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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 12/1/2025 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: Refrigerator with hinge and damper within a housing.
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:
Hinge mounting part “is located below an upper end of the first portion with respect to the vertical direction and above an upper end of the second portion” of claim 4; applicant asserts this is present in figure 6, but is not clearly defined by the claim language. Examiner assumes that applicant intends to claim that the first portion of the hinge cover fits within the “hinge mounting part” (recess 217 of the door), while the first portion does not fit within the “hinge mounting part (recess 217 of the door). Please see 112b below.
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 § 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 4 is 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.
Regarding claim 4, applicant claims the hinge mounting part “is located below an upper end of the first portion with respect to the vertical direction and above an upper end of the second portion” of claim 4; applicant asserts this is present in figure 6, but is not clearly defined by the claim language. Examiner assumes that applicant intends to claim that the first portion of the hinge cover fits within the “hinge mounting part” (recess 217 of the door), while the first portion does not fit within the “hinge mounting part (recess 217 of the door), based on the language in claim 7. Examiner notes that the language of claim 4 on its own is not clear on its own.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-9, 11, 21-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 2016/0245579 Eom, in view of 2014/0210328 Akalan, in further view of 2023/0383584 Schneider.
Regarding claim 1, Eom discloses a refrigerator (title) comprising:
a cabinet 10 having a storage space;
a door 31 configured to open and close the storage space (figure 1) the door being located at a front of the cabinet (figure 1);
a hinge 70 connecting the door 31 to the cabinet 10;
PNG
media_image1.png
792
405
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a hinge cover 100 configured to cover at least a portion of the hinge (as shown in figure 2); and
a damper 40 located at the hinge cover 100, the damper being configured to contact one of the door or the hinge cover to provide a damping force to the door when the door rotates in a closing direction to close the storage space (“damper 40…in contact with the upper right door 31” [0092]);
wherein the hinge cover 100 includes:
a first portion 102 configured to accommodate the hinge therein (as it does in figure 1), the first portion protruding towards a front of the cabinet 10; and
a second portion (as annotated in figure 2 above) protruding from the first portion (rectangular area), the damper 70 being located at the second portion (as it protrudes through the hole 104), and
wherein the first portion protrudes further forward than the second portion so as to define a stepped portion (step annotated in figure 2).
Eom discloses the damper 40 is located above the hinge 70, and overlaps the hinge 70 with respect to a vertical direction when the door is in an opened state (in fact, when the door is in every state).
Eom does not disclose that the first portion of the cover is lower than the damper; Eom’s cover covers both the damper and the hinge in one shape, where the damper is above the hinge.
Akalan discloses a refrigerator hinge (abstract), which has a hinge 21 attaching a door 20 and a cabinet body 10, the hinge 21 having a housing (as annotated) below a diverse functional attachment (cable [0041]) within its own housing 300.
Schneider disclose that the plate above the hinge of Akalan is considered a “cover 8”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to separate the housing 100 of Eom to separately cover the hinge 70 and the damper 40, in the manner taught by Akalan and Schneider. The resulting separation of the housing does not alter the form, function, or use, of the Eom hinge with damper, but merely covers the hinge and the damper separately. The covered damper of Eom remains above the covered hinge of Eom, as this is required for the damper of Eom to engage the door 31. It has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04 (V) (c).
Note that it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. MPEP 2114. Examiner notes the phrases in italics above, and throughout the action, are considered intended use. Examiner contends that the structure capable of performing the intended use is met in the prior art, and is described how the structure disclosed performs the claimed functions in the parentheses; therefore, all italicized language is considered and shown in the prior art. Further, examiner notes that the disclosed structure is capable of performing the intended use claimed by applicant.
Regarding claim 2, Eom as modified discloses the refrigerator of claim 1, wherein the hinge 70 is located at an upper surface of the cabinet (figures 2 and 9), and wherein a rear surface of the door 31 includes a hinge mounting part recessed (as shown in figure 2) inward at an upper portion of the door 31, the hinge 70 being rotatably coupled to the hinge mounting part (as shown in figure 2).
Regarding claim 4, please see 112b rejection above. Eom as modified discloses the refrigerator of claim 2, wherein an upper end of the hinge mounting part (recess of the door 31, annotated in figure 2, detailed in figure 8) is located below an upper end of the first portion with respect to the vertical direction and above an upper end of the second portion with respect to the vertical direction (please see 112b rejection above), and wherein the damper is configured to contact the rear surface of the door above the hinge mounting part when the door is closed (contacts the rear surface of the door within the hinge mounting part, so it is “configured” to contact the rear surface of the door if the hinge mounting part/recess is changed in size).
PNG
media_image2.png
318
426
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Eom as modified discloses the refrigerator of claim 2, wherein the damper 40 is located inside the second portion (as it protrudes through the hole 104), and wherein the damper 40 includes a push member 62 configured to contact the rear surface of the door when the door is closed (as discussed in [0092], the surface of the hinge mounting part annotated in figure 8 of Eom meets this requirement), the push member protruding through a front surface of the second portion (through the hole 104, figure 2).
Regarding claim 6, Eom as modified discloses the refrigerator of claim 2, wherein the damper 40 extends through the second portion (through hole 104), the damper 40 being configured to selectively contact an inner surface of the hinge mounting part (damper 40 is not in contact with the door 31 when fully open).
Regarding claim 7, Eom as modified discloses the refrigerator of claim 6, wherein the first portion (covering only the hinge) extends into the hinge mounting part.
Regarding claim 8, Eom as modified discloses the refrigerator of claim 6, wherein the damper 40 (detailed in figure 3) includes a push member 62 extending through the second portion (at hole 104), the push member being configured to be retracted towards the cabinet when the push member contacts the inner surface of the hinge mounting part when the door is closed (retracts with piston rod 61), the push member 62 having a contact portion 63 at a front end of the push member (figure 3), and wherein the inner surface of the hinge mounting part (recessed portion of door 31) includes a guide part (the damper engage a surface of the inset portion of door 31, and therefore, Eom discloses a “guide part”) having a shape corresponding to a shape of the contact portion (flat surface of the door in figure 8, flat surface of the push member 62 in figure 3).
Regarding claim 9, Eom as modified discloses the refrigerator of claim 8, wherein the guide part (indicated in Eom figure 8 above) is inclined (perpendicular) such that the guide part extends away from the rear surface of the door and extends closer towards a rotation center of the hinge the further the guide part is away from the rear surface of the door (angled such that the surface engages the piston of the damper).
Regarding claim 11, Eom as modified discloses the refrigerator of claim 6, wherein the second portion (as annotated in figure 2) protrudes from a side surface of the first portion (rectangular section, as shown in figure 2), the side surface being closer to an outside of the cabinet (as it is closer to the door, which is exterior of the cabinet) among a left surface and a right surface of the first portion (as shown in figure 2).
Regarding claim 21, Eom discloses a refrigerator (title) comprising: a cabinet 10 having a storage space; a door 31 configured to open and close the storage space (figure 1); a hinge 70 connecting the door 31 to the cabinet 10; a hinge cover 100 configured to cover at least a portion of the hinge (as it does in figure 2); and a damper 40 located at the hinge cover 100, the damper being configured to contact the door to provide a damping force to the door when the door rotates in a closing direction to close the storage space ([0092] as discussed above), wherein the hinge cover 100 includes: a first portion (as annotated above) configured to accommodate the hinge therein (as shown in figure 2), the first portion protruding towards a front of the cabinet 10; and a second portion (with opening 104 as annotated above) protruding from the first portion, the damper 40 being located at the second portion (protruding from the second portion),
Wherein the damper 40 is located inside the second portion (located in both first portion 102 and second portion as annotated), and
Wherein the damper 40 is configured to contact a rear wall surface (as discussed in claim 23) when the door is closed, the damper 40 protruding through a front surface of the second portion (through hole 104), and
Wherein the damper is located above the hinge and overlaps the hinge with respect to a vertical direction when the door is in an opened state (in all states).
Eom does not disclose that the first portion of the cover is lower than the damper; Eom’s cover covers both the damper and the hinge in one shape, where the damper is above the hinge.
Akalan discloses a refrigerator hinge (abstract), which has a hinge 21 attaching a door 20 and a cabinet body 10, the hinge 21 having a housing (as annotated) below a diverse functional attachment (cable [0041]) within its own housing 300.
Schneider disclose that the plate above the hinge of Akalan is considered a “cover 8”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to separate the housing 100 of Eom to separately cover the hinge 70 and the damper 40, in the manner taught by Akalan and Schneider. The resulting separation of the housing does not alter the form, function, or use, of the Eom hinge with damper, but merely covers the hinge and the damper separately. The covered damper of Eom remains above the covered hinge of Eom, as this is required for the damper of Eom to engage the door 31. It has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04 (V) (c).
Regarding claim 22, Eom as modified discloses the refrigerator of claim 21, wherein the first portion protrudes further forward than the second portion so as to define a stepped portion (step as annotated in figure 2 above).
Regarding claim 23, Eom as modified discloses the refrigerator of claim 22, wherein the damper includes a push member 62 configured to contact the rear wall surface of the door when the door is closed (as discussed in [0092], a surface of the hinge mounting part is also a rear surface of the door), the push member 62 protruding through a front surface of the second portion (through hole 104).
Regarding claim 24, Eom as modified discloses the refrigerator of claim 21, wherein a rear surface of the door 31 includes a hinge mounting part recessed inward (as shown in figure 2, detailed in figure 8) at an upper portion of the door 31 (as shown in figure 1), the hinge 70 being rotatably coupled to the hinge mounting part (as detailed in figure 8), and wherein the damper 40 extends through the second portion (through hole 104), the damper 40 being configured to selectively contact an inner wall surface of the hinge mounting part (as it does in figure 2).
Regarding claim 25, Eom as modified discloses the refrigerator of claim 24, wherein the first portion (of the housing) extends into the hinge mounting part (figure 10).
Regarding claim 26, Eom as modified discloses the refrigerator of claim 24, wherein the damper 40 includes a push member 62 extending through the second portion (at hole 104), the push member 62 being configured to be retracted towards the cabinet when the push member contacts the inner surface of the hinge mounting part when the door is closed (by having piston rod 61), the push member 62 having a contact portion 63 at a front end of the push member 62, and wherein the inner surface of the hinge mounting part includes a guide part (as annotated in figure 8 above) having a shape (flat) corresponding to a shape of the contact portion 63 (also flat).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eom in view of Akalan and Schneider as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of 11859434 Collene.
PNG
media_image3.png
308
638
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Eom as modified discloses the use of a damper having an internal structure of figure 11 and 12, with a push member 62 on the extending rod from the body of the cylinder, the push member extending through the hinge cover 100 to be movable relative to the hinge cover while in contact with a rear surface of the door as the door is opened or closed. Eom does not disclose the internal structure as claimed.
Collene discloses a damper used with a hinge of a refrigerator (title), the damper having the structure of:
a cylinder D having a space DSB2 to accommodate oil therein, the cylinder having a first end (closed) and a second end, the first end having an opening (with piston rod protruding); a sealing cap CB1 configured to seal the opening of the cylinder (as it does in figure 11a); a rod PR extending through the sealing cap CB1 from inside the cylinder D; a piston PP coupled to the rod PR, the piston configured to move within the space of the cylinder (moves linearly as is common in the art); and an elastic member RS located in the space of the cylinder D, the elastic member configured to apply an elastic force to the piston (as it is in the same position as applicant’s disclosure).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to swap the damper 50 of the refrigerator hinge of Eom with the known refrigerator hinge damper of Collene, since both are known dampers for the same purpose as known in the art, and are considered equivalents. Further, the use of the cap/push member of Eom on the contracting end of the Collene damper does not affect the use of the Collene damper, nor the use of the damper within the hinge of Eom. Examiner contends that these are known equivalents and are used for the same purpose within the ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144 (I): “rationale to modify or combine the prior art does not have to be expressly stated in the prior art…it may be reasoned from knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art”.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eom modified by Akalan and Schneider as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of 2004/0205935 Launtenschlaeger.
Regarding claim 10, Eom discloses the refrigerator of claim 6, wherein the second portion (as annotated in figure 2) protrudes from the first portion. Eom discloses the damper is directly attached to the hinge body, with a housing on top of both of the hinge and damper.
Lautenschlaeger discloses the use of a cabinet hinge which has its own body and housing 18, with a separate and distinct damper and damper housing 32 on top of the hinge housing (figures 6-7), which is “upward” from an upper surface of the first/hinge housing portion.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the damper of Eom on top of a separate housing for the hinge of Eom, as taught by Lautenschlager, as the location of the damper of Eom is known to be in any location that will engage the door surface. Examiner notes that cited reference Fleig teaches the damper 24 on a different side of the hinge (figure 3), Jung discloses the damper 160 underneath the hinge body (figure 7), Collene discloses the use of the hinge with damper without a housing (figure 3), and Lautenschlaeger discloses the use of several different types of dampers on multiple different locations with respect to the hinge. Examiner contends that the relocation of the known part (damper) with relation to another part of the device (hinge) to perform the same function (engage the door) does not affect the form, function, or use, of the hinge device of Eom. The rearrangement of known parts into a known arrangement is considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04 (VI) (c).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EMILY M MORGAN whose telephone number is (303)297-4260. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 8-5 MST.
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, Jason San can be reached at (571)272-6531. 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.
/EMILY M MORGAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3677