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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-4, 7, 8, and 10-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of co-pending Application No. 18/657,054 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both co-pending applications teach a recreational vehicle of the type comprising a chassis with at least one axle, the recreational vehicle comprising: a generally horizontal floor; a vehicle body comprising a plurality of generally upstanding walls each comprising a bottom adjacent the floor and a top distal to the floor; and a cabinet structure in contact with the horizontal floor and one of the upstanding walls, the cabinet structure comprising a plurality of generally planar side panels, each of the plurality of side panels comprising: a rear edge disposed proximate to one of the upstanding walls; an opposed front edge distal to one of the upstanding walls; a lower edge adjacent the horizontal floor (Fig. 5); an upper edge distal to the floor; opposed first and second panel faces extending generally between the front and rear edges and the upper and lower edges; a plurality of mounting apertures extending from the first panel face to the second panel face and a plurality of generally vertical and generally horizontal ribs extending from the first panel face, the second panel face, or both, wherein the plurality of generally vertical and generally horizontal ribs are interconnected, such that they together define a plurality of sub- panels arranged in a grid, and at least one of the sub-panels of the grid comprises at least one of the plurality of mounting apertures. Wherein each of the sub-panels of the grid comprise at least one of the plurality of mounting apertures. Wherein the cabinet structure further comprises a plurality of reinforcement panels, each reinforcement panel comprising: a reinforcement panel rear edge; an opposed reinforcement panel front edge to the reinforcement panel rear edge; a reinforcement panel lower edge; an opposed reinforcement panel upper edge to the reinforcement panel lower edge; and a reinforcement panel first face and an reinforcement panel second face opposing each other and extending generally between the front and rear edges and the upper and lower edges, wherein the reinforcement panel second face is adjacent to one of the first and second panel faces of the side panel, and at least one reinforcement panel is engaged with one of the horizontal ribs and is anchored to the at least one mounting aperture of one of the sub-panels. Wherein: the reinforcement panel rear edge is disposed proximate to one of the plurality of vertical ribs; the opposed reinforcement panel front edge is proximate to another of the plurality of vertical ribs; and the reinforcement panel lower edge is adjacent to one of the horizontal ribs. Wherein at least one of: at least one of the plurality of reinforcement panels spans at least two sub-panels of the grid in a horizontal direction, and the reinforcement panel second face of the reinforcement panel spanning the at least two sub-panels of the grid further comprises a reinforcement panel recess sized to fit over one of the vertical ribs; or at least one of the plurality of reinforcement panels spans at least two sub-panels in a vertical direction, and the reinforcement panel second face of the reinforcement panel spanning at least two sub-panels further comprises a reinforcement panel recess sized to fit over one of the horizontal ribs. Wherein: at least one of the plurality of reinforcement panels comprises a ledge extending from the reinforcement panel first face; at least one of the plurality of reinforcement panels comprises a guide hole extending through the reinforcement panel first and second faces; the cabinet structure further comprises a hinge coupled to at least one of the reinforcement panels; or combinations thereof. Wherein at least one of the plurality of side panels further comprises a plurality of openings extending between the first and second side panel faces. Wherein the plurality of side panels are perpendicular to at least one of the upstanding walls. Wherein: the cabinet structure further comprises a plurality of cosmetic panels coupled to at least one of the rear edge, the front edge, the upper edge, the lower edge, the first panel face, or the second panel face of at least one of the plurality of side panels; and the plurality of cosmetic panels and the plurality of reinforcement panels cooperate to substantially obscure the said rear edge, front edge, upper edge, lower edge, first panel face, second panel face, or combinations thereof of the plurality of side panels from an exterior view. Wherein: the cabinet structure further comprises a second plurality of generally planar side panels perpendicular to the first plurality of generally planar side panels, each of the second plurality of side panels comprising: a rear edge distal to the first and second panel faces of the first plurality of side panels, an opposed front edge proximal to the first and second panel faces of the first plurality of side panels, a lower edge adjacent the horizontal floor, an upper edge distal to the floor, opposed first and second panel faces extending generally between the front and rear edges and upper and lower edges, and a plurality of mounting apertures extending from the first panel face to the second panel face; and a plurality of generally vertical and generally horizontal ribs extending from the first panel face, the second panel face, or both, wherein the plurality of generally vertical and generally horizontal ribs are interconnected, such that they together define a plurality of sub-panels arranged in a grid, and at least one of the sub-panels of the grid comprises at least one of the plurality of mounting apertures. Wherein: each of the first and second pluralities of side panels comprise a plurality of channels extending between the first and second side panel faces; the cabinet structure further comprises a plurality of tubular supports; each tubular support is sized to fit through the channels of the first and second pluralities of side panels; at least one of the tubular supports extends from the channel of one of the first plurality of side panels to another of the first plurality of side panels; at least one of the tubular supports extends from the channel of one of the second plurality of side panels to another of the second plurality of side panels; at least one of the tubular supports comprises an elbow joint, such that the tubular support comprising the elbow joint extends from the channel of one of the first plurality of side panels to a corresponding channel of one of the second plurality of side panels; and the at least one of the tubular supports comprising the elbow joint interconnects the first and second pluralities of side panels, thereby providing rigidity to the cabinet structure. Wherein: each of the plurality of side panels has a plurality of channels extending between the first and second side panel faces; and the cabinet structure further comprises a plurality of tubular supports; each tubular support is sized to fit through the channels of the plurality of side panels; each tubular support extends from the channel of one of the plurality of side panels to a corresponding channel of another of the plurality of side panels; and the plurality of tubular supports interconnect the plurality of sides panels, thereby providing rigidity to the cabinet structure. Wherein the cabinet structure further comprises a panel extension interposed between the rear edge of each of the plurality of side panels and the upstanding wall the rear edges are proximate to. Wherein at least one of the reinforcement panels comprises: a reinforcement panel spanning at least two sub-panels in a horizontal direction, wherein the reinforcement panel second face of the reinforcement panel comprises a reinforcement panel recess sized to fit over one of the vertical ribs and the first reinforcement face comprises a ledge extending from the reinforcement panel first face; a reinforcement panel spanning at least two sub-panels in a horizontal direction, wherein the reinforcement panel comprises a guide hole extending through the first and reinforcement panel second faces, a drawer slide is coupled to the reinforcement panel via the guide hole, and the reinforcement panel second face of the reinforcement panel comprises a reinforcement panel recess sized to fit over one of the vertical ribs; a reinforcement panel spanning at least two sub-panels in a vertical direction, wherein the reinforcement panel second face of the reinforcement panel further comprises a reinforcement panel recess sized to fit over one of the horizontal ribs, and an overlay hinge is coupled to the reinforcement panel; or combinations thereof.
Since claims 1-4, 7, 8, and 10-20 are anticipated by the claims of the co-pending application, they are not patentably distinct therefrom. Thus, the invention of claims 1-4, 7, 8, and 10-20 of the application is in effect a species of the generic invention of co-pending application. It has been held that the generic invention is anticipated by the species, see In re Goodman 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed Cir. 1993) Since claims 1-4, 7, 8, and 10-20 are anticipated (fully encompassed) by the claims of the application, they are not patentably distinct there from, regardless of any additional subject matter present in co-pending claims.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 5 and 9 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of co-pending Application No. 18/657,054 (reference application) in view of Davis et al (2006/0250052). As stated above, the co-pending application teaches the limitations of claims 1 and 3, including reinforcing panels on the side panels. For claim 5, the co-pending application fails to specifically teach that the reinforcing panels are snap-fit onto the side panels. Davis teaches reinforcing panels snap-fit onto side panels (Fig. 27). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cabinet of the co-pending application by specifically snap-fitting the panels together, such as is taught by Davis, to provide an easy means of connecting the panels without the need for tools.
For claim 9, the co-pending application fails to teach a protrusion on the lower edges of the panels. Davis teaches that at least one of the sub-panels adjacent the lower edge of the side panel comprises a protrusion (Fig. 2; d as shown below), the protrusion in contact with the generally horizontal floor of the recreational vehicle; or at least one of the sub-panels adjacent the lower edge of the side panel are attached to a weight-bearing element in contact with the floor. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cabinet of the co-pending application by having a lower protrusion on the side panels, such as is taught by Davis, for panel attachment purposes.
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.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rosner et al (10,524,587). Rosner teaches a cabinet comprising side panels (side walls 13) having a rear edge; a front edge opposed to the rear edge; a lower edge; an upper edge opposed to the lower edge; opposed first and second panel faces extending generally between the front and rear edges and the upper and lower edges and each panel having inner first panel faces with a plurality of generally vertical (a; see annotated figure below) and generally horizontal (b) ribs extending from the first panel face, the second panel face, or both, wherein the plurality of generally vertical and generally horizontal ribs are interconnected, such that they together define a plurality of sub-panels (c) arranged in a grid, and a plurality of mounting apertures (d) extending from the first panel face to the second panel face wherein at least one of the sub-panels includes at least one of the mounting apertures.
PNG
media_image1.png
715
840
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Davis et al (2006/0250052). Davis teaches a cabinet (Figs. 7 and 8) with side panels (200), each having inner first panel faces with a plurality of generally vertical (a; see annotated figure below) and generally horizontal (b) ribs extending from the first panel face, the second panel face, or both, wherein the plurality of generally vertical and generally horizontal ribs are interconnected, such that they together define a plurality of sub-panels (c) arranged in a grid, and a plurality of mounting apertures (12) extending from the first panel face to the second panel face wherein at least one of the sub-panels includes at least one of the mounting apertures. Wherein the cabinet structure further comprises a plurality of reinforcement panels (11), each reinforcement panel comprising: a reinforcement panel rear edge; an opposed reinforcement panel front edge to the reinforcement panel rear edge; a reinforcement panel lower edge; an opposed reinforcement panel upper edge to the reinforcement panel lower edge; and a reinforcement panel first face and an reinforcement panel second face opposing each other and extending generally between the front and rear edges and the upper and lower edges, wherein the reinforcement panel second face is adjacent to one of the first and second panel faces of the side panel, and at least one reinforcement panel is engaged with one of the horizontal ribs and is anchored to the at least one mounting aperture of one of the sub-panels (Fig. 27).
PNG
media_image2.png
437
404
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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.
Claims 1, 2, 10, 11, 15, 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maclean (2015/0102631) in view of Rosner et al (10,524,587). Maclean teaches a recreational vehicle of the type comprising a chassis with at least one axle (paragraphs 0005-0017), the recreational vehicle comprising: a generally horizontal floor (12); a vehicle body comprising a plurality of generally upstanding walls (14) each comprising a bottom adjacent the floor and a top distal to the floor; and a cabinet structure (Fig. 5) in contact with the horizontal floor and one of the upstanding walls, the cabinet structure comprising a plurality of generally planar side panels (76,90,92,78), each of the plurality of side panels comprising: a rear edge disposed proximate to one of the upstanding walls (Fig. 5); an opposed front edge distal to one of the upstanding walls (Fig. 5); a lower edge adjacent the horizontal floor (Fig. 5); an upper edge distal to the floor (Fig. 5); opposed first and second panel faces extending generally between the front and rear edges and the upper and lower edges; a plurality of mounting apertures (93,98) extending from the first panel face to the second panel face. For claims 1 and 19, Maclean fails to teach horizontal and vertical ribs on the first and/or second panel faces. Rosner teaches side panels (side walls 13) on a cabinet, each having inner first panel faces with a plurality of generally vertical (a; see annotated figure above) and generally horizontal (b) ribs extending from the first panel face, the second panel face, or both, wherein the plurality of generally vertical and generally horizontal ribs are interconnected, such that they together define a plurality of sub-panels (c) arranged in a grid, and at least one of the sub-panels of the grid comprises at least one aperture (d). The panels allow drawers (Fig. 1) to be mounted within the cabinet. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cabinet structure of Maclean by adding the inner panels on at least two adjacent side panels, such as is taught by Rosner, aligning adjacent mounting apertures of the panels of Rosner and Maclean to fasten the panels together, to provide specific drawer mounting means within the cabinet (general drawer mounting means discussed in paragraph 0124 of Maclean).
For claim 2, although Maclean in view of Rosner fails to teach that each of the sub-panels of the grid comprise at least one of the plurality of mounting apertures, it would have been obvious to add apertures to each sub-panel for a more secure or varied attachment to the respective side wall and/or for attachment of auxiliary structures. Furthermore, it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v Bemis Co. 193 USPQ8 and MPEP 2144.04
For claim 10, Maclean in view of Rosner further teaches that at least one of the plurality of side panels further comprises a plurality of openings (93 of Maclean) extending between the first and second side panel faces.
For claim 11, Maclean in view of Rosner further teaches that the plurality of side panels are perpendicular to at least one of the upstanding walls.
For claim 15, Maclean in view of Rosner further teaches that each of the plurality of side panels has a plurality of channels (see upper channels in Fig. 8 of Maclean) extending between the first and second side panel faces; and the cabinet structure further comprises a plurality of tubular supports (100,102); each tubular support is sized to fit through the channels of the plurality of side panels; each tubular support extends from the channel of one of the plurality of side panels to a corresponding channel of another of the plurality of side panels; and the plurality of tubular supports interconnect the plurality of sides panels, thereby providing rigidity to the cabinet structure (Fig. 8).
For claim 16, Maclean in view of Rosner further teaches that the cabinet structure further comprises a panel extension (80 of Maclean) interposed between the rear edge of each of the plurality of side panels and the upstanding wall (at 82) the rear edges are proximate to.
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maclean (2015/0102631) in view of Rosner et al (10,524,587) as applied to claims 1, 2, 10, 11, 15, 16 and 19 above, and further in view of Liu et al (CN218418961). As stated above, Maclean in view of Rosner teaches the limitations of claim 1, including a cabinet with side panels. For claim 13, Maclean in view of Rosner fails to teach an L-shaped cabinet structure within the vehicle. Liu teaches teach an L-shaped cabinet structure within the vehicle (Fig. 1). Wherein the cabinet structure comprises a first plurality of generally planar side panels and a second plurality of generally planar side panels perpendicular to the first plurality of generally planar side panels, each of the second plurality of side panels comprising: a rear edge distal to the first and second panel faces of the first plurality of side panels, an opposed front edge proximal to the first and second panel faces of the first plurality of side panels, a lower edge adjacent the horizontal floor, an upper edge distal to the floor, opposed first and second panel faces extending generally between the front and rear edges and upper and lower edges. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cabinet arrangement of Maclean in view of Rosner by adding a perpendicular section thereto, such as is taught by Liu, to provide additional storage and workspaces within the vehicle. It should be understood that all of the panels in the cabinet structure of Maclean in view of Rosner and Liu would include the ribs and apertures of Rosner.
For claim 14, Maclean in view of Rosner and Liu further teaches that each of the plurality of side panels has a plurality of channels (see upper channels in Fig. 8 of Maclean) extending between the first and second side panel faces; and the cabinet structure further comprises a plurality of tubular supports (100,102); each tubular support is sized to fit through the channels of the plurality of side panels; each tubular support extends from the channel of one of the plurality of side panels to a corresponding channel of another of the plurality of side panels; and the plurality of tubular supports interconnect the plurality of sides panels, thereby providing rigidity to the cabinet structure (Fig. 8). For claim 14, Maclean in view of Rosner and Liu fails to specifically teach that the extended section includes the tubular supports. However, it would have been obvious to use the tubular supports and channels of Maclean on the L-shaped cabinet extension of Maclean in view of Rosner and Liu for rigidity of the entire structure. Furthermore, since elbow joints are well known in the art, it would have been obvious to connect both sections’ tubular supports together with elbow joints for corner rigidity.
Claims 1-5, 7, 9-11, 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis et al (2006/0250052) in view of Maclean (2015/0102631). Davis teaches a cabinet (Figs. 7 and 8) with side panels (200), each having inner first panel faces with a plurality of generally vertical (a; see annotated figure above) and generally horizontal (b) ribs extending from the first panel face, the second panel face, or both, wherein the plurality of generally vertical and generally horizontal ribs are interconnected, such that they together define a plurality of sub-panels (c) arranged in a grid, and at least one of the sub-panels of the grid comprises at least one aperture (12). For claims 1 and 18, Davis fails to teach that the cabinet is located within a vehicle. However, Davis does teach that the cabinet can be attached to a horizontal wall via a bracket (117). Maclean teaches a recreational vehicle of the type comprising a chassis with at least one axle (paragraphs 0005-0017), the recreational vehicle comprising: a generally horizontal floor (12); a vehicle body comprising a plurality of generally upstanding walls (14) each comprising a bottom adjacent the floor and a top distal to the floor; and a cabinet structure (Fig. 5) in contact with the horizontal floor and one of the upstanding walls, the cabinet structure comprising a plurality of generally planar side panels (76,90,92,78), each of the plurality of side panels comprising: a rear edge disposed proximate to one of the upstanding walls (Fig. 5); an opposed front edge distal to one of the upstanding walls (Fig. 5); a lower edge adjacent the horizontal floor (Fig. 5); an upper edge distal to the floor (Fig. 5); and opposed first and second panel faces extending generally between the front and rear edges and the upper and lower edges. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the cabinet structure of Davis within the vehicle of Maclean, arranging and attaching it against one of the walls like the existing cabinet via a bracket (117), to provide additional storage within the vehicle.
For claim 2, although Davis in view of Maclean fails to teach that each of the sub-panels of the grid comprise at least one of the plurality of mounting apertures, it would have been obvious to add apertures to each sub-panel for a more secure or varied attachment to the side wall and/or for attachment of auxiliary structures. Furthermore, it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v Bemis Co. 193 USPQ8 and MPEP 2144.04
For claims 3 and 18, Davis in view of Maclean further teaches that the cabinet structure further comprises a plurality of reinforcement panels (11), each reinforcement panel comprising: a reinforcement panel rear edge; an opposed reinforcement panel front edge to the reinforcement panel rear edge; a reinforcement panel lower edge; an opposed reinforcement panel upper edge to the reinforcement panel lower edge; and a reinforcement panel first face and an reinforcement panel second face opposing each other and extending generally between the front and rear edges and the upper and lower edges, wherein the reinforcement panel second face is adjacent to one of the first and second panel faces of the side panel, and at least one reinforcement panel is engaged with one of the horizontal ribs and is anchored to the at least one mounting aperture of one of the sub-panels (604,12; and 30,31; Fig. 27 of Davis).
For claim 4, Davis in view of Maclean further teaches that the reinforcement panel rear edge is disposed proximate to one of the plurality of vertical ribs; the opposed reinforcement panel front edge is proximate to another of the plurality of vertical ribs; and the reinforcement panel lower edge is adjacent to one of the horizontal ribs.
For claim 5, Davis in view of Maclean further teaches that each reinforcement panel is anchored to at least one of the plurality of mounting apertures via at least one snap fitting (604,12) protruding from the reinforcement panel second face of each of the plurality of reinforcement panels.
For claim 7, Davis in view of Maclean further teaches that at least one of: at least one of the plurality of reinforcement panels spans at least two sub-panels of the grid in a horizontal direction, and the reinforcement panel second face of the reinforcement panel spanning the at least two sub-panels of the grid further comprises a reinforcement panel recess sized to fit over one of the vertical ribs; or at least one of the plurality of reinforcement panels spans at least two sub-panels in a vertical direction, and the reinforcement panel second face of the reinforcement panel spanning at least two sub-panels further comprises a reinforcement panel recess sized to fit over one of the horizontal ribs.
For claim 9, Davis in view of Maclean further teaches that at least one of the sub-panels adjacent the lower edge of the side panel comprises a protrusion (Fig. 2; d), the protrusion in contact with the generally horizontal floor of the recreational vehicle; or at least one of the sub-panels adjacent the lower edge of the side panel are attached to a weight-bearing element in contact with the floor.
PNG
media_image3.png
534
288
media_image3.png
Greyscale
For claim 10, Davis in view of Maclean further teaches that at least one of the plurality of side panels further comprises a plurality of openings (15) extending between the first and second side panel faces.
For claim 11, Davis in view of Maclean further teaches that the plurality of side panels are perpendicular to at least one of the upstanding walls.
For claim 16, Davis in view of Maclean further teaches that the cabinet structure further comprises a panel extension (bracket 117) interposed between the rear edge of the cabinet and the upstanding wall the rear edge is proximate to. Although the bracket is not shown at the sidewall rear edges, additional brackets could be added thereto for a more secure cabinet to wall attachment. As stated above, it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v Bemis Co. 193 USPQ8 and MPEP 2144.04
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANET M WILKENS whose telephone number is 571-272-6869. The examiner can normally be reached Mon thru Thurs 7am-5:30pm EST.
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, Daniel Troy can be reached at 571-270-3742. 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.
Wilkens
June 22, 2026
/JANET M WILKENS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights