`Application No.:
`December 16, 2013
`Amendment Dated:
`Reply to Office Action of: September 19, 2013
`
`MAT-10424US
`
`RemarkslArguments:
`
`Claims 1, 3, 4 and 6 have been rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as being
`
`anticipated by Van Hout (US 4,883,932).
`
`It is respectfully submitted, however, that
`
`these claims are patentable over the art of record for the reasons set forth below.
`
`An exemplary embodiment of Applicant’s invention is illustrated by Applicant's
`
`Fig. 1. Operation body 22 (e.g. a switch) includes operating part 22A and a base (not
`
`numbered) from which operating part 22A projects. Thus, operating part 22A is on
`
`the top and the base is on the bottom. Operating part 22A projects upward from the
`
`base. Operating part 22A includes ribs 22G and operation surface 22E. As shown in
`
`Fig. 1, operation surface 22E is flat. Ribs 22G project slightly above the surface of
`
`operation surface 22E.
`
`Thus, when a user presses their thumb onto the top of
`
`operating part 22A, the user’s thumb is prevented from touching (at least partially)
`
`surface 22E.
`
`In this manner, letters which are printed on surface 22E are not rubbed
`
`off by the user’s thumb. As shown in Applicant’s Fig. 1, operating part 22A and the
`
`base are integrated.
`
`Applicant’s invention, as recited by claim 1 includes a feature which is neither
`
`disclosed nor suggested by the art of record, namely:
`
`a fla_t operation surface formed at a top of the operating
`part
`
`The operating surface of Van Hout, however, is not flat. As shown in Fig. 1 of
`
`Van Hout, the upper surface curves and is lower where the word “BASS” appears and
`
`is higher where the “+” and the “-” appears. Thus, Van Hout lacks Applicant’s claimed
`
`feature of a flat surface.
`
`The flat surface, for example,
`
`is easier to print on than a curved surface such
`
`as the curved surface found in Van Hout.
`
`Applicant's invention, as recited by claim 1 includes a further feature which is
`
`neither disclosed nor suggested by the art of record, namely:
`
`the base and the operating part are integrated
`
`Page 4 of 5
`
`
`
`12/969,717
`Application No.:
`December 16, 2013
`Amendment Dated:
`Reply to Office Action of: September 19, 2013
`
`MAT—10424US
`
`Thus, again as shown in Applicant’s Fig. 1, operating part 22A is integrated
`
`with the base that appears below operating part 22A.
`
`In the Office Action,
`
`the
`
`Examiner identifies switch 14 of Van Hout’s corresponding to Applicant’s claimed
`
`operating part while the frame 12 is analogized as corresponding to Applicant’s
`
`claimed base.
`
`In Van Hout, however, operating part 14 and base 12 are completely
`
`separate objects. Again,
`
`this is structurally completely different
`
`than Applicant’s
`
`claimed base and operating part which are integrated.
`
`As stated in Applicant’s
`
`specification at page 5, line 13, “Operation body 22 is made of an insulating resin such
`
`as polycarbonate or ABS. Operation body 22 has, at approximately its center,
`
`operating part 22A projecting upward through opening 1A.” Accordingly, for this
`
`additional reason, Applicant’s claim 1 is patentable over the art of record.
`
`Claims 3, .4 and 6 are patentable by virtue of their dependency on allowable
`
`claim 1.
`
`Claims 2 and 5 have been rejected under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 103(a) as being
`
`unpatentable over Van Hout. Those claims, however, are also patentable by virtue of
`
`their dependency on allowable claim 1.
`
`This application is
`
`in condition for allowance, which action is
`
`respectfully
`
`requested.
`
`e pectfully
`\.»,_ f
`
`
`
`
`
`Lawrence E. Ashery, Reg.v. 34,5 S
`Attorney for Applicants
`
`LEA/fp
`
`Dated: December 16, 2013
`
`'P.O. Box 980
`
`Valley Forge, PA 19482
`(610) 407—0700
`
`FP__2009419
`
`Page 5 of 5
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
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.
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.
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
