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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: “U” and “32a”. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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 (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 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Otsuka et al. 2015/0000372.
In Re Claim 1, Otsuka et al. teach an article storage shelf comprising: a shelf frame (14); a shelf body (15) attached to the shelf frame in a cantilever manner and configured to support an article as a storage target (4); and a transfer device (3) configured to transfer the article supported by the shelf body, wherein; when a first direction (left – right direction, Fig. 2) is a specific direction along a horizontal plane, a first direction first side (left side, Fig. 2) is one side in the first direction, a first direction second side (right side, Fig. 2) is the other side in the first direction, and a second direction (direction of 83, Fig. 2) is a direction along the horizontal plane and perpendicular to the first direction, the transfer device comprises a support section (3d, Fig. 1) configured to support the article, and a drive mechanism configured to advance and retract the support section in the first direction and to lift and lower the support section in an up down direction; (stacker crane drive, Paragraph 34) the shelf body comprises: an attachment section (portion of 15 wrapped around shelf rail of shelf frame 14, Fig. 4) attached to the shelf frame, a support plate section (top surface of 15, Fig. 4) disposed to project from the attachment section toward the first direction first side and formed in plate shape along the horizontal plane, and a first support pin (15p), a second support pin (15p), and a third support pin (15p near 53) as three support pins fixed to the support plate section to project upward from the support plate section such that the three support pins support the article from the lower side; (Fig. 4) the support plate section has: a notch (notch of 15 shown in Fig. 4) penetrating through the support plate section in the up down direction and opened toward the first direction first side such that the support section of the transfer device is passable through the notch in the up down direction, (Fig. 1, 2 and 4) (Paragraph 38) and a through opening disposed on the first direction second side relative to the notch and penetrating through the support plate section in the up down direction; the first support pin and the second support pin are disposed on opposite sides across the notch in the second direction; the third support pin is disposed between the notch and the through opening in the first direction; and the through opening (rectangular opening between 15P and rail of shelf frame 14, Fig. 4) is disposed between the third support pin and the attachment section in the first direction and has a dimension, in the second direction, that is larger than a dimension in the first direction. (See Fig. 4)
In Re Claim 5, Otsuka et al. teach the shelf body further comprising support frame sections formed to be bent downward from opposite side edges, (See bent down sides of 15, Fig. 4) in the second direction, of the support plate section; and the support frame section is formed in a range from a position, in the first direction, where the first support pin and the second support pin are disposed to the attachment section. (See Fig. 4)
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otsuka et al.
In Re Claim 2, Otsuka et al. teach a notch having a dimension, in the first direction, that is equal to or more than half of a dimension of the support plate section in the first direction; (See fig. 4) the notch has a dimension, in the second direction, that is equal to or more than half of a dimension of the support plate section in the second direction; (See fig. 4)
Otsuka et al. do not teach the through opening having a dimension, in the second direction, that is equal to or more than half of the dimension of the support plate in the second direction. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary in the art before the invention was file to make the dimension of the through hole in the second direction equal to or more than half of the dimension of the support plate in the second direction in order to reduce the weight of the support, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otsuka et al. and in view of Tominaga 2017/0194184.
In Re Claim 3, Otsuka et al. teach the shelf of Claim 1 as discussed above.
Otsuka et al. do not teach a shelf frame having a top surface facing upward and a reference surface facing the first direction side; the attachment section comprising a first abutment section abutting with the top surface and a second abutment section abutting with the reference surface; the first abutment section is fastened and fixed to the top surface by a first fastening member, and the second abutment section is fastened and fixed to the reference surface by a second fastening member.
However, Tominaga teaches a shelf frame (31, 32, 33, Fig. 9) having a top surface (31 top surface, Fig. 9) facing upward and a reference surface (surface including hole 32hy, Fig. 9) facing the first direction side; (Fig. 9) the attachment section comprising a first abutment section (Top extended surface of 52, Fig. 9) abutting with the top surface and a second abutment section (54, Fig. 9) abutting with the reference surface; the first abutment section is fastened and fixed to the top surface by a first fastening member (31b, Fig. 9), and the second abutment section is fastened and fixed to the reference surface by a second fastening member (54b, Fig. 9).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed to add first and second fastening members to the shelf of Otsuka et al. as taught by Tominaga with a reasonable expectation for success in order to easily install and uninstall shelves in a well-known method that does not require special skills by an operator.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Inui, Natume and Jo et al. teach a shelf frame, shelf body, notch, transfer device and support pins.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GLENN F MYERS whose telephone number is (571)270-1160. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4 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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at 571-272-7097. 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.
GLENN F. MYERS
Examiner
Art Unit 3652
/GLENN F MYERS/Examiner, Art Unit 3652