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 .
This non-final Office action is in response to Applicant’s patent application number 18/509,279 filed on 11/14/2023.
Currently, claims 1-20 are pending and examined.
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 lifting device 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.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The Abstract is objected because too many words in length. Correction is required.
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 1-20 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.
Re claim 1, lines 4-5; a citation “at least one lifting device attached an item of furniture; at least one runner attached to the item of furniture” is confusing and indefinite because the claimed preamble in line 1 cites “A system for raising and lowering furniture” thus “for raising and lowering furniture” is functional and not positively combined with “The system”? Clarification is required. For examination purposes, the claims are being treated as a sub-combination of “A system”. Independent claims 9 and 11 having the same issues as mentioned; therefore, claims 9-20 are also rejected.
Re claim 1, line 7; a citation “the room” does not have a proper antecedent basis. Correction is required. Claims 2-8 depending upon the rejected claim 1 are also rejected.
Re claim 1, line 8; a citation “the furniture” does not have a proper antecedent basis, unless the Applicant meant “the item of furniture” as cited line 5. Correction is required.
Re claim 1, line 8; a citation “the connection” does not have a proper antecedent basis. Correction is required.
Re claim 1, line 8; a citation “the lifting device” does not have a proper antecedent basis, unless the Applicant meant “the at least one lifting device”. Correction is required.
Re claim 9, line 1; a citation “the height” does not have a proper antecedent basis. Correction is required. Claim 10 depending upon the rejected claim 9 is also rejected.
Re claim 9, line 2; a citation “the floor line” does not have a proper antecedent basis. Correction is required.
Re claim 9, lines 2-3; a citation “the dwelling” does not have a proper antecedent basis, unless the Applicant meant “the dwelling unit”. Correction is required.
Re claim 9, line 2; a citation “the floor” does not have a proper antecedent basis. Correction is required.
Re claim 9, line 3; a citation “the lifter” does not have a proper antecedent basis, unless the Applicant meant “the at least one lifter”? Correction is required.
Re claim 9, line 3; a citation “the fixture” does not have a proper antecedent basis. Correction is required.
Re claim 11, line 1; a citation “the furniture” does not have a proper antecedent basis. Correction is required. Claims 12-20 depending upon the rejected claim 11 are also rejected.
Re claim 11, line 2; a citation “the floor line” does not have a proper antecedent basis. Correction is required.
Re claim 11, line 3; a citation “the floor…the lifter…the fixture” does not have a proper antecedent basis. Correction is required.
Re claim 11, line 5; a citation “at least one lifting device” renders the claim indefinite and confusing because it is unclear whether the same as “at least one lifter” cited in line 2? Clarification is required.
Re claim 11, line 9; a citation “the furnishing…the connection” does not have a proper antecedent basis. Correction is required.
Re claim 11, line 10; a citation “the at least one channel” does not have a proper antecedent basis, unless the Applicant meant “the at least one vertical channel”? Correction is required.
Re claim 16, line 2; a phrase “it” renders the claim indefinite and confusing because it is unclear whether “it” referring to which structure? Clarification is required.
Re claim 17, line 2; a citation “the storage zone” does not have a proper antecedent basis. Correction is required.
Re claim 18, lines 1-2; a citation “wherein at least one lifting device is attached only on one side of the furniture…” is confusing and indefinite because the independent claim 11 cites “A system for rearranging the furniture” thus “for rearranging the furniture” is functional and not positively combined with “The system”? Clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
As best understood, claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US No. 5,020,169 to Hamada et al. (‘Hamada’).
Re claim 1: Hamada discloses a system for raising and lowering furniture, comprising: a dwelling unit comprising a residential zone for occupants (i.e. a room, Fig. 4, col. 5, line 49) and a storage zone 5 for furnishings above the residential zone; at least one lifting device 20 attached to an item of furniture 10; at least one runner 22 attached to the item of furniture 10; and at least one vertical channel 5 adapted to engage with the at least one runner 22 as the item of furniture 10 is raised or lowered to or from a storage zone above the room; whereby the furniture 10 is supported by the connection to the lifting device 20; whereby the at least one runner 22 travels along the at least one channel 5 as the item of furniture is raised or lowered (Figs. 3-4).
Re claim 2: wherein the at least one lifting device 20 comprises a motor 21, a spool 31, and a line 30.
Re claim 3: wherein the at least one lifting device comprises one motor 21, two spools 31, and two lines 30 (see Fig. 3).
Re claim 4: wherein the at least one lifting device comprises one motor 21, four spools 31, and four lines 30 (Fig. 3).
Re claim 5: wherein the at least one channel comprises a C-shaped groove (col. 8, line 42).
Re claim 6: wherein the at least one channel 5 comprises two channels 5/5 facing one another to constrain horizontal motion of the furniture as it is raised or lowered (see Fig. 4, i.e. two channels of two frames are facing to each other).
Re claim 7: wherein the at least one lifting device 20 is mounted in a mechanical zone above the storage zone (see Figs. 6-7).
Re claim 8: (see also 112 2nd above) wherein the at least one lifting device 20 is attached only on one side of the furniture 10 and the furniture 10 is raised and lowered in cantilevered fashion (Fig. 21).
Re claim 9: (see also 112 2nd rejection above of the claim 1) Hamada discloses a system for adjusting the height of fixtures in a dwelling unit, comprising at least one lifter 20 with a base 2 below the floor line of the dwelling (see Fig. 1) and extending through the floor of the dwelling wherein the lifter 20 is adapted to lower the fixture down to or near floor level (see Fig. 1).
Re claim 10: wherein the at least one lifter 20 comprises at least one column lifter 6.
Re claim 11: (see also 112 2nd rejection above) Hamada discloses a system for rearranging the furniture in a room, comprising: at least one lifter 20 with a base below the floor line (Fig. 1) of the room and extending through the floor of the room wherein the lifter 20 is adapted to lower the fixture down to or near floor level (Fig. 1); at least one lifting device 20 attached to an item of furniture 10; at least one runner 22 attached to the item of furniture 10; and at least one vertical channel 5 adapted to interact with the at least one runner 22 as the item of furniture 10 is raised or lowered to or from a space above the room (Figs. 1-2); whereby the furnishing is supported by the connection to the lifting device 20; and whereby the at least one runner 22 travels along the at least one channel 5 as the item of furniture 10 is raised or lowered.
Re claim 12: wherein the at least one lifting device 20 comprises a motor 21, a spool 31, and a line 30.
Re claim 13: wherein the at least one lifting device comprises one motor 21, two spools 31, and two lines 30 (see Fig. 3).
Re claim 14: wherein the at least one lifting device comprises one motor 21, four spools 31, and four lines 30 (Fig. 3).
Re claim 15: wherein the at least one channel comprises a C-shaped groove (col. 8, line 42).
Re claim 16: wherein the at least one channel 5 comprises two channels 5/5 facing one another to constrain horizontal motion of the furniture as it is raised or lowered (see Fig. 4, i.e. two channels of two frames are facing to each other).
Re claim 17: wherein the at least one lifting device 20 is mounted in a mechanical zone above the storage zone (see Figs. 6-7).
Re claim 18: (see also 112 2nd above) wherein the at least one lifting device 20 is attached only on one side of the furniture 10 and the furniture 10 is raised and lowered in cantilevered fashion (Fig. 21).
Re claim 19: wherein the at least one runner comprises a roller 51.
Re claim 20: wherein the at least one lifter 20 comprises at least one column lifter 6.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure (see attached PTO-892).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to CHI Q. NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571) 272-6847. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 7AM-5PM or email: chi.nguyen@uspto.gov. If attempt to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Brian Mattei can be reached at (571) 270-3238. 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://pairdirect.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at (866) 217-9197.
/CHI Q NGUYEN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635
PNG
media_image1.png
100
143
media_image1.png
Greyscale