the support for how
`
`the spring remains unbent near the first at72ment must be .
`
`
`/e pectfully sub ~~' ted,
`
`
`
`44v
`
`LEA/fp
`
`Dated: March 13, 2014
`
`P.O. Box 980
`
`Valley Forge, PA 19482
`(610) 407—0700
`
`2239879
`
`
` Lawrence E. Ashery, Reg. No.
`Attorney for Applicants
`
`
`
`Page 1 of 1
`
`