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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on June 30, 2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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, 4, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 3478367 B2.
As to claim 1, JP 3478367 B2 discloses a lifting device (40) for use with an appliance (11), as illustrated in Figures 1-19, comprising an appliance having a housing, wherein the housing includes a top wall (19), a bottom wall, and a plurality of side walls connecting the top wall with the bottom wall (see annotated Figure 15 below), and wherein at least one first side wall of the plurality of side walls includes at least one through aperture (23); a pair of handle members (40) and a loop forming member interconnecting the pair of handle members (see annotated Figure 15 below); and wherein the loop forming member passes through the at least one through aperture and cradles a portion of the at least one side wall defining the through aperture whereby the pair of handle members and the loop forming member overlap.
PNG
media_image1.png
362
610
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With claim 4, the pair of handle members is in a position at an elevation above an uppermost extent of the top wall of the appliance (see Figure 15).
With claim 7, it is best interpreted that the portion of the at least one first side wall is a horizontal member.
Claims 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pietsch (US 3,151,791).
Pietsch discloses a lifting device for use with an appliance (1), as illustrated in Figures 1-6, comprising a pair of handle members (32,37) and a loop forming member (32) interconnecting (via window sill 11) the pair of handle members, wherein each handle member is a T-shaped member (as viewed in Figure 6); and the lifting device being configurable between a planar configuration and a folded configuration, when in the planar configuration the lifting device is substantially flat and when in the folded configuration (rod 17 connecting to indented portion 36) the pair of T-shaped members and the loop forming member overlap to form a cradle.
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.
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 3478367 B2 in view of DE 202009006816 U.
JP 3478367 B2 discloses the claimed invention except for a second lifting device. DE 202009006816 U teaches the use of multiple lifting devices (10) for transporting an appliance (see Abstract). The lifting devices each have a handle (12) and a tab (14) having a fixation section (22) for looping around and engaging in a recess (30).
The substitution of one known element (lifting device as shown in JP 3478367 B2) for another (two lifting devices as shown in DE 202009006816 U) would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention since the substitution of two lifting devices as shown in DE 202009006816 U would have yielded predictable results, namely, the appliance in JP 3478367 B2 to be manually transported and handled by two people standing on each side of the appliance.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 4-6, and 9-16 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.
Claims 17-24 are allowed. The prior art of record neither anticipates nor renders obvious the claimed subject matter of the instant application as a whole either taken alone or in combination. In particular, the prior art of record does not teach the method of manipulating an appliance from packaging further comprising overlapping at least a portion of a pair of handle members and loop forming member to create a cradle receiving a lifting point of an appliance.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Rumboldt, Waters, Wenderoth, Dubin, and Henderson, Jr. are cited as being relevant art, because each prior art discloses a lifting for an appliance comprising a pair of handle members.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN VU whose telephone number is (571)272-1961. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:00 am - 3:30 pm EST.
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, Victoria Augustine can be reached at (313) 446-4858. 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.
STEPHEN VU
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3654
/STEPHEN A VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights