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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
(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 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li et al. (CN 206336317).
With regards to claim 1, Li et al. discloses a shopping cart (Figures 1 and 3-5) allowed to be nested in a front-rear direction, comprising: a cart body; an electronic device (“display module” of Li et al.) attached to the cart body and includinq: a reading device (3) configured to read commodity information, and a display device (“display module” of Li et al.) configured to display the commodity information; a battery (4 “storage module”) attached to the cart body and configured to supply power to the electronic device; a power receiving portion (41) provided on a front side of the cart body and electrically connectable to an external power supply (Page 4 of provided translation, 5th paragraph); a power transmitting portion (43) provided on a rear surface side of the power receiving portion and configured to, when the shopping cart and another shopping cart are nested, supply power to a power receiving portion of said another shopping cart (Page 4 of provided translation, 6th paragraph); cart guide frames provided on right and left sides of the power transmitting portion and extending rearward (Frame 2 is the frame of the entire cart, and part of this frame has right and left guide frames that extend rearward; and magnets (21) attached to the cart guide frames and by which a relative position between the shopping cart and said another shopping cart can be determined.
Examiner Note: The exact placement of these magnets is not covered by the current claim limitations and may be a distinction between applicant’s invention and the prior art of record.
With regards to claim 3, Li et al. discloses the shopping cart according to claim 1, further comprising a cushioning material (“spring”, Page 4, 5th paragraph, and 44) provided around at least one of the power receiving portion and the power transmitting portion in the cart body.
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(s) 4, 6-7, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN 206336317) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kato (US 2020/0127505).
With regards to claim 4, Li et al. discloses the shopping cart according to claim 1, however Li et al. fails to explicitly teach, but Kato clearly teaches wherein the cart body includes two support frames (illustrated in Figure 1, supporting the mesh basket body), and a cover covering outside portions of the support frames (the mesh basket body), and the battery is provided between the support frames (Li et al. “storage module” 4). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have incorporated the teachings of Kato into the invention of Li et al. in order to provide a more strongly supported basket allowing for the transport of heavier items.
With regards to claim 6, Li et al. discloses the shopping cart according to claim 3, however Li et al. fails to explicitly teach, but Kato clearly teaches wherein the cart body includes two support frames (illustrated in Figure 1, supporting the mesh basket body), and a cover covering outside portions of the support frames (the mesh basket body), and the battery is provided between the support frames (Li et al. “storage module” 4). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have incorporated the teachings of Kato into the invention of Li et al. in order to provide a more strongly supported basket allowing for the transport of heavier items.
With regards to claim 7, Li et al. as modified teaches the shopping cart according to claim 4, however the combination is silent as to wherein at least a portion of the cover is removably attached to the support frames. However, at the time the claimed invention was filed it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have made the frame and cart basket separable to make servicing the cart convenient, to allow for easier shipping in smaller packages, or to make the cart more easily repairable by allowing the components to be easily replaced.
With regards to claim 9, Li et al. as modified teaches the shopping cart according to claim 6, however the combination is silent as to wherein at least a portion of the cover is removably attached to the support frames. However, at the time the claimed invention was filed it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have made the frame and cart basket separable to make servicing the cart convenient, to allow for easier shipping in smaller packages, or to make the cart more easily repairable by allowing the components to be easily replaced.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Supervisory Patent Examiner should be directed to JOHN R. OLSZEWSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-2706. The Supervisory Patent Examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 5:30am - 4:00pm.
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 Supervisory Patent Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Supervisory Patent Examiner’s supervisor, TC Director Joseph Thomas can be reached at 571-272-8004. 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.
JOHN R. OLSZEWSKI
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3617
/JOHN OLSZEWSKI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3617
Prosecution Insights