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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
The claimed limitations: “hinge”, “structural element” and “swivel axle” lacks an identifying numeral in the specification that can be found in the drawings.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “structural element”, “swivel axle” & “an attachment” (line 4) in claim 1, three different “articulated attachment” (s) in claim 5, “eccentric sleeve” in claim 8, “the race is straight” in claim 10 and “an insert” claim 12, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 14-18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the variable swivel axle" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Additionally, line 7 recitation “the variable swivel axle of the articulated component” causes confusion because assuming what is recited in line 7 is the same swivel axle established in line 4, now line 7 claims that the swivel axle is of the “articulated component”, while in line 4 it was the swivel axle of “an attachment”, provided that “an attachment” is not referred to with a numeral, line 7 appears to either conflict or add an undescribed limitation.
Claim 1 recites “attached to one another via the hinge” in line 8; two issues arise from this recitation: (a) what are the two components that are “attached to one another”? and (b) since the components recited in the claim are all parts of the hinge, how can it be recited that two of them are “attached ... via the hinge”?
Claim 2 recites “the second coupler is ... attached in an articulated manner to the hinge”; confusion arises because the claim appears to recite that part of the hinge is attached to the hinge.
Claim 5 recites “a first additional couplers” as well as “a second additional coupler” in lines 3-4 and 5 respectively, are the plural first additional couplers and the second additional coupler in addition to the “at least two additional couplers” established earlier in the claim? In addition, “a free end” recited in line 3 and again “a free end” in line 5, are these in addition to the “ends” established in line 2 of the claim? The same issues above apply to claims 14-16.
Claims 7 and 17 recite “smoothly adjustable attachment”, since the term “smoothly” is a relative term and there is no standard in the industry as to what constitutes a smooth attachment, it is provided that this language is objected to.
Claims 8 and 18 recite “the articulated attachment”; which of the three articulated attachments recited in claim 5 is being referred to in claims 8 and 18?
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5-8 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 5 and 14-16 recite the limitation “designed for an articulated attachment”; note that it is not designed for a function, but instead it recites designed for a component, hence it is not understood how a component is designed for another component, is it designed to attach, to include, or other relationship between component A that is designed for component B.
Dependent claims are rejected at least for depending from a rejected claim.
Note: that in light of the drawings, claim objections and 112 issues detailed above, some limitations, such as those which are not illustrated and those which appear to be recited twice with two different nomenclatures will be examined as best understood in order to best expedite prosecution.
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 1-5, 7-11, 13-16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schrimpf, US (7334361).
In regards to claim 1 Schrimpf discloses
A hinge (assembly as shown in fig. 4B) for attaching at least two components of a structural element (intended use), a fixed component (intended use) and an articulated component (intended use), comprising an assembly hanger (62) designed for mounting the hinge to the fixed component (intended use), at least one base coupler (72) rotatably attached to the assembly hanger (at bottom of 72; see annotated drawings below), wherein a swivel axle (as best understood being the same as the top pin, per what is disclosed; and in the same manner as in the current invention) of an attachment (rotatable attachment; see annotated draiwngs below) between the at least one base coupler and the assembly hanger runs through a top pin (as best understood being the same as the swivel axle, per what is disclosed; and in the same manner as in the current invention), the at least one base coupler (72) is attached to the assembly hanger through the top pin (as shown in reproduced fig. 4B below), wherein the assembly hanger comprises a race (66) for a travelling pin (68; fig. 4B), determining a position of the variable swivel axle of the articulated component relative to the fixed component (22; fig. 3) attached to one another via the hinge (per the mechanism as shown in fig. 4B; pin 68 traveling in race 66 varies the position of the swivel axle relative to 22).
PNG
media_image1.png
569
800
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 2 Schrimpf discloses the hinge comprises a second coupler (70), wherein the second coupler is immovably attached to the articulated component (80) and attached in an articulated manner to the hinge (at traveling pin 68).
In regards to claim 3 Schrimpf discloses a first end of a second coupler (top end of 70 at pin 68) is attached to the assembly hanger via the travelling pin (68) of the hinge (as shown in fig. 4B), and a second end of the second coupler is attached to the at least one base coupler via a bottom pin (either attached to 72 at 76 or indirectly at bottom of 70 via 64 and 74 via unnumbered pin at bottom of 70; note that “end” need not be the terminal end).
In regards to claim 4 Schrimpf discloses the travelling pin is located on the articulated component (68 located on 80 since 70 is located on 80, in the same manner as in the current invention where 6 is located on 11 via 7; see fig. 6 of the current invention).
In regards to claim 5 Schrimpf discloses the hinge comprises at least two additional couplers (61, 74) for suspending an additional articulated component (64) on the hinge, wherein ends of the at least two additional couplers are joined by an articulated attachment (attachment between 61 and 74 being joined for pivotal /articulated movement at bottom end of spring 61), and a free end (top end of 61) of a first additional couplers (61; being one of the additional couplers; see claim objection above) is designed for (intended use) an articulated attachment with the assembly hanger (attachment between 61 and 62 at top of 61), and a free end (bottom end of 74) of a second additional coupler (74; being one of the additional couplers; see claim objection above) is designed for (intended use) an articulated attachment with the additional articulated component (pivotal attachment at bottom of 74 between 74 and 64).
In regards to claim 7 Schrimpf discloses the articulated attachment of the free end of the first additional coupler (top end of 61) with the assembly hanger (62) is a smoothly adjustable attachment (where top curved end attachment of wire of spring 61 is “smoothly” adjustable in term of pivoting and adjusting length of 61; as best understood).
In regards to claim 8 (as best understood) Schrimpf discloses the articulated attachment is adjusted using an eccentric sleeve or an eccentric rivet (either any of the numbered or unnumbered rivets disclosed in fig. 4B or one of the spring ends where the spring elongation and retraction is an eccentric sleeve).
In regards to claim 9 Schrimpf discloses the race is in a shape of an arch (arc shape of 66 as shown in fig. 4B).
In regards to claim 10 Schrimpf discloses the race is straight (at least the top half of 66; fig. 4B).
In regards to claim 11 Schrimpf discloses the race is curved (curved shape between top and bottom halves of 66 as shown in fig. 4B).
In regards to claim 13 Schrimpf discloses the first end (top end) of the second coupler (70) is attached to the assembly hanger (62) via the travelling pin (68) of the hinge (as shown in fig. 4B), and a second end of the second coupler is attached to the at least one base coupler via a bottom pin (either attached to 72 at 76 or indirectly at bottom of 70 via 64 and 74 via unnumbered pin at bottom of 70; note that “end” need not be the terminal end).
In regards to claim 14 Schrimpf discloses the hinge comprises at least two additional couplers (61, 74) for suspending an additional articulated component (64) on the hinge, wherein ends of the at least two additional couplers are joined by an articulated attachment (attachment between 61 and 74 being joined for pivotal /articulated movement at bottom end of spring 61), and a free end (top end of 61) of a first additional couplers (61; being one of the additional couplers; see claim objection above) is designed for (intended use) an articulated attachment with the assembly hanger (attachment between 61 and 62 at top of 61), and a free end (bottom end of 74) of a second additional coupler (74; being one of the additional couplers; see claim objection above) is designed for (intended use) an articulated attachment with the additional articulated component (pivotal attachment at bottom of 74 between 74 and 64).
In regards to claim 15 Schrimpf discloses the hinge comprises at least two additional couplers (61, 74) for suspending an additional articulated component (64) on the hinge, wherein ends of the at least two additional couplers are joined by an articulated attachment (attachment between 61 and 74 being joined for pivotal /articulated movement at bottom end of spring 61), and a free end (top end of 61) of a first additional couplers (61; being one of the additional couplers; see claim objection above) is designed for (intended use) an articulated attachment with the assembly hanger (attachment between 61 and 62 at top of 61), and a free end (bottom end of 74) of a second additional coupler (74; being one of the additional couplers; see claim objection above) is designed for (intended use) an articulated attachment with the additional articulated component (pivotal attachment at bottom of 74 between 74 and 64).
In regards to claim 16 Schrimpf discloses the hinge comprises at least two additional couplers (61, 74) for suspending an additional articulated component (64) on the hinge, wherein ends of the at least two additional couplers are joined by an articulated attachment (attachment between 61 and 74 being joined for pivotal /articulated movement at bottom end of spring 61), and a free end (top end of 61) of a first additional couplers (61; being one of the additional couplers; see claim objection above) is designed for (intended use) an articulated attachment with the assembly hanger (attachment between 61 and 62 at top of 61), and a free end (bottom end of 74) of a second additional coupler (74; being one of the additional couplers; see claim objection above) is designed for (intended use) an articulated attachment with the additional articulated component (pivotal attachment at bottom of 74 between 74 and 64).
In regards to claim 19 (as best understood) Schrimpf discloses the articulated attachment is adjusted using an eccentric sleeve or an eccentric rivet (either any of the numbered or unnumbered rivets disclosed in fig. 4B or one of the spring ends where the spring elongation and retraction is an eccentric sleeve).
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.
Claims 6, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schrimpf as applied to claim 5 above.
In regards to claim 6, examiner takes Official Notice that hook attachments at the end of a component around a pivoting pin are old and well-known in the art, such as piano hinges for closures for instance. A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have had the bottom end of member 74 hooked around the unnumbered pivot pin at the bottom of 74 for the predicable result with reasonable expectation of success i.e. to provide for high-strength, non-permanent connection which can be easily repaired and allow for limited side-to-side positioning flexibility.
In regards to claim 17 Schrimpf discloses the articulated attachment of the free end of the first additional coupler (top end of 61) with the assembly hanger (62) is a smoothly adjustable attachment (where top curved end attachment of wire of spring 61 is “smoothly” adjustable in term of pivoting and adjusting length of 61; as best understood).
In regards to claim 18 (as best understood) Schrimpf discloses the articulated attachment is adjusted using an eccentric sleeve or an eccentric rivet (either any of the numbered or unnumbered rivets disclosed in fig. 4B or one of the spring ends where the spring elongation and retraction is an eccentric sleeve).
Claims 12 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schrimpf as applied to claims 1 and 2 respectively above, and further in view of Gerkin, US (3729044).
In regards to claims 12 and 20 Schrimpf does not disclose an insert made out of plastic is provided in the race.
Gerkin teaches an insert (40) made out of plastic (as described in Col 3; LL 23-29; see highlighted excerpt below) is provided in the race (12).
PNG
media_image2.png
186
606
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the plastic insert taught by Gerkin onto the race 66 of Schrimpf for the predictable result with reasonable expectation of success and as motivated by Gerkin i.e., to provide for low friction contact between pin 68 and the inner edges of race 66 in order to reduce wear and tear of repeated usage, and provide for a relatively cheap replaceable insert when needed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please refer to PTO-892 form for list of cited references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHIREF M MEKHAEIL whose telephone number is (571)270-5334. The examiner can normally be reached 10-7 Mon-Fri.
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 Cahn can be reached at 571-270-5616. 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.
/S.M.M/Examiner, Art Unit 3634
/DANIEL P CAHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights