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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of species A1 in the reply filed on 2025-06-27 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out any errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claims 2-11, 13-15 withdrawn (claims 10, 11 now canceled) from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 2025-06-27. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore remains FINAL.
Please note that arguments against the a posteriori reference cited in the election of species unity of invention office action do not point out error in the unity of invention, as the arguments are made with respect to amended claims, which were not utilized in the unity of invention action.
Applicant is reminded that in the event of an allowance any withdrawn claims must be amended to include the limitations of the allowable claim(s) or they cannot be rejoined and must be canceled or other appropriate action must be taken (MPEP 821, 37 CFR 1.144).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 12, 16-18, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nagamine et al. (US 2003/0217495).
Regarding claim 1 Nagamine discloses:
A display device comprising:
a lower frame (e.g. lowest row of 1 FIG.6);
a plurality of lower guides movably disposed in a horizontal direction relative to the lower frame (e.g. 15/bottom 17 disposed to be moved/arrayed left/right with 1);
an upper frame (e.g. uppermost row of 1 FIG.6) spaced apart from the lower frame in a vertical direction (e.g. shown FIG.6);
a plurality of upper guides (e.g. upper 17 of upper 6 FIG.6) movably disposed in the horizontal direction relative to the upper frame (e.g. 17 disposed to be moved/arrayed left/right with 1); and
a plurality of display modules (e.g. 1 FIG.7) disposed between the plurality of lower guides and the plurality of upper guides in the vertical direction and the horizontal direction (e.g. shown Fig.6);
a vertical rod (e.g. 3/sidewalls 17 FIG.8) extending from a first lower guide of the plurality of lower guides to a first upper guide of the plurality of upper guides; wherein
a lowermost display module among the plurality of display modules is connected to one of the plurality of lower guides (e.g. indicated FIG.6/FIG.7), and wherein an uppermost display module among the plurality of display modules is connected to one of the plurality of upper guides (e.g. indicated FIG.6/FIG.7), wherein each display module comprises a display module locker (e.g. 4 FIG.8) configured to lock or unlock the display module from the vertical rod (e.g. described paragraph [0053]), and wherein the display module locker comprises:
a friction member (e.g. 43 FIG.11) hinged to the vertical rod and having a friction portion capable of rubbing against the vertical rod (e.g. against left/right sides of 3 on 3a FIG.11) ;
a wire (e.g. 43c FIG.8) connected to the friction member; and
a control lever (e.g. 41, 44, 45 FIG.10) module rotatably disposed in a cabinet and connected to the wire (e.g. indicated FIG.11).
please note: “[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does.” Hewlett-Packard Co.v.Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987) (see MPEP 2114)
Regarding claim 12 Nagamine discloses:
a lever (e.g. 41 FIG.11) hinged to the cabinet and having a wire connection portion to which the wire is connected (e.g. shown via dotted line(s) FIG.11); and
a lever locker (e.g. 45 FIG.11) configured to lock or unlock the lever.
Regarding claim 16 Nagamine discloses:
the friction portion directly rubs against a vertically extending portion of the vertical rod (e.g. sides of 43 against the side of 3 shown FIG.10).
Regarding claim 17 Nagamine discloses:
a second friction member (e.g. base of 41 against 3 FIG.11) hinged to the vertical rod (e.g. via 43 as indicated w/ dotted lines FIG.11) and including a second friction portion directly rubbing against another vertically extending portion of the vertical rod (e.g. against 3 shown FIG.10).
Regarding claim 18 Nagamine discloses:
the friction member and the second friction member are configured to rotate toward each other when a lever of the control lever module rotates in a first direction (e.g. toward one another shown FIG.12B), and wherein the friction member and the second friction member are configured to rotate away from each other when the lever of the control lever module rotates in a second direction opposite of the first direction (e.g. away from each other shown FIG.12C).
Regarding claim 21 Nagamine discloses:
each display module of the plurality of display modules is configured to be fixed to the vertical rod independently of the other display modules (e.g. 1 shown fixed to 3 independent of other 1 FIG.8).
Claim Objections
Claims 19 and 20 are 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.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in dependent claim 19 (including all limitations from the claims upon which claim 19 depends) even though the individual elements are taught in various references. After careful consideration of the claims, it is concluded that the combination of all the elements of claim 19, including the elements/amendments added in the response filed 2026-01-29 is not fairly suggested to one of ordinary skill even after consideration of the art.
The allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in dependent claim 20 (including all limitations from the claims upon which claim 20 depends) even though the individual elements are taught in various references. After careful consideration of the claims, it is concluded that the combination of all the elements of claim 20, including the elements/amendments added in the response filed 2026-01-29 is not fairly suggested to one of ordinary skill even after consideration of the art.
The examiner has cited a plurality of references on prior PTO-892 which teach related hinging housing/circuit board assemblies. However, none of the references cited during prosecution of the instant application, taken alone or in combination, is believed to render the present invention as recited in the above dependent claims, and all the limitations from which the dependent claims depend, unpatentable as claimed.
The examiner performed inventor and assignee name searches for possible double patenting issues. No documents with conflicting claims have been identified.
Response to Arguments
All arguments with respect to claims 19 and 20 (and horizontal movement as recited in claims 19 and 20) are addressed in the action above and will not be re-addressed here.
The below address the arguments submitted as part of the RCE dated 2026-01-29, which replaced the arguments dated 2025-12-30.
Regarding applicant’s arguments with respect to the guide element.
One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that at least FIG.8 clearly shows/indicates through connected dotted lines that 3/17 “extending from a first lower guide of the plurality of lower guides to a first upper guide of the plurality of upper guides” forming a rod from 3 to the sidewalls(17) of 1 to 3 again until reaching the top of the stack, including as shown in e.g. FIG.6. While such a guide may not bear the same appearance as applicant’s guide, it nevertheless discloses the argued limitation(s).
It must be noted that at least FIG.8 shows the sidewall 17 connecting to 15 and bottom 17 at the corners of 1
Applicant’s arguments with respect to “changing the location of the connecting pin” does not seem connected to the exact language of the claim(s). Insofar as the rejection of record is concerned no “changing” as applicant asserts is necessary either in the claims themselves or any interpretation of one of ordinary skill in the art, not least of which because the claims of record are apparatus claims and so no methods are read into the apparatus claims (MPEP 2111, 2114)
The remaining arguments are constructively addressed in the response and rejection above and will not be repeated here.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THERON S MILLISER whose telephone number is (571)270-1800. The examiner can normally be reached 9-6.
Examiner interviews are available.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Imani N. Hayman can be reached at (571) 270-5528. 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.
/THERON S MILLISER/Examiner, Art Unit 2841
/IMANI N HAYMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights