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
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of restriction requirement in the reply filed on 11/26/25 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that MPEP § 803 and/or arguing the claims are considered in the same application. Examiner reconsider the restriction as following:
Group I and II: Examiner agree to withdraw this restriction.
Specie A and Specie B: Examiner agree to merger these two species as the elastic components are the same. (Fig 3-6, fig 13A)
Specie C (fig 13B): Applicant also agree this is another embodiment. Examiner will keep this species as a non-elected embodiment as the structure is mutually exclusive, especially compare with Fig 13A.
Other figures: Since it’s the other figures are unclear compare with the species A, B, and C (especially fig 13A, Fig 13B), Examiner will also consider as non-elected embodiments. In addition, the above Fig 3-6, fig 13A are enough to represent the invention. If Applicant has any further comments, Examiner encourage Applicant to contact Examiner.
Claims 17, 18: these claims are similar to the claim 5 which are belonged to another embodiment (see above discussion). Therefore, these claims are withdrawn from consideration.
Examiner consider the restriction requirement is still deemed proper (after above re-grouping) and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claims 1, 13, “a handle disposed pivotally on the bottom plate and disposed between the mounting plate and the bottom plate” are not supported by SPEC/drawing. The limitation lacks antecedent basis and/or is not supported by SPEC/drawings. Further clarification is required. These claims clearly specified the elastic component id disposed on the handle. Therefore, the handle should be disposed on the mounting plate (see fig 4). Examiner request applicant to clearly determine the claimed limitations on the drawing with label in the next response. A 112 rejection will be applied in the next office action.
The Examiner respectfully requests that the Applicant(s) review all claims for any such similar issues.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 limitations, rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, and/or discussed in the above claim objections (see above) 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 § 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 1-3, 8-11, 13-15, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liao (US 20210068296) in view of Shih (TW M630680).
Regarding claim 1, Liao disclosed A tray, (abstract, see also fig 1-8) comprising: a bottom plate; a mounting plate disposed on the bottom plate (at least fig 4A, the plates on top/bottom of handle 450, Examiner consider as either mounting plate or the bottom plate; 410, 350), a handle disposed pivotally on the bottom plate and disposed between the mounting plate and the bottom plate (at least fig 4A, 450).
Liao lacks teaching: wherein the mounting plate comprises a first locking hole and a second locking hole; an elastic component disposed on the handle, wherein the elastic component comprises a first protrusion portion; and the first protrusion portion protruded toward the mounting plate is selectively disposed in the first locking hole or the second locking hole.
Shih teaches a try structure (abstract, see also fig 1-11) comprising: the plate comprises a first locking hole and a second locking hole (at least fig 6, 114, 115); an elastic component disposed on the handle (154), wherein the elastic component comprises a first protrusion portion (the protrusion portion on one end); and the first protrusion portion protruded toward the plate is selectively disposed in the first locking hole or the second locking hole (see fig 4-6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, or at the time of the invention was made, to include this feature (first locking hole and a second locking hole; elastic component with protrusion portion and through groove) and modify to previous discussed structure (modified to the mounting plate and the handle) so as to further secure the modified structure and/or latch the handle on different positions.
Regarding claim 13, Liao further disclosed An electronic device, (abstract, see also fig 1-8) comprising: a cabinet; and a chassis accommodated in the cabinet (at least fig 1, fig 2, 200, 238; paragraph [42]-[47]), wherein the chassis comprises: a bottom plate; a mounting plate disposed on the bottom plate (at least fig 4A, the plates on top/bottom of handle 450, Examiner consider as either mounting plate or the bottom plate; 410, 350), a handle disposed pivotally on the bottom plate and disposed between the mounting plate and the bottom plate (at least fig 4A, 450).
Liao lacks teaching: wherein the mounting plate comprises a first locking hole and a second locking hole; an elastic component disposed on the handle, wherein the elastic component comprises a first protrusion portion; and the first protrusion portion protruded toward the mounting plate is selectively disposed in the first locking hole or the second locking hole.
Shih teaches a try structure (abstract, see also fig 1-11) comprising: the plate comprises a first locking hole and a second locking hole (at least fig 6, 114, 115); an elastic component disposed on the handle (154), wherein the elastic component comprises a first protrusion portion (the protrusion portion on one end and through groove); and the first protrusion portion protruded toward the plate is selectively disposed in the first locking hole or the second locking hole (see fig 4-6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, or at the time of the invention was made, to include this feature (first locking hole and a second locking hole; elastic component with protrusion portion) and modify to previous discussed structure (modified to the mounting plate and the handle) so as to further secure the modified structure and/or latch the handle on different positions.
Regarding claims 2, 14, modified liao further disclosed the handle comprises a through groove (Shih’s fig 6, through groove for 154); the elastic component is disposed between the handle and the bottom plate (at least Shih’s fig 6, 154 modified to Liao as discussed above); and the first protrusion portion of the elastic component is disposed in the through groove (Shih’s fig 6).
Regarding claims 3, 15, modified liao further disclosed the first protrusion portion is used to contact a surface of the mounting plate (at least Shih’s fig 6); and the surface faces the handle (at least Shih’s fig 6).
With regard claim 8, the above discussed art further disclosed the width of the first locking hole is substantially greater than a width of the first protrusion portion (at least Shih’s fig 6).
The primary art and/or the modified structure discussed in the preceding claim disclosed all the subject matter except for a width of the first locking hole is substantially greater than a width of the second locking hole.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the above feature (changing sizes of the width of the first locking hole is substantially greater than a width of the second locking hole), since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). The motivation to modify the previous discussed structure with the current feature is to provide a different feedback to the user for engaging different locking holes.
With regard claim 9, the primary art and/or the modified structure discussed in the preceding claim disclosed all the subject matter except for the first locking hole of the mounting plate comprises a leaned wall and a bottom wall; the leaned wall is opposite to the bottom wall; and an oblique angle is between the leaned wall and the bottom wall.
Examiner’s note: cited items/holes are unclear about the shape of the holes with oblique angle is between the two walls (the leaned wall and the bottom wall).
Shih further teaches engagement hole comprising: a leaned wall and a bottom wall; the leaned wall is opposite to the bottom wall (see fig 9, fig 10: at least the holes located on the bottom side of 112 as shown in fig 10, no label; two walls is opposite to each other; left and right side); and an oblique angle is between the leaned wall and the bottom wall.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to include this feature (changing the shape of the holes with oblique angle is between the leaned wall and the bottom wall) and modify to previous discussed structure so as to further enhance the engagement with the handle for the modified structure.
Regarding claims 10, modified liao further disclosed a connector (at least fig 2. The connector near the label 260); wherein the bottom plate comprises a carrying portion and an engaging portion (at least fig 3-4, the a carrying portion, on the center part, no label, and an engaging portion on one side opposite to the connector); and the engaging portion and the connector are respectively disposed at two ends of the carrying portion (at least fig 3-4).
Regarding claim 11, modified liao further disclosed a locking portion is disposed at one end of the handle (at least fig 4, left end of 450); the locking portion comprises a first hook portion, a second hook portion, and a recess portion (at least fig 4, 462, 464, 466); and two ends of the recess portion are respectively connected to the first hook portion and the second hook portion (at least fig 4).
Regarding claim 19, modified liao further disclosed the bottom plate further comprises a connector (at least fig 2. The connector near the label 260); the cabinet comprises a docking component (at least fig 1-2, the docking component for the connector; see also paragraph [44]-[47]); and the connector is used to be connected to the docking component to dispose the chassis in the cabinet (at least fig 1-2, see also paragraph [44]-[47]).
Regarding claim 20, modified liao further disclosed the cabinet further comprises a positioning portion (at least fig 5-6, the positioning portion for the locking portion); the handle further comprises a locking portion (at least fig 5-6, hook 462/464); and the handle is used to fit the positioning portion of the cabinet with the locking portion to position the chassis in the cabinet (see fig 5-7).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 6-7, 12, 16 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
With respect to claims 4, 16, the allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in this independent claim and at least in part because the prior art does not teach or suggest a structure comprising: the elastic component further comprises an extension portion and a body portion; the first protrusion portion extends from the body portion in a direction away from the body portion; the extension portion extends from the first protrusion portion in a direction away from the body portion; the first protrusion portion contacts the surface of the mounting plate; and the extension portion is used to contact the bottom plate, as set forth in the combination of the independent claims.
With respect to claims 6, 12, the allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in this independent claim and at least in part because the prior art does not teach or suggest a structure comprising: at least one second protrusion portion and a body portion; the first protrusion portion extends from the body portion in a direction away from the body portion; the at least one second protrusion portion extends from the body portion in a direction away from the body portion; an angular relation is between the first protrusion portion and the at least one second protrusion portion; the at least one second protrusion portion protrudes toward the bottom plate; and the at least one second protrusion portion is used to contact the bottom plate, as set forth in the combination of the independent claims.
The aforementioned limitations in combination with all remaining limitations of independent claim are believed to render said independent claims and all claims dependent therefrom patentable over the art of record.
The closest prior art, Liao (US 20210068296) in view of Shih (TW M630680), discloses a similar structure but does not configure to have the above limitations. The above prior art thus fails to anticipate or render the above portions obvious, either singularly or in combination with other references.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERRY WU whose telephone number is (571)270-5420. The examiner can normally be reached on PHP: M-Th: 8:30-12:30; 2:30-8:30pm.
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, Imani Hayman can be reached on 571.270.5528. 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.
/JERRY WU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841