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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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 1-20 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 1, 16, and 19 recite “at least one retention device among the first and second catch members includes a second catch member”. “at least one retention device” lacks antecedent basis and it is unclear whether this refers to the previously disclosed at least one retention device or the other retention device. It is also unclear how “among the first and second catch members modifies the retention device because the retention device is not a catch member. For examination purposes Examiner will consider that any one of the retention devices has the second catch member.
Claims 6, 14, and 18 recite “a metal, a plastic, an elastomer”. These appear to be options and should have the work or before elastomer otherwise it is unclear if there are other combinations of options. For examination purposes Examiner will consider that only the options listed are to be provided in the alternative individually and that they are not combined.
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) 1-3 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE102008060611 to Komowski (Komowski).
Regarding claim 1, Komowski teaches first (entirety of 1 or right sidewall of 1, Figure 1) and second retention devices (3 or left sidewall of 1, Figure 1) each having a respective body portion (shown in Figure 1), wherein at least one retention device among the first and second retention devices includes at least a first catch member (7, Figure 1) and at least one retention device among the first and second catch members includes a second catch member (7’, Figure 1), and wherein the first and second catch members define differing damper positions (shown in Figure 1); and a damper having opposed first and second edges (5 and/or 4, Figure 1), wherein the damper is pivotally coupled between the first and second retention devices with the first edge adjacent the first retention device and the second edge adjacent the second retention device (shown in Figure 1 whether the retention devices are 1 and 3 or right side of 1 and the left side of 1), wherein each of the first and second edges has a respective third catch member magnetically attracted to the first and second catch members the first and second retention devices, such that the damper can be selectively configured in an first position by aligning the third catch member with the first catch member and can be selective configured in a second position by aligning the third catch member with the second catch member (6 or 6’, Figure 1).
Regarding claim 2, Komowski teaches wherein the first and second catch members comprise magnets (Abstract of translation).
Regarding claim 3, Komowski teaches wherein the third catch member comprises a magnet (Abstract of translation).
Regarding claim 7, Komowski teaches wherein each of the first and second retention devices includes a finger portion and an arm portion extending from the body portion and spaced apart by a channel (any parts of 1, 3, the left side of 1, and the right side of 1 can be viewed as two halves, one half being a finger portion and another half being an arm portion).
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 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.
Claim(s) 5 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Komowski in view of U.S. PGPUB 20110074184 to Hashikawa et al. (Haskikawa).
Regarding claim 5, Komowski does not explicitly state that the first and second retention devices are formed of a resilient material although it is well known that the structure called out is commonly plastic or metal. To expedite examination Examiner has provided the following.
Haskikawa teaches wherein the first and second retention devices are formed of a resilient material (Paragraph 0034 discloses plastic ducts). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Komowski with the teachings of Haskikawa to provide the first and second retention devices are formed of a resilient material. Doing so would be a simple change of material and/or allow the device to operate safely longer without damaging the device with a rigid structure.
Regarding claim 6, Komowski does not explicitly state that the resilient material is one of the following: a metal, a plastic, an elastomer although it is well known that the structure called out is commonly plastic or metal. To expedite examination Examiner has provided the following
Haskikawa teaches wherein the resilient material is one of the following: a metal, a plastic, an elastomer (Paragraph 0034 discloses plastic ducts). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Komowski with the teachings of Haskikawa to provide the resilient material is one of the following: a metal, a plastic, an elastomer. Doing so would be a simple change of material and/or allow the device to operate safely longer without damaging the device with a rigid structure.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 8, 9-15, 17-18 and 20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Regarding claim 4, the prior art does not provide a reasonable combination to teach “wherein the first and second retention devices comprise spring clips” because modification of Komowski in this manner would not be reasonable due to the structure cited as the retention devices. Regarding claim 15, the prior art does not provide a reasonable combination to teach “each of the first and second retention devices includes a finger portion and an arm portion extending from the body portion and spaced apart by a channel” because modification of Komowski in this manner would not be reasonable due to the structure cited as the retention.
Claims 8, 16 and 19 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. Regarding claim 8, the prior art does not provide a reasonable combination to teach “wherein the first and second retention devices engage the first and second sidewalls” because modification of Komowski in this manner would not be reasonable due to the structure cited as the retention devices. The reasons for allowability of claims 16 and 19 are same as claims 4 and 8 above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN S ANDERSON II whose telephone number is (571)272-2055. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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 Hoang can be reached at 574-272-6460. 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.
/STEVEN S ANDERSON II/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762