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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
1. 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.
2. Claims 1-8, 10-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN101299514A (CN ‘514) in further in view of US 2019/0208908 A1 (Karl).
With respect to claim 1, CN ‘154 shows a ligature resistant cabinet (1, Fig.2) for mounting to a wall (Fig.1), the cabinet comprising; a housing (10, 70, 50, Fig.2, Fig.4), the housing including a rear wall (10, Fig.2) and a plurality of side walls (70, Fig.3, Fig.4), the side walls including a top wall, a bottom wall, a left side wall and a right side wall (Fig.4), the plurality of side walls (70) cooperating with the rear wall (10) to define an interior chamber of the housing (Fig.2, Fig.3, Fig.4, Fig.5), the housing further having a front side (50, Fig.2) opposite the rear wall (10), the front side including portions defining a front opening (52, Fig.2) providing an opening into the interior chamber; a door (64, Fig.4), the door being mounted to the housing and being moveable between an open position and a closed position (via hinge 62), the closed position covering the front opening (Fig.3, Fig.4); and at least one of the housing and the door defining a beveled face (50, Fig.2, Fig.3), the beveled face extending circumferentially about the front opening (52, Fig.2) in the closed position (Fig.2, Fig.3, Fig.4).
With respect to claim 1, CN ‘154 doesn’t show the top wall slopes downward from the rear wall to the front side. Karl shows the top wall (192, Fig.26) slopes downward from the rear wall (197, Fig.28) to the front side (Fig.26, Fig.28). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to make the top wall slope downward from the rear wall such as taught by Karl, in order to prevent storage of debris and water on the top wall and direct them downwards and away from the top wall as well as to resist climbing on the top wall.
With respect to claim 2, modified CN ‘154 shows wherein the beveled face (50, Fig.2, Fig.3) is defined by the housing.
With respect to claim 3, modified CN ‘154 shows wherein the beveled face (50) includes a first face and a second face (see annotation #1 below), the first face extending in a first plane generally parallel to the rear wall (10, made of a flat plate 14 in figure 2), the second face defining an acute angle relative to the first plane (Fig.3).
With respect to claim 4, modified CN ‘154 does not explicitly recite the acute angle is in the range of 30 to 60 degrees. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to make the angle in the range of 30 to 60 degrees, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
With respect to claim 5, modified CN ‘154 shows a second portion of the second face (portion engaging the side edge of the door in Fig.3) but doesn’t disclose the angle is in the range of 60 to 89 degrees is in the range of 60 to 89 degrees, inclusive. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to make the angle in the range of 60 to 89 degrees, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
With respect to claim 6, modified CN ‘154 teaches wherein the beveled face includes a third face (see annotation below), the third face extending in a second plane generally parallel to the rear wall (Fig.2).
With respect to claim 7, modified CN ‘154 teaches wherein the first plane is spaced a first distance from the rear wall and the second plane is spaced a second distance from the rear wall, the first distance being different from the second distance (Fig.2).
With respect to claim 8, modified CN ‘154 shows wherein the first distance is less than the second distance (see figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
340
553
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotation #1
With respect to claim 10, modified CN ‘154 teaches wherein the second face (see annotation #2 below) extends from the first face in a direction away from rear wall (10, at 14 in figure 3).
With respect to claim 12, modified CN ‘154 shows wherein the portions defining the front opening (52) are portions of the first face (Fig.3, see annotation #2 below).
With respect to claim 13, modified CN ‘154 shows wherein the door (64, Fig.4) is mounted to the first face (at 62, Fig.3, see figure below).
With respect to claim 14, modified CN ‘154 shows wherein the door (64, Fig.3, Fig.4) is mounted to the first face by a hinge (at 62 in figure 3, first face surrounds the door and opening 52, Fig.2).
PNG
media_image2.png
395
614
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 11, modified CN ‘154 shows wherein the second face extends from the first face in a direction toward the rear wall (see annotation #3 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
336
537
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 15, modified CN ‘154 shows wherein the beveled face is defined by the door (64, Fig.3).
With respect to claim 16, modified CN ‘154 teaches wherein the beveled face defines a perimeter of the door (64, Fig.3, defines the two sides of the perimeter of the door).
With respect to claim 17, modified CN ‘154 teaches wherein the perimeter circumscribes the front opening (52, Fig.4) when the door is in the closed position (Fig.3, Fig.4).
With respect to claim 18, modified CN ‘154 teaches wherein the door (64) includes a center panel (Fig.4) defining a plane extending parallel to the rear wall (10, Fig.4, Fig.3) in the closed position.
With respect to claim 19, modified CN ‘154 teaches wherein the beveled face extends from the center panel in a direction toward the rear wall (Fig.3).
With respect to claim 20, modified CN ‘154 shows wherein the beveled face define an acute angle relative to the plane (Fig.3) but doesn’t explicitly recite the acute angle being in the range of 30 to 60 degrees. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to make the angle in the range of 30 to 60 degrees, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
With respect to claim 21, modified CN ‘154 teaches each of the housing and door defines a beveled face (Fig.3, Fig.2).
With respect to claim 22, the combination (Karl) shows wherein the top wall (192) includes a first downward sloping portion (at 226 in Fig.28) defining a first acute angle relative to rear wall and a second downward sloping portion (at 192 in figure 28) defining a second acute angle relative to rear wall, the second acute angle being different from the first acute angle (Fig.28).
With respect to claim 23, the combination (Karl) teaches wherein the first acute angle is greater than the second acute angel (Fig.28).
With respect to claim 24, the combination (Karl) teaches wherein the first downward sloping portion (at 226, Fig.28) extends from the rear wall (197) to the second downward sloping portion (at 192, Fig.28).
With respect to claim 25, modified CN ‘154 teaches wherein the rear wall (10) is configured for mounting in surface-to-surface engagement with a vertically extending support surface (at 5, Fig.1)
With respect to claims 26 and 27, modified CN 154 shows wherein the left and right side walls (70) are configured for mounting to a vertically extending support surface (at 5, Fig.1).
With respect to claim 28, modified CN ‘154 shows wherein the plurality of side walls include a necked down portion (at first face in annotation #2 above) defining a portion of the housing having a reduced length and width between the plurality of side walls.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 is allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/2/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argued that CN ‘514 does not disclose because the beveled face extends circumferentially about the front opening because only the left and right sides of the frame have the beveled face not the top and bottom of the frame. The examiner takes the position that the beveled face extending “circumferentially” does not mean that the beveled face extends completely around the perimeter/circumference of the front opening. The term “circumferential” means “of, at or near the circumference” or “lying along the outskirts” (dictionary.com) and thus as long as the beveled face is located at or near the circumference of the front opening then it meets the limitation. In this instant case, the beveled face extends at least at the left and right sides of the circumference of the front opening.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 HIWOT E TEFERA whose telephone number is (571)270-3320. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6PM.
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, Daniel Troy can be reached at 5712703742. 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.
/HIWOT E TEFERA/Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights