`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMIVHSSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria1 Virginia 22313-1450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`
`
`
`
`14/395,107
`
`10/17/2014
`
`Toshiaki Takenaka
`
`MAT—10637US
`
`4615
`
`RATNERPRESTIA
`PO. BOX 980
`VALLEY FORGE, PA 19482-0980
`
`PAYNE, SHARONE
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2875
`
`PAPER NUIVIBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`10/07/2015
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e—mail address(es):
`
`ptocorrespondence @ratnerprestia.c0m
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Applicant(s)
`Application No.
` 14/395,107 TAKENAKA ET AL.
`
`
`AIA (First Inventor to File)
`Art Unit
`Examiner
`Office Action Summary
`
`
`SHARON PAYNE its“ 2875
`-- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING DATE OF
`THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR1. 136( a).
`after SIX () MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1 .704(b).
`
`In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`
`Status
`
`1)|:I Responsive to communication(s) filed on
`El A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2b)|ZI This action is non-final.
`2a)|:l This action is FINAL.
`3)I:I An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)|:| Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)IZI Claim(s) 149 is/are pending in the application.
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`is/are allowed.
`6)I:I Claim(s)
`7)|Z| CIaim(s)_1-9is/are rejected.
`8)|:I Claim(s)_ is/are objected to.
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`9)I:I Claim((s)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`hit
`:/'/\W¢W.LISI>I‘.0. ovI’ atentS/init events/
`
`
`
`iindex.‘s or send an inquiry to PPI-iieedback{®usgtc.00v.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)I:l The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)I:l The drawing(s) filed on
`is/are: a)I:I accepted or b)I:I objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`12)IXI Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)IZl All
`
`b)|:l Some” c)I:l None of the:
`
`1.IXI Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.|:l Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.|:| Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`
`
`3) D Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`1) E Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date.
`.
`.
`4) I:I Other'
`2) E InformatIon DIsclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date 10/17/14.
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL—326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20150930
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/395,107
`
`Page 2
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent
`
`provisions.
`
`Claim Objections
`
`Claims 8-9 are objected to because of the following informalities. Claims 8-9 fail
`
`to narrow the claims upon which they depend. Appropriate correction is required.
`
`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 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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis
`
`for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically
`
`disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the
`
`differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the
`
`prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been
`
`obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/395,107
`
`Page 3
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not
`
`be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
`
`Claims 1-2 and 5-9 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being
`
`unpatentable over Fuke et al. (U.S. Patent 5,911,085, hereinafter "Fuke") in view of
`
`Kaneko et al. (U.S. Patent 5,721,984, hereinafter "Kaneko").
`
`Regarding claim 1, Fuke discloses a strobe main body (Fig. 2, top); a light emitter
`
`rotatably coupled to the strobe main body (Fig. 2, see bulb 5 and reflector 4 at top) ; a
`
`variable mechanism capable of changing an illumination direction angle of the light
`
`emitter (Fig. 2 and abstract); and a driver that drives the variable mechanism (11), a
`
`detector that detects that abnormal force is applied to the variable mechanism (19, 14b,
`
`13). Fuke does not disclose a fault compensator as described in the claim.
`
`Kaneko includes a detection responsive controller that controls the driver based
`
`on the abnormal force detected by the detector (column 1, lines 25-30; column 6, lines
`
`10-20).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`
`invention was made to use the configuration of Kaneko in the apparatus of Fuke to
`
`avoid a collision within the apparatus.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/395,107
`
`Page 4
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`Concerning claim 2, Fuke disclsoes the detector wherein the detector further
`
`includes a direction detector that detects a direction in which the abnormal force is
`
`applied to the variable mechanism (19, 14b, 13).
`
`Regarding claim 5, Fuke does not disclose a limiting agent as described in the
`
`claim. Kaneko discloses wherein when the detector detects the abnormal force with the
`
`driver in operation, the detection responsive controller controls the driver so that the
`
`driver limits a movement of the light emitter in a direction in which the light emitter is
`
`moving (column 1, lines 25-30; column 6, lines 10-20).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`
`invention was made to use the configuration of Kaneko in the apparatus of Fuke to
`
`avoid a collision within the apparatus.
`
`Regarding claim 6, Regarding claim 1, Fuke discloses a strobe main body (Fig.
`
`2, top); a light emitter rotatably coupled to the strobe main body (Fig. 2, see bulb 5 and
`
`reflector 4 at top) ; a variable mechanism capable of changing an illumination direction
`
`angle of the light emitter (Fig. 2 and abstract); and a driver that drives the variable
`
`mechanism (11). Fuke does not disclose an obstacle detector.
`
`Kaneko discloses an obstacle detector that detects that the light emitter is going
`
`to collide with an obstacle (column 1, lines 25-30; column 6, lines 10-20); and a
`
`detection responsive controller that controls the driver when the obstacle detector
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/395,107
`
`Page 5
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`detects that the light emitter is going to collide with the obstacle (column 1, lines 25-30;
`
`column 6, lines 10-20).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`
`invention was made to use the configuration of Kaneko in the apparatus of Fuke to
`
`avoid a collision within the apparatus.
`
`Concerning claim 7, Fuke does not disclose limiting the motion of the strobe as
`
`described in the claim. Kaneko discloses wherein when the obstacle detector detects
`
`an obstacle with the driver in operation, the detection responsive controller controls the
`
`driver so that the driver limits a movement of the light emitter in a direction in which the
`
`light emitter is moving(column 1, lines 25-30; column 6, lines 10-20).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`
`invention was made to use the configuration of Kaneko in the apparatus of Fuke to
`
`avoid a collision within the apparatus.
`
`Regarding claims 8 and 9, these claims fail to narrow claims 1 and 6 respectively
`
`and are rejected for the same reasons claims 1 and 6 are rejected.
`
`Claims 3-4 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable
`
`over Fuke in view of Kaneko and Olympus (JP 2007/219265 A).
`
`Regarding claim 3, Fuke and Kaneko do not disclose the compensator as
`
`described in the claim. Olympus discloses wherein when the detector detects the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/395,107
`
`Page 6
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`abnormal force with the driver not in operation, the detection responsive controller
`
`controls the driver so that the driver drives the light emitter in the direction in which the
`
`abnormal force is applied (English abstract).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`
`invention was made to use the configuration of Olympus in the apparatus of Fuke and
`
`Kaneko to avoid internal damage from pressing against a force.
`
`Concerning claim 4, Fuke and Kaneko do not disclose the stop mechanism as
`
`described in the claim. Olympus discloses wherein when the detector no longer detects
`
`the abnormal force, the detection responsive controller controls the driver so that the
`
`driver stops driving the light emitter (English abstract).
`
`(The apparatus will stay in the
`
`current notch when the force stops.)
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`
`invention was made to use the configuration of Olympus in the apparatus of Fuke and
`
`Kaneko to avoid internal damage from pressing against a force.
`
`Conclusion
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to SHARON PAYNE whose telephone number is
`
`(571 )272—2379. The examiner can normally be reached on regular business hours.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/395,107
`
`Page 7
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
`
`supervisor, Diane Lee can be reached on (571) 272-2399. The fax phone number for
`
`the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571 -273-8300.
`
`Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the
`
`Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for
`
`published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
`
`Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only.
`
`For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should
`
`you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic
`
`Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a
`
`USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information
`
`system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272—1000.
`
`/SHARON PAYNE/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/395,107
`
`Page 8
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`