throbber
www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`
`15/907,979
`
`02/28/2018
`
`Hideaki WATANABE
`
`AOYA1-58876
`
`1026
`
`759°
`52°“
`PEARNE & GORDON LLP
`
`04’1””
`
`1801 EAST 9TH STREET
`SUITE 1200
`
`CLEVELAND, OH 44114-3108
`
`VU~ STEPHEN A
`
`3652
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`04/ 1 1/2019
`
`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):
`
`patdoeket@pearne.eom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`0/7709 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`15/907,979
`Examiner
`STEPHEN A vu
`
`Applicant(s)
`WATANABE et al.
`Art Unit
`AIA (FITF) Status
`3652
`Yes
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 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 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing
`date of this communication.
`|f 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).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 1/02/2019.
`[:1 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a). This action is FINAL.
`
`2b) C] This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] 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 Expat/7e Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`E] Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are rejected.
`
`[:1 Claim(s) _ is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[j Claim(s)
`9
`* If any claims have been determined aflowabie. 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
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`10)[:] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11)[:] The drawing(s) filed on
`
`is/are: a)D accepted or b)l:] 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):] Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)D All
`
`b)I:l Some**
`
`c)C] None of the:
`
`1.[:] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.[:] 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)
`
`1) C] Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Datew.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) C] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) CI Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20190405
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/907,979
`Art Unit: 3652
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
`
`Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first
`
`inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Information Disclosure Statement
`
`2.
`
`The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on December 14, 2018 is in compliance
`
`with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being
`
`considered by the examiner.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
`
`3.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 USC. 112(b):
`(b) CONCLUSION.7The 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 USC. 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.
`
`4.
`
`Claim 5 is rejected under 35 USC. 112(b) or 35 USC. 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
`
`5.
`
`Claim 5 recites the limitation "the cross-sectional shape of the holding groove" in lines 1-3 and
`
`“the axial portion of the component” in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation
`
`in the claim.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
`
`6.
`
`In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 USC. 102 and
`
`103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 USC. 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.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/907,979
`Art Unit: 3652
`
`Page 3
`
`7.
`
`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.
`
`8.
`
`Claims 1-3 and 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Malstrom et
`
`al (US 2017/0057101).
`
`9.
`
`As to claims 1 and 8, Malstrom et al disclose a component mounting device (robotic positioning
`
`system per Abstract), as illustrated in Figures 1 -9, for mounting a component on a substrate (see
`
`paragraph [0001] - capable of accomplishing this function), comprising a pair of opening/closing
`
`members opening and closing (see paragraph [0002,0004]) with spring connection (see paragraph
`
`[0023]); and a plurality of adapters (10) detachably attached to the opening/closing members, each of the
`
`plurality of adapters inherently includes a clamping surface configured to engage the component to be
`
`mounted (see paragraphs [0028-0029] describe “grasping fingers 42 to engage and manipulate object”),
`
`wherein the adapters are attached to the opening/closing members depending on the component to be
`
`mounted so as to clamp the component by using the adapters, and wherein the plurality of adapters
`
`includes first adapters (14) each having a flat clamping surface (42) clamping a body of the component
`
`and second adapters (12) each having a holding groove (20) holding an axial portion of the component via
`
`the first adapters.
`
`10.
`
`With claim 2, the axial portion of the component and substrate are considered to be a Material
`
`or Article Worked Upon by Apparatus per MPEP 2115. The holding groove extends toward a tip (22)
`
`of the second adapter.
`
`11.
`
`With claim 3, the flat clamping surface of the first adapter is covered with an elastic
`
`member (34).
`
`12.
`
`With claim 5, a cross-sectional shape of a lead projecting laterally from the axial portion of the
`
`component is considered to be a Material or Article Worked Upon by Apparatus per MPEP 2115.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/907,979
`Art Unit: 3652
`
`Page 4
`
`The cross-sectional shape is rectangular, and it allows the first adapters to be operably movable from a
`
`first position (Figure 1) to a second position (Figure 6).
`
`13.
`
`With claims 6-7, the method of mounting a component can be accomplished with the
`
`structural elements as discussed in claims 1-3 above.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`14.
`
`In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 USC. 102 and
`
`103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 USC. 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.
`
`15.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 USC. 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.
`
`16.
`
`The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere C0., 383 US. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966),
`
`that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 USC. 103 are
`
`summarized as follows:
`
`1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
`
`2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
`
`3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
`
`4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or
`
`nonobviousness.
`
`17.
`
`Claim 4 is rejected under 35 USC. 103 as being unpatentable over Malstrom et al
`
`(US 2017/0057101).
`
`18.
`
`Malstrom et al disclose the claimed invention except for the holding groove of the second adapter
`
`to be constructed of metal.
`
`It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/907,979
`Art Unit: 3652
`
`Page 5
`
`the invention was made to construct the second adapter of metal, since metal is well known to be durable
`
`and non-rusting and could handle the long automated process in a factory environment for the robotic
`
`positioning system.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`l9.
`
`Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-8 have been considered but necessitated the
`
`examiner to adjust the prior art rejections to respond to the new limitations.
`
`In the Remarks, filed
`
`January 2, 2019, on pages 5-6, applicant has stated that amended claim 1 has now recited “each of the
`
`plurality of adapters includes a clamping surface configured to engage the component to be mounted.”
`
`Applicant has argued that this feature is not in the prior art of Malstrom. The examiner respectfully
`
`disagrees. The examiner has addressed this new limitation in the prior art rejection above. Each of the
`
`plurality of adapters inherently includes a clamping surface configured to engage the component to be
`
`mounted (see paragraphs [0028-0029] describe “grasping fingers 42 to engage and manipulate object”).
`
`Conclusion
`
`20.
`
`Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office
`
`action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is
`
`reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR l.l36(a).
`
`A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from
`
`the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing
`
`date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH
`
`shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action
`
`is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR l.l36(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of
`
`the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX
`
`MONTHS from the date of this final action.
`
`21.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should
`
`be directed to STEPHEN A VU whose telephone number is (571)272-1961. The examiner can normally
`
`be reached on Monday-Friday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm EST.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/907,979
`Art Unit: 3652
`
`Page 6
`
`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, Saul
`
`Rodriguez can be reached on (571)272-7097. 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.
`
`STEPHEN A. VU
`
`Primary Examiner
`Art Unit 3652
`
`/STEPHEN A VU/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket