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 Amendment
Amendments submitted on 1/20/26 include amendments to the claims. Claims 1, 3-12, 15-21 are pending. Claims 1, 3-5, 7-8, 11, 15, 18 have been amended. Claims 2 and 13-14 have been cancelled. Claim 21 has been newly added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/20/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s arguments that none of the references teach that an upper portion of the door assembly that is above the door glass includes the inner discharge passage and outer discharge passage:
Gim teaches an outer discharge passage 2800 (which is disposed at a lower portion of the door assembly that is below the door glass 280, and also capable of operating as an inlet passage through which air outside the door assembly is introducible into the outer space) formed in the door assembly connects the outer space to an outside of the door assembly, such that the inner discharge passage 2700 and the outer discharge passage 2800 are configured such that, air heated in the inner space is dischargeable to the outside of the door assembly through the inner discharge passage 2700 and then through the outer discharge passage 2800 (see figures 10-11, paragraphs [0152]-[0158]). Gim does not explicitly teach that an upper portion of the door assembly that is above the door glass includes the inner discharge passage and outer discharge passage. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention that additional outer discharge passages and associated inner discharge passages may be disposed at an upper portion of the door assembly above the door glass so as to provide additional ventilation capacity. Furthermore, it has been determined that the duplication of parts and the rearrangement of parts constitute obvious design choices to one of ordinary skill in the art absent persuasive evidence that a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Kwon et al. teaches an outer discharge passage 40 (which is disposed at a lower portion of the door assembly that is below the door glass 23, and also capable of operating as an inlet passage through which air outside the door assembly is introducible into the outer space) formed in the door assembly 12 connects the outer space to an outside of the door assembly 12 to discharge the heated air to the outside of the door assembly 12, the outer discharge passage 40 formed by holes passing through the rear face of the glass holder 19 to the outer space (see pages 9-10 of the translation, figures 2-3, 6, 8-9, 11-13); the inner discharge passage 39 and the outer discharge passage 40 are configured such that, air heated in the inner space is dischargeable to the outside of the door assembly through the inner discharge passage 39 and then through the outer discharge passage 40 (see pages 9-10 of the translation, figures 2-3, 6, 8-9, 11-13). Kwon et al. does not explicitly teach that an upper portion of the door assembly that is above the door glass includes the inner discharge passage and outer discharge passage. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention that additional outer discharge passages and associated inner discharge passages may be disposed at an upper portion of the door assembly above the door glass so as to provide additional ventilation capacity. Furthermore, it has been determined that the duplication of parts and the rearrangement of parts constitute obvious design choices to one of ordinary skill in the art absent persuasive evidence that a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3, 6, 11, 17-18, 21 are under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gim (US20180363198).
Regarding claims 1-3, 6, Gim teaches a home appliance (see abstract), comprising: a cabinet 100 including an opening (see figure 2, paragraph [0030]); and a door assembly 200 rotatably coupled to the cabinet 100 to open the opening and close the opening (see figure 2, paragraph [0030]), the door assembly including: a door glass 280 having a rear face and a front face (see figure 5, paragraph [0045]), a glass holder 230 having an opening of the glass holder and at least partially supporting the door glass 280 in the opening of the glass holder by the rear face (see figures 5, 9-11, paragraph [0045]), a door cover 240 at least partially supporting the door glass 280 in the opening of the glass holder 230 by the front face, and coupled to the glass holder 230 so that the door cover 240 and the glass holder 230 form an outer space (see annular space including convection space portion 2711) having a ring shape around the door glass 280 inside the door assembly (see figures 5, 10, 11, paragraphs [0035]-[0038]), a door safety 204 coupled to the door cover 240 so that the door safety 204, the door glass 280, and the door cover 280 form an inner space (see space include flow A_in in figure 10) inside the door assembly (see figures 1, 10, 11 paragraph [0038]), and wherein an inner discharge passage 2700 formed in the door assembly connects the inner space to the outer space capable of discharging air heated in the inner space to the outer space (see paragraphs [0095]-[0096], [0155]-[0158], figures 6, 8, 10-11), the inner discharge passage 2700 is formed by a gap between one end of a support member (see inwardly curved portion of door cover 240 as shown in figure 10) formed along a portion of an inner edge of a rear face of the door cover 240 and an outer periphery 284 of the front face of the door glass 280 (see figure 10, paragraphs [0095]-[0096], [0155]-[0158]) (reads on claim 6); and wherein the door assembly is configured so that, when the opening is closed by the door assembly, a portion of the door glass 280 protrudes into the cabinet 100, at least a portion of the glass holder 230 contacts a periphery of the opening, and the door safety 204 is exposed as a front face of the home appliance (see figures 1-2, 5, paragraph [0045]); an outer discharge passage 2800 (which is disposed at a lower portion of the door assembly that is below the door glass 280, and also capable of operating as an inlet passage through which air outside the door assembly is introducible into the outer space) formed in the door assembly connects the outer space to an outside of the door assembly, such that the inner discharge passage 2700 and the outer discharge passage 2800 are configured such that, air heated in the inner space is dischargeable to the outside of the door assembly through the inner discharge passage 2700 and then through the outer discharge passage 2800 (see figures 10-11, paragraphs [0152]-[0158]); the outer discharge passage 2800 is formed by at least a portion (see inwardly protruding circumferential portion as shown in figure 11) of an inner periphery of a rear face of the glass holder 230 having a protruding shape forming a gap spaced apart from the rear face of the glass holder 230 so that air at the outside of the door assembly is capable of ventilating the outer space through the gap (see figure 11, paragraphs [0152]-[0158]) (reads on claim 3). Gim does not explicitly teach that an upper portion of the door assembly that is above the door glass includes the inner discharge passage and outer discharge passage. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention that additional outer discharge passages and associated inner discharge passages may be disposed at an upper portion of the door assembly above the door glass so as to provide additional ventilation capacity. Furthermore, it has been determined that the duplication of parts and the rearrangement of parts constitute obvious design choices to one of ordinary skill in the art absent persuasive evidence that a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claims 11 and 21, Gim teaches a home appliance (see abstract), comprising: a home appliance body including a cabinet 100 and an opening (see figure 2, paragraph [0030]); and a door assembly 200 rotatably connected to the home appliance body to open the opening and close the opening (see figure 2, paragraph [0030]); the door assembly 200 including: a door safety 204 exposed to an outside of the home appliance (see figure 1, paragraph [0038]), a door cover 240 coupled to the door safety 204 (see figure 5, paragraphs [0035]-[0038]), a door glass 280 coaxial with and coupled to the door cover 240 (see figure 5, paragraph [0045]), and a glass holder 230 coupled to the door glass 280 and including a ring-shaped rear face (see flat and diagonal portions of rear face of glass holder 230) facing the cabinet 100 when the door assembly 200 is closed and an outer circumferential surface (see circumferential lip portion of glass holder 230) extending along an edge of the ring-shaped rear face (see figures 5, 9-11, paragraph [0045]), wherein the glass holder 230 comprises an air discharge passage structure including at least one first opening T formed between the door glass 280 and the glass holder 230 and at least one second opening 2800 (which is also capable of functioning as an air inlet passage on the outer circumferential surface as it is capable of allowing air at the outside of the door assembly to be introduced into the inner space) through the glass holder 230 through which air in an inner space of the door assembly is capable of escaping to an outside of the door assembly 200 through the air discharge passage (see paragraphs [0106]-[0107], [0117], [0118], [0148]-[0152], figure 11). Gim does not explicitly teach that the air discharge passage is in an upper portion of the door assembly that is above the door glass and an additional air inlet passage is on a lower end of the outer circumferential surface that is opposite to the air discharge passage and is below the door glass. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention that additional air discharge passages, which also function as air inlet passages, may be disposed at an upper portion of the door assembly above the door glass as well as on an opposite lower end so as to provide additional ventilation capacity. Furthermore, it has been determined that the duplication of parts and the rearrangement of parts constitute obvious design choices to one of ordinary skill in the art absent persuasive evidence that a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). Hence, it is readily apparent that in the modified system, the air inlet passage may include a plurality of holes, and may be configured such that, air introduced into the inner space through the plurality of holes flows around the door glass and through the air discharge passage to ventilate an outer space having a ring shape around the door glass 280 (reads on claim 21).
Regarding claims 17-18, Gim teaches the limitations of claim 11. Gim also teaches that the door assembly 200 further includes a first air discharge passage (see fluid passage channels associated with A_in, A_cir, A_out, as shown in figures 10-11) on a side of an edge thereof (see paragraphs [0107], [0152]-[0158], [0165], figure 11) (reads on claim 17); the first air discharge passage 2800 is configured such that hot internal air is capable of being introduced to the inner space through a first gap 2700 between an edge of the door cover 240 and an edge of the door glass 280, and the introduced hot internal air is capable of exiting the inner space to the outside of the door assembly 200 through a second gap 2800 formed between the edge of the door glass 280 and the glass holder 230 (see paragraphs [0095]-[0096], [0155]-[0158], figures 6, 8, 10-11) (reads on claim 18).
Claims 1, 4, 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (KR20200096044A).
Regarding claims 1, 4, 7, Kwon et al. teaches a home appliance (see abstract, laundry appliance), comprising: a cabinet 10 including an opening 106 (see figures 1, 12, page 5 of the translation); and a door assembly 12 rotatably coupled to the cabinet 10 to open the opening 106 and close the opening 106 (see figures 1-2, 12, page 5 of the translation), the door assembly 12 including: a door glass 23 having a rear face and a front face, a glass holder 19 having an opening of the glass holder 19 and at least partially supporting the door glass 23 in the opening of the glass holder 19 by the rear face, the glass holder 19 including a ring-shaped rear face (see flat portion of rear face of 19 as shown in figures 4-5, 12-15) facing the cabinet 10 when the door assembly 12 is closed and an outer circumferential surface (see curved surface of rear face of 19 extending from the outer edge of the flat portion of rear face of 19 as shown in figures 4-5, 12-15) extending along an edge of the ring-shaped rear face (see figures 2-5, 12, pages 6 and 8 of the translation), a door cover 14 at least partially supporting the door glass 23 in the opening of the glass holder 19 by the front face, the door glass 23 coaxial with and coupled to the door cover 14 (see figures 2-4, pages 6 and 8 of the translation), and coupled to the glass holder 19 so that the door cover 14 and the glass holder 19 form an outer space (see second space, 41) having a ring shape around the door glass 23 inside the door assembly 12 (see figures 3-4, pages 9-10), a door safety 20 coupled to the door cover 14 so that the door safety 20, the door glass 23, and the door cover 14 form an inner space (see first space) inside the door assembly 12 (see figures 3-4, pages 9-10 of the translation), and wherein an inner discharge passage 39 formed in the door assembly 12 connects the inner space to the outer space to discharge air heated in the inner space to the outer space (see pages 9-10 of the translation, figures 2-3, 6, 8-9, 11-13), and wherein the door assembly 12 is configured so that, when the opening 106 is closed by the door assembly 12, a portion 232 of the door glass 23 protrudes into the cabinet 10 (see figures 3, 12, page 5 of the translation), at least a portion of the glass holder 19 contacts a periphery 103 of the opening 106, and the door safety 20 is exposed as a front face of the home appliance (see figures 1, 12, page 5 of the translation); an outer discharge passage 40 (which is disposed at a lower portion of the door assembly that is below the door glass 23, and also capable of operating as an inlet passage through which air outside the door assembly is introducible into the outer space) formed in the door assembly 12 connects the outer space to an outside of the door assembly 12 to discharge the heated air to the outside of the door assembly 12, the outer discharge passage 40 formed by holes (holes 40 are formed in a bottom portion of the glass holder 19 and also allow air to enter into the outer space of the door from the outside and therefore one or more the holes would also read on the hole(s) of claim 7) passing through the rear face of the glass holder 19 to the outer space (see pages 9-10 of the translation, figures 2-3, 6, 8-9, 11-13) (reads on claim 4); the inner discharge passage 39 and the outer discharge passage 40 are configured such that, air heated in the inner space is dischargeable to the outside of the door assembly through the inner discharge passage 39 and then through the outer discharge passage 40 (see pages 9-10 of the translation, figures 2-3, 6, 8-9, 11-13). Kwon et al. does not explicitly teach that an upper portion of the door assembly that is above the door glass includes the inner discharge passage and outer discharge passage. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention that additional outer discharge passages and associated inner discharge passages may be disposed at an upper portion of the door assembly above the door glass so as to provide additional ventilation capacity. Furthermore, it has been determined that the duplication of parts and the rearrangement of parts constitute obvious design choices to one of ordinary skill in the art absent persuasive evidence that a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (KR20200096044A) as applied to claim 1 in view of Gim (US20180363198).
Regarding claims 8-10, Kwon et al. teaches the limitations of claim 1. Kwon et al. also teaches that a material of the door safety 20 may be transparent or semi-transparent (see pages 6-7 of the translation, see portion 21 that may be transparent or semi-transparent) or opaque (see portion 22); and that, in the modified system including outer discharge passages in an upper portion of the door assembly, it is readily apparent that air would be capable of entering into the outer space, flowing around the door glass 23 and through the outer discharge passage to ventilate the outer space. Kwon et al. does not teach that the door safety is made of a plastic material. Gim teaches a washing machine (see abstract) and that the door 200 may be constructed of a suitable plastic material and that the door cover 240 may be transparent so as to improve the visibility to the user of internal portions of the door and washing machine (see paragraphs [0037], [0100]). Since both Kwon et al. and Gim teach washing machines it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention that the door safety and door cover of Kwon et al. may be constructed of a suitable plastic material and the door cover may be transparent so as to improve the visibility of the internal features of the door and washing machine, as shown to be known and conventional by Gim. Furthermore, it has been determined that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination. Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945); In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Claims 12, 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gim (US20180363198) as applied to claim 11.
Regarding claim 12, Gim teaches the limitations of claim 11. Gim teaches that the at least one first opening includes a first opening T formed on the ring-shaped rear face of the glass holder 230 and allowing the passage of fluids into and out of the inner space of the door (see figures 9, 11 and paragraphs [0106]-[0107], [0117]). Gim does not explicitly teach that a plurality of first openings formed at equal intervals along a horizontal direction of the ring-shaped rear face. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention that the number and location of the gaps may be chosen based on the desired amount and location of the fluid flow so as to optimize the fluid flow into and out of the inner space of the door. Furthermore it has been determined that the duplication of parts and rearrangement of parts constitute obvious design choices to one of ordinary skill in the art absent persuasive evidence that a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claims 15-16, Gim teaches the limitations of claim 11. Gim teaches that the air inlet passage structure may include an opening 2800 at an outer circumference surface that allows the flow of fluid into and out of the inner space of the door (see figures 7, 9, 11, paragraphs [0152]-[0158]). Gim does not explicitly teach that the air inlet passage structure includes one or more second openings formed at equal intervals along the outer circumference surface. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention that the number and location of the openings may be chosen based on the desired amount and location of the fluid flow so as to optimize the fluid flow into and out of the inner space of the door. Furthermore it has been determined that the duplication of parts and rearrangement of parts constitute obvious design choices to one of ordinary skill in the art absent persuasive evidence that a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Claims 5 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gim (US20180363198) as applied to claim 11 in view of Kwon et al. (KR20200096044A).
Regarding claim 5, Gim teaches the limitations of claim 1. Gim teaches that the outer discharge passage 2800 includes a first outer discharge passage 2800 formed by at least a portion (see inwardly protruding circumferential portion as shown in figure 11) of an inner periphery of a rear face of the glass holder 230 having a protruding shape forming a gap spaced apart from the rear face of the glass holder 230 so that air at the outside of the door assembly is capable of ventilating the outer space (see figure 11, paragraphs [0152]-[0158]). Gim does not teach a second outer discharge passage formed by one or more holes passing through the rear face of the glass holder to the outer space. Kwon et al. teaches an outer discharge passage 40 formed by a hole passing through the rear face of the glass holder 19 connecting the outer space to an outside of the door assembly 12 capable of discharging the heated air to the outside of the door assembly 12 (see pages 9-10 of the translation, figures 2-3, 6, 8-9, 11-13). Since both Gim and Kwon et al. teach washing machines it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention that a second outer discharge passage may be formed through the rear face of the glass holder in the system by Gim so as to allow for additional ventilation capacity, as shown to be known and conventional by Kwon et al.
Regarding claims 19-20, Gim teaches the limitations of claim 11. Gim teaches that the door cover 240 may be a transparent plastic material (see paragraphs [0037], [0100]). Gim does not teach that the door safety is opaque or semi-transparent. Kwon et al. teaches that a material of the door safety 20 may be semi-transparent (see pages 6-7 of the translation, see portion 21 that may be semi-transparent) or opaque (see portion 22) depending on the desired visibility of the various parts of the door and the internal components of the washing machine as well as to maintain a neat appearance (see pages 4, 7 and 10 of the translation). Since both Gim and Kwon et al. teach washing machines it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention that the door safety in the system by Gim may be semi-transparent (reads on claim 20) and opaque (reads on claim 19) depending on the desired visibility of various portions of the door and washing machine, as well as to maintain a neat appearance, as shown to be known and conventional by Kwon et al.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TINSAE B AYALEW whose telephone number is (571)270-0256. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5pm.
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, MICHAEL BARR can be reached at 571-272-1414. 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.
/TINSAE B AYALEW/EXAMINER, Art Unit 1711