DETAILED ACTION
This is a non-final Office action in reply to the response filed 02/27/2026.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-10 and 12-21 are pending;
Claims 1-3, 5, 7-10, 12-17, and 19-21 are original; claim 4 has been withdrawn; claim 6 is currently amended; claims 11 and 22-32 have been cancelled; claim 18 was previously presented;
Claims 1-3, 5-10, and 12-21 are rejected herein.
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 of Species B in the reply filed 02/27/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claim 4 has been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 7, 9, 10, 13, 20, and 21 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.
Regarding claim 7, the limitation "an object" in claim 7 (line 3) is indefinite because it is not clear as to whether the limitation "an object" in claim 7 (line 3) and the limitation "an object" in claim 1 (line 4) refer to the same objects or different objects. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 7, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation "the second end" (line 4) in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 7, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation "the first end" (line 5) in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 7, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation "the second end" (line 6) in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 9, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation "the process" (lines 1 and 2) in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 10, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation "the process" (lines 1 and 2) in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 13, the limitation "a second motion mechanism actuator" in claim 13 (lines 1 and 2) is indefinite because it is not clear as to whether claim 13 requires "a first motion mechanism actuator" in claim 13 or any claim from which claim 13 depends. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 20, the term "which" in line 2 is indefinite because it is not clear as to whether the term "which" refers to the "connecting rod" in line 1 or the "curved shape" in line 2. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 21, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation "the lower part" (line 2) in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-3, 5-10, and 20, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rush (US 2019/0309566 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Rush discloses a bracket (10, fig 11), comprising: a base (2, 8, 80, fig 11); a working panel (20, fig 11) supported by the base (see Figure 11), the working panel being configured to be suitable for supporting an object to be supported (see Figure 11, the panel 20 has the configuration to perform the above intended use); at least one first motion mechanism (150, fig 11) being connected between the working panel and the base (see Figure 11) and comprising a first member (150a, fig 11, see annotation) connected to the working panel (see Figure 11), the first member being configured to be movable in a first direction (see Figure 11, the first member 150a has the configuration to perform the above intended use); at least one second motion mechanism (14, fig 11) comprising a first end (14a, fig 11, see annotation) connected to the working panel (see Figure 11) and a second end (14b, fig 11, see annotation) connected to the base (see Figure 11), the second motion mechanism being configured to enable the first end to perform relative motion relative to the second end (see Figure 11, the second motion mechanism 14 has the configuration to perform the above intended use), the relative motion comprising motion in a second direction different from the first direction (see Figure 11).
PNG
media_image1.png
848
534
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (24 – Front Surface)]
[AltContent: textbox (150a1 – First End)][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: textbox (14a – First End)][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (150a – First Member)]
[AltContent: textbox (150b1 – First End)]
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: textbox (150b – Second Member)]
[AltContent: textbox (14b – Second End)][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: textbox (150b2 – Second End)]
Regarding claim 2, wherein the second motion mechanism is configured so that the first end is movably connected to the working panel (see Figure 11) and the second end is movably connected to the base (see Figure 11).
Regarding claim 3, wherein the first member comprises a first end (150a1, fig 11, see annotation) connected to the working panel (see Figure 11), and the first end of the second motion mechanism is located below the first end of the first member (see Figure 11).
Regarding claim 5, wherein the second motion mechanism comprises a connecting rod (14, fig 11).
Regarding claim 6, wherein the first motion mechanism further comprises a second member (150b, fig 11, see annotation) fixedly connected to the base (see Figure 11), and the first member is configured to be scalable relative to the second member (see Figure 11).
Regarding claim 7, wherein the working panel comprises a front surface (24, fig 11, see annotation) and a back surface (22, fig 11), the front surface is configured to be suitable for arranging an object to be supported (see Figure 11), the first end of the first member is hinged with the back surface (see Figure 11), the second end of the first member is retractably engaged with the second member (see Figure 11), the first end (150b1, fig 11, see annotation) of the second member is retractably engaged with the first member (see Figure 11), and the second end (150b2, fig 11, see annotation) of the second member is fixed to the base (see Figure 11).
Regarding claim 8, wherein the first end of the second motion mechanism is pivotably connected to a lower end of the working panel (see Figure 11), and the second end of the second motion mechanism is hinged to the base (see Figure 11).
Regarding claim 9, configured such that: during the process of the first member extending from the second member, the working panel moves upwards, and the first end of the second motion mechanism pivots around the second end of the second motion mechanism towards the second member (see Figure 11).
Regarding claim 10, configured such that: during the process of the first member retracting back to the second member, the working panel moves downwards, and the first end of the second motion mechanism pivots around the second end of the second motion mechanism in a direction away from the second member (see Figure 11).
Regarding claim 20, wherein the connecting rod is in a curved shape (see Figure 11, the curved shape defined by the cylindrical outer surface of the connecting rod 14), which protrudes in a direction away from the working panel (see Figure 11).
Claims 1-3, 5-10, 18, and 20, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by He (CN 112145924 A).
Regarding claim 1, He discloses a bracket (see Figure 1), comprising: a base (1, fig 1); a working panel (3, fig 1) supported by the base (see Figure 1), the working panel being configured to be suitable for supporting an object to be supported (see Figure 1, the working panel 3 has the configuration to perform the above intended use); at least one first motion mechanism (2, 5, 9, fig 1) being connected between the working panel and the base (see Figure 1) and comprising a first member (5, fig 1) connected to the working panel (see Figure 1), the first member being configured to be movable in a first direction (see Figure 1); at least one second motion mechanism (7, fig 1) comprising a first end (7a, fig 1, see annotation) connected to the working panel (see Figure 1) and a second end (7b, fig 1, see annotation) connected to the base (see Figure 1), the second motion mechanism being configured to enable the first end to perform relative motion relative to the second end (see Figure 1), the relative motion comprising motion in a second direction different from the first direction (see Figure 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
546
528
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (5a – First End)]
[AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: textbox (2a – First End)][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: textbox (5b – Second End)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (7a – First End)]
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: textbox (2b – Second End)]
[AltContent: textbox (7b – Second End)]
Regarding claim 2, wherein the second motion mechanism is configured so that the first end is movably connected to the working panel and the second end is movably connected to the base (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 3, wherein the first member comprises a first end (5a, fig 1, see annotation) connected to the working panel (see Figure 1), and the first end of the second motion mechanism is located below the first end of the first member (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 5, wherein the second motion mechanism comprises a connecting rod (7, fig 1).
Regarding claim 6, wherein the first motion mechanism further comprises a second member (2, fig 1) fixedly connected to the base (see Figure 1), and the first member is configured to be scalable relative to the second member (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 7, wherein the working panel comprises a front surface and a back surface (see Figure 1), the front surface is configured to be suitable for arranging an object to be supported (see Figure 1, the front surface of the working panel 3 has the configuration to perform the above intended use), the first end of the first member is hinged with the back surface (see Figure 1), the second end (5b, fig 1, see annotation) of the first member is retractably engaged with the second member (see Figure 1), the first end (2a, fig 1, see annotation) of the second member is retractably engaged with the first member (see Figure 1), and the second end (2b, fig 1, see annotation) of the second member is fixed to the base (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 8, wherein the first end of the second motion mechanism is pivotably connected to a lower end of the working panel (see Figure 1), and the second end of the second motion mechanism is hinged to the base (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 9, configured such that: during the process of the first member extending from the second member, the working panel moves upwards, and the first end of the second motion mechanism pivots around the second end of the second motion mechanism towards the second member (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 10, configured such that: during the process of the first member retracting back to the second member, the working panel moves downwards, and the first end of the second motion mechanism pivots around the second end of the second motion mechanism in a direction away from the second member (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 18, wherein a scaling direction of the at least one first motion mechanism is a vertical direction (see Figure 1), a motion of the working panel is a composite motion of the following two motions: motion along the vertical direction; and rotation around a hinge position (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 20, wherein the connecting rod is in a curved shape (see Figure 1, the curved shape defined by the cylindrical outer surface of the connecting rod 7), which protrudes in a direction away from the working panel (see Figure 1).
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.
Claims 12-17 and 19, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rush (US 2019/0309566 A1) in view of Xiang et al. (CN 210153458 U), hereinafter Xiang.
Regarding claims 12 and 13, Rush does not disclose the bracket, [claim 12] further comprising at least one first motion mechanism actuator configured to actuate the first member of the at least one first motion mechanism to be scalable relative to the second member; [claim 13] further comprising a second motion mechanism actuator configured to cause the second motion mechanism to be pivotable around a pivot located at the second end of the second motion mechanism.
Xiang teaches a bracket (see Figure 1), comprising: at least one first motion mechanism actuator (6, fig 1) configured to actuate a first member (201, fig 1) of at least one first motion mechanism (2, fig 1) to be scalable relative to the second member (200, fig 1); and a second motion mechanism actuator (5a, fig 1, see annotation) configured to cause a second motion mechanism (202, fig 1) to be pivotable around a pivot (see Figure 1).
PNG
media_image3.png
514
446
media_image3.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (5a – Second Motion Mechanism Actuator)]
[AltContent: arrow]
Rush and Xiang are analogous art because they are at least from the same field of endeavor, i.e., supports. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to [claim 12] provide at least one first motion mechanism actuator (Xiang: 6, fig 1) configured to actuate the first member (Rush: 150a, fig 11, see annotation) of the at least one first motion mechanism (Rush: 150, fig 11) to be scalable relative to the second member (Rush: 150b, fig 11, see annotation) and [claim 13] provide a second motion mechanism actuator (Xiang: 5a, fig 1, see annotation) configured to cause the second motion mechanism (Rush: 14, fig 11) to be pivotable around a pivot located at the second end (Rush: 14b, fig 11) of the second motion mechanism, as taught by Xiang, with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation would have been to allow automatic adjustment of the working panel. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Rush and Xiang to obtain the inventions as specified in claims 12 and 13.
Regarding claims 14-17, Rush, as modified by Xiang with respect to claim 12 above, does not teach the bracket, [claim 14] wherein the at least one first motion mechanism comprises a middle motion mechanism which is arranged adjacent to the middle of the back surface and the base, and the at least one first motion mechanism actuator comprises a middle motion mechanism actuator to actuate the first member of the middle motion mechanism to be scalable relative to the second member; [claim 15] wherein the at least one first motion mechanism further comprises two side motion mechanisms which are respectively arranged on both sides of the middle motion mechanism opposite to each other, the first member of each of the two side motion mechanisms is configured to be slidable along a second member thereof; [claim 16] wherein the at least one first motion mechanism comprises two side motion mechanisms, and the at least one first motion mechanism actuator comprises two side motion mechanism actuators to respectively actuate the first members of the two side motion mechanisms to be retracted relative to the second members; [claim 17] wherein the at least one first motion mechanism comprises three motion mechanisms: a middle motion mechanism being arranged adjacent to the middle of the back surface and the base, two side motion mechanisms being respectively arranged on both sides of the middle motion mechanism opposite to each other, the at least one first motion mechanism actuator comprises two side motion mechanism actuators to respectively actuate the first members of the two side motion mechanisms to retract relative to the second members, and the first member of the middle motion mechanism is configured to be slidable longitudinally along the second member.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art to [claim 14] form the at least one first motion mechanism (Rush: 150, fig 11) with a middle motion mechanism which is arranged adjacent to the middle of the back surface and the base, and the at least one first motion mechanism actuator (Xiang: 6, fig 1) comprises a middle motion mechanism actuator to actuate the first member of the middle motion mechanism to be scalable relative to the second member; [claim 15] form the at least one first motion mechanism (Rush: 150, fig 11) with two side motion mechanisms which are respectively arranged on both sides of the middle motion mechanism opposite to each other, the first member of each of the two side motion mechanisms is configured to be slidable along a second member thereof; [claim 16] form the at least one first motion mechanism (Rush: 150, fig 11) with two side motion mechanisms, and the at least one first motion mechanism actuator (Xiang: 6, fig 1) comprises two side motion mechanism actuators to respectively actuate the first members of the two side motion mechanisms to be retracted relative to the second members; and [claim 17] form the at least one first motion mechanism (Rush: 150, fig 11) with three motion mechanisms (Rush: 150, fig 11), a middle motion mechanism being arranged adjacent to the middle of the back surface and the base, two side motion mechanisms being respectively arranged on both sides of the middle motion mechanism opposite to each other, the at least one first motion mechanism actuator comprises two side motion mechanism actuators (Xiang: 6, fig 1) to respectively actuate the first members of the two side motion mechanisms to retract relative to the second members, and the first member of the middle motion mechanism is configured to be slidable longitudinally along the second member (Xiang: see Figure 1), with a reasonable expectation of success, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. The motivation would have been to better support a heavier working panel and heavier objects to be supported. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the combination of Rush and Xiang to obtain the inventions as specified in claims 14-17.
Regarding claim 19, Rush, as modified by Xiang with respect to claim 17, does not explicitly teach the bracket, wherein first ends of first members of the three motion mechanisms are collinear with the hinge positions hinged with the back surface of the working panel.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the first ends of first members of the three motion mechanisms (Rush: 150, fig 11) to be collinear with the hinge positions hinged with the back surface of the working panel (Rush: 20, fig 11), with a reasonable expectation of success, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. The motivation would have been to allow uniform support to the working panel. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the combination of Rush and Xiang to obtain the invention as specified in claim 19.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 21 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. See the attached PTO-892 for various supports.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Guang H Guan whose telephone number is (571) 272-7828. The examiner can normally be reached weekdays (10:00 AM - 6:00 PM).
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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at (571) 272-8227. 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.
/G. H. G./Examiner, Art Unit 3631
/JONATHAN LIU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3631
Prosecution Insights