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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Specification should clearly define the “extended”, “folded”, and “intermediate position” as it relates to the multi-joint mechanism as discloses in Figs. 7-9. Furthermore, how do the positions (disclosed in Figs. 7-9) relate to the orientation of the furniture flap at each position.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Fig.4 appears to disclose the ICR of the multi-joint mechanism but the 61 and 62 are arranged in a parallel orientation at top and bottom, but this orientation of (61, 62) is not consistent with the rest of the disclosure. Appropriate correction or an explanation is required.
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.
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 subject matter recited in claim 1,“the when the multi-joint mechanism is in a first position, an instantaneous center of rotation of movement of the mounting device lies outside the multi-joint mechanism, and when the multi-joint mechanism is in a second position, an instantaneous center of rotation of the movement of the mounting device lies inside a region of the multi-joint mechanism” 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Applicant’s added limitation, “when the multi-joint mechanism is in a first position, an instantaneous center of rotation of movement of the mounting device lies outside the multi-joint mechanism, and when the multi-joint mechanism is in a second position, an instantaneous center of rotation of the movement of the mounting device lies inside a region of the multi-joint mechanism,” the original disclosure does not support this limitation to the same level of specificity. Appropriate correction or an explanation is required.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 6-9, 11 and 17-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by 20180363348 (“SCHLUGE”).
Regarding Claim 1, SCHLUGE discloses a furniture fitting for movably mounting a two-part furniture flap on a furniture carcass, the furniture fitting comprising:
a main body (5) to be connected to the furniture carcass,
a mounting device (10) to be connected to the furniture flap, and
an actuating arm (6) having a first end mounted on the main body (5) so as to be pivotable about an axis of rotation,
wherein the actuating arm (6) has a second end opposite the first end and connected to the mounting device (10) via a multi-joint mechanism, the multi-joint mechanism having at least each having an axis of rotation,
wherein the multi-joint mechanism (7, 8) is configured such that:
when the multi-joint mechanism is in a first position, an instantaneous center of rotation of movement of the mounting device (10) lies outside the multi-joint mechanism, and when the multi-joint mechanism is in a second position, an instantaneous center of rotation of the movement of the mounting device (10) lies inside a region of the multi-joint mechanism.
Regarding Claim 2, SCHLUGE discloses wherein the axes of rotation of the at least four joints (see four joints connecting 7 & 8 to 6 & 10) are aligned parallel to each other.
Regarding Claim 3, SCHLUGE discloses wherein the multi-joint mechanism has at least two connecting linkages (7, 8), the actuating arm (6) being connected to the mounting device (10) in an articulated manner by the at least two connecting linkages (7, 8).
Regarding Claim 4, SCHLUGE discloses wherein the multi-joint mechanism includes a first connecting linkage (7) and a second connecting linkage (8), wherein:
a first joint connects the actuating arm (6) to the first connecting linkage (7), and/or
a second joint connects the actuating arm (6) to the second connecting linkage (8), and/or a third joint connects the mounting device (10) to the first connecting linkage (7), and/or a fourth joint connects the mounting device (10) to the second connecting linkage (8).
Regarding Claim 6, SCHLUGE discloses wherein the actuating arm (6) comprises a connecting part, the multi-joint mechanism being connected to the actuating arm (6) via the connecting part.
Regarding Claim 7, SCHLUGE discloses wherein the multi-joint mechanism comprises at least two connecting linkages (7, 8), the at least two connecting linkages (7, 8) each comprising a lever.
Regarding Claim 8, SCHLUGE discloses wherein the actuating arm (6) comprises a connecting part, the multi-joint mechanism being connected to the actuating arm (6) via the connecting part, and wherein:
a first joint of the multi-joint mechanism comprises a drilled hole in the connecting part, a drilled hole in the lever of the first connecting linkage (7), and a pin, and/or
a second joint of the multi-joint mechanism comprises a drilled hole in the connecting part, a drilled hole in the lever of the second connecting linkage (8), and a pin, and/or
a third joint of the multi-joint mechanism comprises a drilled hole in the mounting device (10), a drilled hole in the lever of the first connecting linkage (7), and a pin, and/or
a fourth joint of the multi-joint mechanism comprises a drilled hole in the mounting device (10), a drilled hole in the lever of the second connecting linkage (8), and a pin.
Regarding Claim 9, SCHLUGE discloses wherein the actuating arm (6) has a connecting part (91, 92)and the multi-joint mechanism has at least two connecting linkages (7, 8), wherein the at least two connecting linkages (7, 8) comprise at least two levers, wherein at least one of the connecting part (91, 92) and the mounting device (10) is arranged between the at least two levers of the at least two connecting linkages (7, 8).
Regarding Claim 11, SCHLUGE discloses wherein the main body (5) is configured to apply a torque to the actuating arm (6).
Regarding Claim 17, SCHLUGE discloses wherein the actuating arm (6) is exactly one actuating arm (6) mounted on the main body (5), and the multi-joint mechanism has exactly four joints (see four joints connecting 7 & 8 to 6 & 10) each having one axis of rotation.
Regarding Claim 18, SCHLUGE discloses wherein the at least two connecting linkages (7, 8) of the multi-joint mechanism are exactly two connecting linkages (7, 8).
Regarding Claim 19, SCHLUGE discloses wherein the first position is an extended position of the multi-joint mechanism and, when in the extended position of the multi-joint mechanism, an instantaneous center of rotation of movement of the mounting device (10) lies in a location within a rear two-thirds of the furniture carcass.
Regarding Claim 20, SCHLUGE discloses wherein the at least two connecting linkages (7, 8) each comprise exactly two levers, and each of the exactly two levers has at least two drilled holes.
Regarding Claim 21, SCHLUGE discloses wherein the at least two connecting linkages (7, 8) comprise exactly two levers, and the at least one of the connecting part (91, 92) and the mounting device (10) is arranged between the two levers of the at least two connecting linkages (7, 8) in the direction of the axes of rotation.
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 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 of this title, 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 10, 12-16 and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103(a) as being unpatentable over SCHLUGE as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US Pub: 20190368254 (“XU”)
Regarding Claim 10 and 12, SCHLUGE discloses the claimed invention but does not disclose an actuator adjustable in length, and a two part furniture flap.
Regarding Claims 10 and 12, XU discloses a similar invention having Claim 10-actuating arm (211, 212) adjustable in length; Claim 12- piece of furniture comprising:
a furniture carcass (7), a two-part furniture flap (8), and
the furniture fitting according to claim 1, wherein the mounting device (10) is mounted to the two-part furniture flap, the main body (5) is connected to the furniture carcass, and the actuating arm (6) is connected to the mounting device (10) by the multi-joint mechanism.
It would have been obvious to one having skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention that the actuating arm could be configured to be adjustable in while similar to the fitting taught by XU so that the furniture fitting can extend to the second flap, to provide an improved fitting that easy to lift with low noise and stable ([0003).
Regarding Claim 13, the combination discloses (XU) wherein the furniture flap comprises a first flap part (seen in Fig. 1) arranged at a top when installed and a second flap part arranged at a bottom when installed, and wherein the first flap part is connected to the furniture carcass in an articulated manner and/or the first flap part is connected to the second flap part (8) in an articulated manner.
Regarding Claim 14, the combination discloses (XU) wherein the mounting device (3) is installed on the second flap part (8), and the actuating arm (5) is connected to the second flap part by the multi-joint mechanism (one having skill in the art could secure the multi joint mechanism to the end of 212, similar to link 213)
Regarding Claim 15, the combination discloses (XU) wherein:
in a substantially closed position of the furniture flap, the actuating arm (211, 212) is substantially parallel to the first flap part and to the second flap part, and/or
in a substantially open position of the furniture flap, the actuating arm (6) forms an angle of from 45° to 135° with respect to the second flap part.
Regarding Claim 16, the combination discloses (XU) wherein the piece of furniture is configured such that: in a substantially closed position of the furniture flap (8), an instantaneous center of rotation of an opening movement of the second flap part lies in an interior of the furniture carcass, and/or
in a substantially open position of the furniture flap, an instantaneous center of rotation of a closing movement of the second flap part lies within a region of the multi-joint mechanism.
Regarding Claim 22, the combination discloses (XU) wherein the length of the actuating arm is fixable by at least one of (1) a catch (235), a frictional part with a spring element exerting pressure on the frictional part, (i1i) locking by means a screw, and/or
the length of the at actuating arm is changeable during the opening and/or closing movement of the furniture flap, and/or
the actuating arm includes a guide sleeve and a piston, the piston being displaceable in the guide sleeve, and/or
the actuating arm includes a connecting part displaceable relative to a remainder of the actuating arm (6).
Regarding Claim 23, the combination discloses wherein the main body includes at least one of an electric drive unit and a mechanical energy storage device to apply the torque to the actuating arm Both XU and SCHLUGE both demonstrate energy storage device to apply torque to the actuating arm. It is well known in the art to also provide an electric motor for automating the furniture fitting.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103(a) as being unpatentable over 20180363348 (“SCHLUGE”) in view of US Pub No.: US Pub: 20190368254 (“XU”).
Regarding Claim 24, SCHLAGE discloses a furniture fitting for movably mounting a two-part furniture flap on a furniture carcass, the furniture fitting comprising:
a main body (5) to be connected to the furniture carcass,
a mounting device (10) to be connected to the furniture flap, and
an actuating arm (6) having a first end mounted on the main body (5) so as to be pivotable about an axis of rotation,
wherein the actuating arm (6) has a second end opposite the first end and connected to the mounting device (10) via a multi-joint mechanism, the multi-joint mechanism (7, 8) having at least each having an axis of rotation,
wherein the multi-joint mechanism (7, 8) is configured such that:
when the multi-joint mechanism is in a first position, an instantaneous center of rotation of movement of the mounting device (10) lies outside the multi-joint mechanism, and when the multi-joint mechanism is in a second position, an instantaneous center of rotation of the movement of the mounting device (10) lies inside a region of the multi-joint mechanism.
SCHLUGE discloses the claimed invention but does not disclose an actuator adjustable in length.
XU discloses a similar invention having -actuating arm (22, 211, 212) adjustable in length.
It would have been obvious to one having skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention that the actuating arm could be configured to be adjustable in while similar to the fitting taught by XU so that the furniture fitting can extend to the second flap, to provide an improved fitting that easy to lift with low noise and stable ([0003).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-24 have been considered but are not persuasive. As to SCHLUGE, Applicant argues that SCHULAGE does not teach or suggest the ICR outside the multi-joint mechanism in the first portion, and the ICR inside a region of the multi-joint mechanism in the second position. Examiner respectfully disagrees, because the linkages taught by SCHULAGE move and operate in a manner similar to Applicant’s multi-joint mechanism.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIMBERLEY S WRIGHT whose telephone number is (571)270-3328. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 11:30-5:30.
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 on 5712703742. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KIMBERLEY S WRIGHT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights