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.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II in response/amendment is acknowledged. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Information Disclosure Statement
The prior art documents submitted by Applicant(s) in the information Disclosure Statement(s) have all been considered and made of record (note the attached copy of form(s) PTO-1449).
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 Chassis must be shown. 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 § 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 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.
(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.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 20-21, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being by “Livingston” et al., US 20200310061 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Livingston teaches a panel system (see Figs. 1-52) comprising:
a chassis including a top panel and a bottom panel that each extend along a forward-rearward axis between a front end of the chassis and a rear end of the chassis (clearly shown in at least figs. 1-24),
each of the top and bottom panels also extending along a lateral axis between opposite sidewalls of the chassis, the sidewalls extending along a height of the chassis between the top and bottom panels to define an interior (clearly shown in at least figs. 1-4), the height of the chassis being 1 RU, the top panel, bottom panel, and sidewalls being fixed relative to each other (clearly shown in at least figs. 1-4), the sidewalls having interior surfaces not configured to receive any additional panels or latching arrangements (clearly shown in at least figs. 1-4); and a plurality of guides disposed at the bottom panel within the interior (see at least figs. 2, 7, 17 and 21 and parags. 0074, 0103, 0049, 0052, 0062, 0067, 0102, 0110) the guides having lengths extending in parallel to each other along the forward-rearward axis, the guides being spaced apart along the lateral axis (see at least figs. 2, 7, 17 and 21 and parags. 0074, 0103, 0049, 0052, 0062, 0067, 0102, 0110), each guide defining a stop arrangement at an intermediate position along the length (see at least figs. 2, 7, 17 and 21 and parags. 0074, 0103, 0049, 0052, 0062, 0067, 0102, 0110); and a cassette configured to mount within the interior of the chassis, the cassette carrying a latching arrangement configured to selectively engage the stop arrangement of a respective one of the guides when the cassette is mounted within the chassis (see at least figs. 1-7, 10-17 and parag. 0102), the cassette carrying a plurality of rows of front port members, the cassette spanning at least a majority of the height of the chassis (see at least figs. 1-7, and 10-21).
Livingston further teaches:
20. (Currently Amended) The panel system of any of claim 17, wherein the interior spans uninterrupted between the opposite sidewalls (see at least figs. 1-10).
21. (Currently Amended) The panel system of any of claim 17, further comprising spacer walls disposed within the chassis and extending between the top and bottom panels to divide the interior (see at least figs. 1-10). .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18-19, 22, 24, 26, 28-31 and 35 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.
Citation of Relevant Prior Art
Prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. In accordance with MPEP 707.05 the following references are pertinent in rejection of this application since they provide substantially the same information disclosure as this patent does. These references are:
US 20210055496 A1
US 10444455 B2
US 11385429 B2
US 20170363831 A1
US 20110268407 A1
US 7613377 B2
US 10606012 B1
US 11448846 B2
US 20200310061 A1
US 5323480 A
US 20190361188 A1
US 20110019964 A1
US 20110026894 A1
US 9071890 B2
US 20180003912 A1
US 6263141 B1
US 20050100301 A1
US 20140086545 A1
US 9057859 B2
US 10082636 B2
US 11740421 B2
US 20160077298 A1
US 20060275008 A1
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAVEH C KIANNI whose telephone number is (571)272-2417. The examiner can normally be reached on 9-19.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas Hollweg can be reached on571-270-1739. 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.
/KAVEH C KIANNI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights