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 without traverse of Group I (claims 18-28) in the reply filed on 1/26/26 is acknowledged.
Claims 29-34 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 1/26/26.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 18-22, 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang (CN206986539U).
Regarding claims 18-19, 27, Wang teaches a lid structure (see abstract) comprising: a frame body 1 including a window 15, an opening 14, and a guiding groove 12; and a lid plate 2; wherein the frame body 1 is configured to allow the lid plate 2 to be inserted into or pulled out from the guiding groove 12 through the opening 14, the window 15 being covered by the lid plate 2 in a state in which the lid plate 2 is inserted in the guiding groove 12 (see pages 2-3 of the translation, figures 1-4) (reads on claim 18); the frame body 1 includes a U-shaped frame structure, the opening 14 being formed at an opening of the U-shaped frame structure, and the guiding groove 12 being formed on an inner side of the U-shaped frame structure (see figures 1 and 4) (reads on claim 19); a reinforcement assembly 11 connected to a side of the frame body 1 away from the guiding groove 12, the reinforcement assembly 11 extending along a circumferential direction of the window 15 (see figures 1-2, page 3 of the translation) (reads on claim 27).
Regarding claims 20-22, Wang teaches the limitations of claim 19. Wang also teaches in figures 1, 4 and pages 2-3 of the translation that the guiding groove 12 circumferentially extends along an inner side of the frame body 1 to form a U-shaped groove
PNG
media_image1.png
3
3
media_image1.png
Greyscale
structure, a peripheral edge of the lid plate 2 being adapted to cooperate with the U-shaped groove structure (reads on claim 20); a depth (see depth of groove 12 that receives lid plate 2, as shown in figure 4) of at least a portion of the U-shaped groove structure is equal to a thickness of the peripheral edge of the lid plate 2 (reads on claim 21); wherein an opening width (see opening of U-shaped structure that receives lid plate 2) of at least a portion of the U-shaped groove structure is equal to a width of the peripheral edge of the lid plate 2 (see figure 1) (reads on claim 22).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 23-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN206986539U) as applied to claim 18 and further in view of Tang et al. (CN203514056U).
Regarding claim 23, Wang teaches the limitations of claim 18. Wang does not explicitly teach that at least a portion of the frame body is made of a plastic material. Tang et al. teaches a door for a washing machine (see abstract) and that at least a portion of the frame body 1 may be made of a plastic material providing a cost-effective material (see page 2 of the translation). Since both Wang and Tang et al. teach doors for washing machines it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention that at least a portion of the frame body of the system by Wang may be constructed of a plastic material, thereby providing a cost-effective material, as shown to be known and conventional by Tang et al. Furthermore, it is readily apparent that the opening may be enlarged from a first position to a second position under an action of an external force.
Regarding claim 24, Wang teaches the limitations of claim 18. Wang does not teach a stop perpendicular to the guiding groove and extending toward the window along a width direction of the guiding groove. Tang et al. teaches a door for a washing machine (see abstract) and a stop 3 perpendicular to the guiding groove 5, 6 and extending toward the window along a width direction of the guiding groove 5, 6; wherein the lid plate 2 is at least partially in contact with the stop 3 in the width direction of the guiding groove 5, 6 in the state in which the lid plate 2 is inserted in the guiding groove 5, 6; allowing for simple and convenient assembly and disassembly (see figures 1-2, page 2 of the translation). Since both Wang and Tang et al. teach doors for washing machines it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention that a stop perpendicular to the guiding groove may be included in the system by Wang so as to improve the simplicity and convenience of assembly and disassembly, as shown to be known and conventional by Tang et al.
Regarding claim 25, Wang and Tang et al. together teach the limitations of claim 24. Wang does not teach that the stop and the frame body are formed in one piece. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention that the stop and frame body may be formed in one piece so as to allow for a more permanent connection. Furthermore, it has been determined that making integral is an obvious design choice for one of ordinary skill in the art absent persuasive evidence that a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965).
Regarding claim 26, Wang and Tang et al. together teach the limitations of claim 18. Wang teaches the frame body 1 comprises the guiding groove 12 comprising a first abutment member and a second abutment member connected to each other, the first abutment member abutting against the lid plate 2 on a lower side of the lid plate, the second abutment member abutting against the lid plate 2 on an upper side of the lid plate (see figures 1 and 4). Wang does not explicitly teach that a width of the first abutment member is greater than a width of the second abutment member. Tang et al. teaches a door for a washing machine (see abstract) and that a width of the first abutment member 5b is greater than a width of the second abutment member 5a; in a configuration that allows for simple and convenient assembly and disassembly (see figures 1-2, page 2 of the translation). Since both Wang and Tang et al. teach doors for washing machines it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention that the width of the first abutment member may be greater than the width of the second abutment member in the system by Wang so as to improve the simplicity and convenience of assembly and disassembly, as shown to be known and conventional by Tang et al. Furthermore, it has been determined that changes in relative dimensions constitute an obvious design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art absent persuasive evidence that a new and unexpected result is produced. In Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN206986539U) as applied to claim 18 and further in view of Lee (KR20100065961A).
Regarding claim 28, Wang teaches the limitations of claim 18. Wang does not explicitly teach that the lid plate is made of a transparent material, and the frame body is made of an opaque material. Lee teaches a door structure for a washing machine (see abstract) and that the lid plate 20 is made of a transparent material, and the surrounding frame body 11 is made of an opaque material, thereby allowing the user to see inside the drum 2 of the washing machine (see figures 1-3, page 2 of the translation). Since both Wang and Lee teach doors for washing machines it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention that the lid plate in the system by Wang may be constructed of a transparent material and the surrounding frame body of an opaque material so as to allow the user to see into the interior of the drum of the washing machine, as shown to be known and conventional by Lee.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TINSAE B AYALEW whose telephone number is (571)270-0256. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5pm.
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, MICHAEL BARR can be reached at 571-272-1414. 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.
/TINSAE B AYALEW/EXAMINER, Art Unit 1711