`
`V i$ T {a
`
`A
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`15/785,664
`
`10/17/2017
`
`KEN TAKANO
`
`PIPMM-SSZZZ
`
`3070
`
`759°
`52°“
`PEARNE & GORDON LLP
`
`01’0””
`
`1801 EAST 9TH STREET
`SUITE 1200
`
`CLEVELAND, OH 44114-3108
`
`NGUYENDONGHAID
`
`3729
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`01/02/2020
`
`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)
`
`

`

`017/09 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`15/785,664
`Examiner
`DONGHAI D NGUYEN
`
`Applicant(s)
`TAKANO et al.
`Art Unit
`3729
`
`AIA (FITF) Status
`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 08 January 2019.
`El A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a)[:] This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)
`
`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 Expade 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) fl is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`
`
`C] Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) 1—2 and 4—7 is/are rejected.
`
`Claim(s) 3 is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`)
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[j Claim(s
`* If any claims have been determined aflowable. 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
`
`httpfiwww.”smogovmatentszinit_events[pph[index.'§p or send an inquiry to PPeredhack@gsptg.ggv.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)D The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11). The drawing(s) filed on 10/17/17 is/are: a). accepted or b)[:] 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). All
`
`b)C] Some**
`
`c)C] None of the:
`
`1.. Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`213 Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3B 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)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date 10/17/17: 1/8/19.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) E] 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 20191223
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/785,664
`Art Unit: 3729
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`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.
`
`Election/Restrictions
`
`2.
`
`Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
`
`l. Claims 1-7, drawn to an electronic assembly apparatus, classified in BZSJ
`
`9/1623.
`
`ll. Claims 8 and 9, drawn to an electronic equipment assembly method, classified
`
`in Y10T29/4913.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`The inventions are independent or distinct, each from the other because:
`
`Inventions II and l are related as process and apparatus for its practice. The
`
`inventions are distinct if it can be shown that either: (1) the process as claimed can be
`
`practiced by another and materially different apparatus or by hand, or (2) the apparatus
`
`as claimed can be used to practice another and materially different process.
`
`(M PEP §
`
`806.05(e)).
`
`In this case, the apparatus as claimed can be used to practice another and
`
`materially different process such as using a controller to operate the robot and cable
`
`holding tool.
`
`5.
`
`Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the
`
`inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above
`
`and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not
`
`required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/785,664
`Art Unit: 3729
`
`Page 3
`
`(a) the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their
`
`different classification and due to their recognized divergent subject matter;
`
`(b) the inventions require a different field of search (for example, searching
`
`different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search
`
`quenesx
`
`(c) the prior art applicable to one invention would not likely be applicable to
`
`another invention.
`
`Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must
`
`include (i) an election of a invention to be examined even though the requirement
`
`may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing
`
`the elected invention.
`
`The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To reserve a
`
`right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly
`
`and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election
`
`shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time
`
`of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement
`
`will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. lf claims are added after
`
`the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the
`
`elected invention.
`
`Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably
`
`distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record
`
`showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is
`
`the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/785,664
`Art Unit: 3729
`
`Page 4
`
`over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C.
`
`103 or pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
`
`6.
`
`During a telephone conversation with MICHAEL W. GARVEY on December 19,
`
`2019 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of
`
`Group I, claims 1-7. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to
`
`this Office action. Claims 8 and 9 are withdrawn from further consideration by the
`
`examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
`
`7.
`
`Applicant is reminded that upon the cancellation of claims to a non-elected
`
`invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one
`
`or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim
`
`remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a)
`
`must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that
`
`identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required
`
`under 37 CFR 1.170).
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`8.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 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.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/785,664
`Art Unit: 3729
`
`Page 5
`
`9.
`
`Claims 1-2 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`U.S. Patent Application 2004/0266276 to Hariki et al in view of U.S. Patent 5,212,576 to
`
`Yoshioka.
`
`Regarding claim 1, Hariki et al disclose an electronic equipment assembly
`
`apparatus which installs a mounted portion of a cable (1) onto a connector (6) of
`
`electronic equipment (5), the cable including a belt-shaped cable main body portion in
`
`which the mounted portion is formed in one end portion, the apparatus comprising: a
`
`cable holding tool (10/20) which holds the cable; a work stage (50) which holds the
`
`electronic equipment (5); a robot portion (not shown) which relatively moves the cable
`
`holding tool to the electronic equipment held by the work stage; and a controller (30)
`
`which operates the robot portion and the cable holding tool to mount the mounted
`
`portion of the cable main body portion onto the connector (see Fig. 6) except for a
`
`reinforcing plate bonded to the one end portion side on one surface of the cable main
`
`body portion. Yoshioka teaches the reinforcing plate (8) bonded to an end portion side
`
`on one surface of the cable (4, see Figs. 4 and 6) for preventing a disconnection due to
`
`the deterioration of the bonding strength (see Col. 2, lines 40-43). Therefore, it would
`
`have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
`
`of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Hariki et al by utilizing the
`
`reinforcement plate bonded to the end of the cable as taught by Yoshioka for effectively
`
`mounting the cable to the connector.
`
`Regarding claim 2, Hariki et al disclose the cable holding tool is a chuck
`
`mechanism which nips the reinforcing plate from an upward-and-downward direction
`
`(see Fig. 6).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/785,664
`Art Unit: 3729
`
`Page 6
`
`Regarding claim 4, Hariki et al disclose a slip stopper is formed on a lower
`
`surface of the chuck block which abuts against the reinforcing plate and protrudes to the
`
`upper surface of at least the bonding portion when interposing the reinforcing plate (see
`
`Figs. 4-6).
`
`10.
`
`Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Hariki et al/Yoshioka as applied above, and further in view of U.S. Patent 6,099,217 to
`
`Wiegand et al.
`
`Hariki et al/Yoshioka as relied and applied above do not disclose the limitations
`
`of claims 6 and 7. Wiegand et al teach the robot portion is a parallel link robot as a six-
`
`degree-of-freedom type (see Fig.1) for providing high stability and accuracy of the robot
`
`(see Col. 2, lines 4-27). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary
`
`skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the
`
`invention of Hariki et al/Yoshioka by utilizing the robot portion having a six-degree-of-
`
`freedom type as taught by Wiegand et al for providing high stability and accuracy of the
`
`robot to mount the cable to the connector.
`
`Allowable Subject Matter
`
`11.
`
`Claim 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would
`
`be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base
`
`claim and any intervening claims.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/785,664
`Art Unit: 3729
`
`Page 7
`
`Conclusion
`
`12.
`
`The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
`
`applicant's disclosure. Prior art references cited for their teachings of an apparatus for
`
`assembly an electronic component to the cable.
`
`13.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to DONGHAI D NGUYEN whose telephone number is
`
`(571)272-4566. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00-5:30.
`
`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, Peter Vo can be reached on 571-272—4690. 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
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/785,664
`Art Unit: 3729
`
`Page 8
`
`USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information
`
`system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571 -272-1 000.
`
`/DN/
`
`December 23, 2019
`
`/DONGHA| D NGUYEN/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3729
`
`