DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status
This Office Action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on 07/09/2025. The previous claim interpretations have been withdrawn. Claims 1-4, 9, 11-18, and 21-23 remain pending for consideration.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 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.
Claims 1-4, 9, 11, 14-17, 21, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong (US20120014090A1), in view of Ikuta (US 20130128128 A1), in view of Yoshikawa (US 8547499 B2), and in further view of Wimbert et al. (US20120262906A1, herein after referred to as Wimbert).
Regarding claim 1, Hong teaches a refrigerator (Fig. 1) comprising: a body (body 10 Fig. 1) configured to form a storage space (storage space 40 Fig. 1); a door (second door 30 Fig. 1) configured to open and close the storage space (paragraph [0057]); and a display device (basket assembly 100 Fig. 2) provided on the body (Fig. 1), wherein the display device includes: a substrate (substrate 133 Fig. 2) to support a light source (light emitting diodes 131 Fig. 2 and paragraph [0081]) for irradiating light (paragraph [0065]); and a case (housing 110 Fig. 2) to accommodate the substrate (Fig. 2) and provide an outer appearance (Fig. 2), wherein the case includes: a display (display portion 120 Fig. 2), and a diffusion sheet (disclosed “diffusing portion” in paragraph [0047]).
Hong teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “wherein the case includes: the display having an opening on a front surface of the case, and configured to pass the light irradiated from the light source; and a plurality of reflectors configured to extend from the opening of the display to the substrate so as to form a space to accommodate the light source, and configured to provide a surface to face the display and to reflect the light irradiated from the light source, wherein the diffusion sheet is coupled to the front surface of the case and configured to shield the display, wherein the case includes a support configured to protrude toward the substrate and to constrain the substrate, wherein the support protrudes backward from the front surface of the case between two adjacent ones of the plurality of reflectors, wherein a locking jaw of the support protrudes through a substrate hole in the substrate, wherein the substrate is disposed between the plurality of reflectors and the locking jaw of the support, wherein the support includes: a supporting stand that extends between two adjacent ones of the plurality of reflectors; a rib that protrudes from the supporting stand and penetrates the substrate; and the locking Jaw disposed at an end of the rib and fixed to a rear surface of the substrate”.
However, Ikuta teaches wherein a case (chassis 22 Fig. 6 corresponds to the case of Hong) includes: a display (space S Fig. 6 corresponds to the display of Hong) having an opening (Figs. 2 and 6) on a front surface of the case (front surface of chassis 22 Figs. 2 and 6), and configured to pass a light (paragraph [0045]) irradiated from a light source (paragraph [0045] and Fig. 6 where light source 28 corresponds to the light source of Hong); and a plurality of reflectors (reflection member 26 and support pins 27 Fig. 6 and paragraphs [0044] and [0047]) configured to extend from the opening of the display to a substrate (Fig. 6 where LED board 30 corresponds to the substrate of Hong) so as to form a space (Fig. 6) to accommodate the light source (Fig. 6), and configured to provide a surface (inclined surface 26a Fig. 6) to face the display and to reflect the light irradiated from the light source (paragraph [0044]), wherein a diffusion sheet (optical member 18 Fig. 6 and paragraph [0046] corresponds to the diffusion sheet of Hong) is coupled to the front surface of the case and configured to shield the display (Fig. 6 and paragraph [0046]), wherein the case includes a support (support pin 27 Fig. 6) configured to protrude toward the substrate and to constrain the substrate (Fig. 6 and paragraph [0049]), wherein the support protrudes backward from the front surface of the case between two adjacent ones of the plurality of reflectors (Fig. 6), wherein a locking jaw of the support (end portion of lower section 27c Fig. 6) protrudes through a substrate hole (opening 30f Fig. 6) in the substrate (paragraph [0049]), wherein the substrate is disposed between the plurality of reflectors and the locking jaw of the support (Fig. 6), wherein the support includes: a supporting stand (upper section 27a Fig. 6) that extends between two adjacent ones of the plurality of reflectors (Fig. 6); a rib (lower section 27c Fig. 6) that protrudes from the supporting stand and penetrates the substrate (Fig. 6); and the locking Jaw disposed at an end of the rib (Fig. 6) and fixed to a rear surface of the substrate (Fig. 6 where end portion of lower section 27c is fixed to the rear surface of LED board 30 via bottom plate 22a) to avoid lifting the entire reflection member (paragraph [0048]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of Hong to include “wherein the case includes: the display having an opening on a front surface of the case, and configured to pass the light irradiated from the light source; and a plurality of reflectors configured to extend from the opening of the display to the substrate so as to form a space to accommodate the light source, and configured to provide a surface to face the display and to reflect the light irradiated from the light source, wherein the diffusion sheet is coupled to the front surface of the case and configured to shield the display, wherein the case includes a support configured to protrude toward the substrate and to constrain the substrate, wherein the support protrudes backward from the front surface of the case between two adjacent ones of the plurality of reflectors, wherein a locking jaw of the support protrudes through a substrate hole in the substrate, wherein the substrate is disposed between the plurality of reflectors and the locking jaw of the support, wherein the support includes: a supporting stand that extends between two adjacent ones of the plurality of reflectors; a rib that protrudes from the supporting stand and penetrates the substrate; and the locking Jaw disposed at an end of the rib and fixed to a rear surface of the substrate” in view of the teachings of Ikuta to avoid lifting the entire reflection member.
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “the supporting stand extends between two adjacent ones of the plurality of reflectors and supports the substrate”.
However, Yoshikawa teaches a supporting stand (body portion 24 Fig. 7 corresponds to the supporting stand of Ikuta) extends between two adjacent ones of a plurality of reflectors (Fig. 7 where the segments of first reflection sheets 22 correspond to the plurality of reflectors of Ikuta) and supports a substrate (Fig. 6 and Col. 10 lines 1-10 where LED board 18 corresponds to the substrate of Hong) to secure the substrate to the case (Col. 10 lines 1-10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “the supporting stand extends between two adjacent ones of the plurality of reflectors and supports the substrate” in view of the teachings of Yoshikawa to secure the substrate to the case.
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “wherein the locking Jaw is formed by heat-fusing a portion of the rib that penetrates through the substrate”.
However, Wimbert teaches wherein a locking Jaw (end portion of projection 8 Fig. 2 corresponds to the locking jaw of Ikuta) is formed by heat-fusing a portion of the rib (paragraph [0017] where Wimbert discloses the use of “hot-caulked” to secure projections 8) that penetrates through a substrate (Fig. 2 where printed circuit board 3 corresponds to the substrate of Hong) to fasten the rib to the substrate (paragraph [0017]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “wherein the locking Jaw is formed by heat-fusing a portion of the rib that penetrates through the substrate” in view of the teachings of Wimbert to fasten the rib to the substrate.
Regarding claim 2, the combined teachings teach wherein each of the plurality of reflectors is inclined from the substrate toward the front surface of the case (Fig. 6 of Ikuta).
Regarding claim 3, the combined teachings teach wherein a distance (see below annotated Fig. 6 of Ikuta) from a front end of each reflector (see below annotated Fig. 6 of Ikuta) to a center of the light source (see below annotated Fig. 6 of Ikuta) is greater than a distance (see below annotated Fig. 6 of Ikuta) from a rear end of the reflector (see below annotated Fig. 6 of Ikuta) to the center of the light source (see below annotated Fig. 6 of Ikuta).
PNG
media_image1.png
453
1254
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, the combined teachings teach wherein a reflection material (disclosed “thermoplastic synthetic resin” in paragraph [0044] of Ikuta) is provided on the reflector (paragraph [0044] of Ikuta).
Regarding claim 9, the combined teachings teach wherein a cross-sectional area of the rib (cross-sectional area of the portion of projection 8 penetrating printed circuit board 3 Fig. 2 of Wimbert) is smaller than an end part area of the supporting stand (end part of the body portion of projection 8 Fig. 2 of Wimbert) in contact with the substrate.
Regarding claim 11, the combined teachings teach wherein the case further includes: the front surface on which the display and the plurality of reflectors are provided (Fig. 6 of Ikuta); and a circumferential part (see below annotated Fig. 2 of Hong) that extends rearward from the front surface of the case (see below annotated Fig. 2 of Hong), and wherein the substrate is accommodated inside of the case formed by the front surface and the circumferential part (see below annotated Fig. 2 of Hong).
PNG
media_image2.png
494
968
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 14, the combined teachings teach wherein the display device is exposed when the door is opened (Fig. 1 of Hong), and the display device is shielded when the door is closed (referring to Fig. 1 of Hong, a person skilled in the art would recognize that when the door is closed the display device of Hong is shielded).
Regarding claim 15, the combined teachings teach wherein the display device is provided inside the storage space (Fig. 1 of Hong), wherein a front surface of the display device (front surface of display unit 100 Fig. 1 of Hong) is exposed as an open front surface (Fig. 1 of Hong) of the storage space, and wherein both surfaces of the display device (Fig.1 of Hong) in first and second lateral directions (from left to right and right to left directions Fig. 1 of Hong) are in contact with both internal surfaces of the storage space (Fig. 1 of Hong) in the first and second lateral directions (Fig. 1 of Hong).
Regarding claim 16, the combined teachings teach wherein the case (lighting house 106 Fig. 1 of Wimbert corresponds to the case of Hong) further includes a hook (locking catch 108 Fig. 1 of Wimbert) at an end of the circumferential part (understood to be the structure from which locking catch 108 is extending from Fig. 1 of Wimbert), and wherein the hook is configured to couple to a rear surface of the substrate (rear surface of printed circuit board 103 Fig. 1 of Wimbert).
Regarding claim 17, the combined teachings teach wherein, when the hook is coupled to the rear surface of the substrate (Fig. 1 of Wimbert), a rear end of the reflector (rear end of reflector 104 Fig. 1 of Wimbert where reflector 104 corresponds to the reflector of Sung) is supported on a front surface of the substrate (front surface of printed circuit board 103 Fig. 1 of Wimbert where printed circuit board 103 corresponds to the substrate of Hong) to constrain the substrate (Fig. 1 of Wimbert).
Regarding claim 21, the combined teachings teach wherein the light source comprises a light emitting diode (paragraph [0081] of Hong).
Regarding claim 23, the combined teachings teach wherein a cross-sectional area of the locking jaw (Fig. 6 of Ikuta) is larger than a cross-sectional area of the rib (Fig. 6 of Ikuta).
Claims 12 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong, Ikuta, Yoshikawa, and Wimbert as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nowak et al. (US 2006 0077653 A1, herein after referred to as Nowak).
Regarding claim 12, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “wherein the case further includes mounts that extend from the circumferential part for mounting the display device at the storage space”.
However, Nowak teaches wherein a case (lens assembly 44 Fig. 2 corresponds to the case of Hong) further includes mounts (snap assemblies 102 and 104 Figs. 2 and 4) that extend from a circumferential part (Figs. 2 and 4 where the circumferential part of lens 80 corresponds to the circumferential part of Hong) for mounting a display device (light assembly 10 Figs. 1 and 3 corresponds to the display device of Hong) at a storage space (Fig. 1 where drawer 12 corresponds to the storage space of Hong) to securely snap the display device into place during installation (paragraph [0031]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “wherein the case further includes mounts that extend from the circumferential part for mounting the display device at the storage space” in view of the teachings of Nowak to securely snap the display device into place during installation.
Regarding claim 22, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “wherein the plurality of reflectors comprises a plurality of surfaces coated with a reflection material”.
However, Nowak teaches wherein a plurality of reflectors (the plurality of walls forming inner surface 64 Fig. 2 corresponds to the plurality of reflectors of Ikuta) comprises a plurality of surfaces (the plurality of the surfaces of walls forming inner surface 64 Fig. 2) coated with a reflection material (paragraph [0029]) to distribute light in an advantageous pattern (paragraph [0029]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “wherein the plurality of reflectors comprises a plurality of surfaces coated with a reflection material” in view of the teachings of Nowak to distribute light in an advantageous pattern.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong, Ikuta, Yoshikawa, and Wimbert as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sung et al. (WO2014168391A1, herein after referred to as Sung).
Regarding claim 13, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “wherein a touch switch is provided on the substrate, wherein an input part is provided on the front surface of the case at a position corresponding to the touch switch provided on the substrate, and wherein the diffusion sheet is configured to shield both the display and the input part”.
However, Sung teaches wherein a touch switch (touch button 140 Fig. 4) is provided on a substrate (Fig. 4 where printing circuit board 132 corresponds to the substrate of Hong), wherein an input part (disclosed “particular region” in paragraph [87]) provided on a front surface of a case (front surface of guide portion 120 which corresponds to the case of Hong) at a position (paragraph [87]) corresponding to the touch switch provided on the substrate (Fig. 4), and wherein a diffusion sheet (cover sheet 110 Fig. 7 corresponds to the diffusion sheet of Hong) is configured to shield both the display and the input part (Figs. 4 and 7) to allow for user interaction (paragraph [86]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “wherein a touch switch is provided on the substrate, wherein an input part is provided on the front surface of the case at a position corresponding to the touch switch provided on the substrate, and wherein the diffusion sheet is configured to shield both the display and the input part” in view of the teachings of Sung to allow for user interaction.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong, Ikuta, Yoshikawa, and Wimbert as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kang et al. (KR20060071660A, herein after referred to as Kang).
Regarding claim 18, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “wherein the substrate is configured to contact an inner surface of the circumferential part and to shield an open rear surface of the display device”.
However, Kang teaches a substrate (circuit board 141 Fig. 1 corresponds to the substrate of Hong) is configured to contact an inner surface (see below annotated Fig. 1 of Kang) of a circumferential part (see below annotated Fig. 1 of Kang) and to shield an open rear surface (open rear surface of the display illustrated in Fig. 1) of a display device (Fig. 1 where the illustrated display unit corresponds to the display device of Hong) to provide the substrate as the back cover of the display device.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “wherein the substrate is configured to contact an inner surface of the circumferential part and to shield an open rear surface of the display device” in view of the teachings of Kang to provide the substrate as the back cover of the display device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
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 1.136(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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMBA NMN GAYE whose telephone number is (571)272-8809. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 4:30AM to 2:30PM.
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, Jerry -Daryl Fletcher can be reached at 571-270-5054. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SAMBA NMN GAYE/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JERRY-DARYL FLETCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763