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 .
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claims 13-17 be found allowable, claims 28-32 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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(s) 13-14, 17, 28-29, & 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mosis (20030019031).
Regarding claims 13 & 28, Mosis teaches an apparatus comprising: a cabinet (1) having a countertop (A in Fig. 5 Annotated) and a bottom surface (B), the bottom surface being situated at an opposing end from the countertop (Fig. 5); a plurality of wheels (14) mounted to the bottom surface of the cabinet, the plurality of wheels configured to support the cabinet (Fig. 5), the plurality of wheels configured to rotate in response to applying a lateral force to the cabinet (note that such rotatability is inherent to wheels); a water hose connector (11) mounted to the cabinet, the water hose connector configured to selectively couple to an external water source for receiving water (par. 31); and a faucet (6) situated at the countertop of the cabinet, the faucet in fluid communication with the water hose connector to receive water from the water hose connector, the faucet being configured to dispense water received from the water hose connector in response to connecting the water hose connector to the external water source and a water valve (12) being opened (par. 31).
PNG
media_image1.png
537
504
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 14 & 29, Mosis teaches a sink (5) situated at the countertop of the cabinet, the sink configured to receive the dispensed water from the faucet (Fig. 4), the sink having a drain (C) through which the dispensed water from the faucet exits the sink (par. 32), wherein the faucet is configured to dispense water into the sink in response to the water valve being opened (Figs. 4-5).
Regarding claims 17 & 32, Mosis teaches a water receptacle (10) situated below the countertop, the water receptacle in fluid communication (via 7) with the drain (C) through which the dispensed water from the faucet exits the sink (par. 28 & 32 and Fig. 11), the water receptacle configured to retain the dispensed water after exiting the sink (par. 28 & 32).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 13-14, 17, 20-22, 28-29 & 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Butler (20180332961) in view of Mosis (20030019031).
Regarding claims 13 & 28, Butler teaches the structure substantially as claimed, including an apparatus (100) comprising: a cabinet (110) having a countertop (120) and a bottom surface (250), the bottom surface being situated at an opposing end from the countertop (Fig. 7); a plurality of wheels (Figs. 2) mounted to the bottom surface of the cabinet (Fig. 7), the plurality of wheels configured to support the cabinet (Fig. 2), the plurality of wheels configured to rotate in response to applying a lateral force to the cabinet (note that such rotatability is inherent to wheels); and a faucet (340) situated at the countertop of the cabinet (Fig. 7). Butler fail(s) to teach a water hose connector. However, Mosis teaches supply means (11-13, 16) comprising a water hose connector (11) mounted (Figs. 8-9) to a cabinet (1), the water hose connector configured to selectively couple to an external water source (i.e., a garden hose) for receiving water (par. 31). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add supply means, as taught by Mosis, to the apparatus of Butler, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to increase the supply of water available to users of the cabinet (as suggested by par. 3 of Mosis). Hence, Butler as modified would teach a faucet (340 of Butler) in fluid communication (as in Fig. 7 & par. 31 of Mosis) with the water hose connector (11 of Mosis) to receive water from the water hose connector (as in par. 31 of Mosis), the faucet being configured to dispense water (as in par. 44 of Butler) received from the water hose connector in response to connecting the water hose connector to the external water source and a water valve (12 of Mosis) being opened (as in par. 31 of Mosis).
Regarding claims 14 & 29, Butler teaches a sink (150 of Butler) situated at (Figs. 1 & 7 of Butler) the countertop (120 of Butler) of the cabinet (110 of Butler), the sink configured to receive the dispensed water from the faucet (implied by par. 43-44 & Fig. 7 of Butler), the sink having a drain (380 of Butler) through which the dispensed water from the faucet exits the sink (par. 49 of Butler), wherein the faucet (340 of Butler) is configured to dispense water into the sink in response to a water valve (12 of Mosis) being opened (implied by par. 43-44 & Fig. 7 of Butler).
Regarding claims 17 & 32, Butler teaches a water receptacle (360) situated below (Fig. 7) the countertop (120), the water receptacle in fluid communication (via 370 - see Fig. 7 & par. 49) with the drain (380) through which the dispensed water from the faucet (340) exits the sink (150), the water receptacle configured to retain the dispensed water after exiting the sink (Fig. 7 & par. 49).
Regarding claim 20, Butler teaches a countertop extension (170) coupled to the cabinet, the countertop extension being configured to: rotate away from the cabinet to reach a deployed position (180 - see Fig. 1), the countertop extension in the deployed position being oriented in a direction approximately parallel to the countertop of the cabinet (Figs. 1-2 & par. 32).
Regarding claim 21, Butler teaches a countertop extension (170) that is further configured to: rotate toward the cabinet to reach a retracted position (200 - see Fig. 2), the countertop extension in the retracted position being oriented in a direction approximately perpendicular to the countertop of the cabinet (Fig. 2 & par. 32). Concerning the rotatability of Butler’s countertop extensions (170): Butler implies such rotatability par. 33, which states that “The hardware that supports the four extensions 170 when in the first position 180 is . . . . the model S-151/12E folding shelf brackets available from SELBY FURNITURE HARDWARE COMPANY, or similar.” Since these folding shelf brackets have hinges (see Reference U), a countertop extension supported by such brackets would necessarily rotate toward, and away from, the cabinet to which the brackets & countertop extension are mounted.
Regarding claim 22, Butler teaches a power receptacle (290) configured to receive power (par. 35-36), the power receptacle being electrically coupled to at a wiring configured to carry electrical energy to a refrigerator situated inside the cabinet (see par. 36). It is noted that, in par. 36, Butler states, “The electrical power inlet receptacle 290 is electrically connected to various internal wiring and circuitry (not illustrated) and provides power to . . . . one or more electrical outlets are provided in the interior of the wheeled cabinet 110 so as to provide convenient electrical power to internal equipment . . . . In other examples, internal equipment is electrically connected to the electrical power inlet receptacle 290 by connections that do not require any electrical outlet 295.” It is further noted that claim 22 of the instant application recites “a wiring configured to carry electrical energy to a refrigerator situated inside the cabinet” (emphasis added). Hence, “a refrigerator situated inside the cabinet” is not positively claimed, only “a wiring” capable of “carry[ing] electrical energy to” such a refrigerator. Since par. 36 of Butler explicitly teaches wiring & electrical outlets in the interior of the cabinet (110), the examiner submits that Butler therefore teaches “a wiring” capable of “carry[ing] electrical energy to a refrigerator situated inside the cabinet.”
Claims 15-16 & 30-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Butler (20180332961) & Mosis (20030019031) in view of Hong (KR200318679). Butler as modified teaches the structure substantially as claimed, including a faucet (340 of Butler); but fail(s) to teach a folding faucet. However, Hong teaches a faucet configured to: rotate from an upright position (Fig. 1) to a horizontal position (Fig. 5) in response to applying force to the faucet (see Fig. 5 and par. 22 of Reference V, which is an English translation of Hong); and rotate from the horizontal position to the upright position in response to applying force to the faucet (see par. 24 of Reference V), the faucet being configured to dispense water into the sink in the upright position (such an water-dispensing ability is inherent to a faucet), wherein the faucet is situated inside the sink in response to rotating the faucet from the upright position to the horizontal position (Fig. 5 & par. 22 of Reference V). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to substitute a faucet, as taught by Hong, for the faucet of Butler as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to reduce the amount of space occupied by the apparatus when not in use, thereby allowing storage of the apparatus in smaller spaces and stacking of items atop the apparatus.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Butler (20180332961) & Mosis (20030019031) in view of Cornille (20130232685). Butler as modified teaches the structure substantially as claimed, including a water receptacle (360 of Butler); but fail(s) to teach a sensor. However, Cornille teaches the inclusion, in a water receptacle (11), of a water level sensor (par. 55) configured to: determine a water level of the dispensed water inside the water receptacle (implied by par. 55); and generating an alert in response to the water level satisfying a water level threshold (par. 55). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add a water level sensor, as taught by Cornille, to the water receptacle of Butler as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to alert users of the apparatus that the water receptacle is full (as suggested by par. 55 of Cornille), thereby preventing overfilling of the water receptacle.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Butler (20180332961) & Mosis (20030019031) in view of Cipriani (20210052131). Butler as modified teaches the structure substantially as claimed, including a sink (150 of Butler); but fail(s) to teach a wash station. However, Cipriani teaches a wash station (10) adjacent to a sink (12, 14), the wash station configured to emit pressurized water in response to applying downward force to the wash station (par. 56 & 59 and Figs. 5-6). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add a wash station, as taught by Cipriani, to the sink of Butler as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to facilitate the washing & rinsing of cups (as suggested by par. 2-4 & Fig. 6 of Cipriani). It is noted that Cipriani teaches a wash station (10) and a faucet (18, 20) that are connected to, and in fluid communication with (via 34, 36, 38, 40), the same water supply lines (30, 32 - see par. 49-50 & Fig. 1). It is further noted that, in the apparatus of Butler as modified by Mosis, the water supply lines (330 of Butler) of the faucet (340 of Butler) would be in fluid communication with the water hose connector (11 of Mosis) to receive water from the water hose connector (as in par. 31 of Mosis). It is therefore reasonable to conclude that, in the apparatus of Butler as modified by Mosis & Cipriani, the wash station (10 of Cipriani) and the faucet (340 of Butler) would be connected to, and in fluid communication with (as in par. 49-50 & Fig. 1 of Cipriani), the same water supply lines (330 of Butler), which would be in fluid communication with the water hose connector (11 of Mosis) to receive water from the water hose connector (as in par. 31 of Mosis). Hence, Butler as modified would teach a wash station (10 of Cipriani) in fluid communication (via 36 & 40 of Cipriani and 330 of Butler) with the water hose connector (11 of Mosis) to receive water from the water hose connector (as in par. 31 of Mosis), wherein the water hose connector is configured to supply water to both the wash station and the faucet (as in par. 31 of Mosis, par. 44-45 of Butler, and Fig. 1 & par. 49-50 of Cipriani).
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Butler (20180332961) & Mosis (20030019031) in view of Mortun (20170373430). Butler as modified teaches the structure substantially as claimed, including a countertop (120 of Butler) of a cabinet (110 of Butler); but fail(s) to teach a retractable charging port. However, Mortun teaches an outlet (10) comprising a retractable (par. 20) charging port (12) situated at a countertop (par. 25). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add an outlet, as taught by Mortun, to the apparatus of Butler modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to supply power to users of the countertop. It is noted that Morton teaches electrically coupling the retractable charging port (12) to a power supply (par. 26); and, in the apparatus of Butler as modified by Mosis, the power supply is the power receptacle (290 of Butler), which is electrically coupled to both internal and external charging ports (par. 36 of Butler). It is therefore reasonable to conclude that, in the apparatus of Butler as modified by Mosis & Mortun, the retractable charging port (12) would be electrically coupled to a power supply, which would be the power receptacle (290 of Butler). Hence, Butler as modified would teach a retractable charging port (12 of Mortun) electrically coupled to the power receptable (290 of Butler), and the retractable charging port configured to carry electrical power received by the power receptacle (such a capability would necessarily follow from the electrical coupling between the power receptacle (290 of Butler) & the retractable charging port (12 of Mortun)).
Claims 24-25 & 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Butler (20180332961) & Mosis (20030019031) in view of Arnold (GB2170101).
Regarding claim 24, Butler as modified teaches the structure substantially as claimed, including a countertop (120 of Butler) of a cabinet (110 of Butler); but fail(s) to teach a retractable shelf. However, Arnold teaches the inclusion, in a cabinet (cl. 1-9) and p. 1, lines 9 & 35-40) storage means (12, 14) comprising a retractable shelf (8B) adjacent to a countertop (8A), the retractable shelf configured to: provide an elevated surface above the countertop in a deployed position (Fig. 2); and provide a flush surface (Fig. 1 & cl. 3) with the countertop in a retracted position (Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add storage means, as taught by Arnold, to the apparatus of Butler as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide additional storage capacity.
Regarding claim 25, it is noted that Arnold teaches a countertop (8A) and a retractable shelf (8B) whose a combined width is approximately the same as a width of the cabinet (Fig. 1) of the which the countertop & retractable shelf are components. It is further noted that Butler teaches countertop extensions (D in Fig. 1 Annotated) whose width is the same as the width of the cabinet (110). It is therefore reasonable to conclude that, in the apparatus of Butler as modified, the combined width of the countertop (120 of Butler) and the retractable shelf (8A of Arnold) would be approximately the same as a width of the cabinet (110 of Butler); and the width of the cabinet would be the same as a width of a countertop extension (D of Butler) coupled to the cabinet. Hence, Butler as modified would teach an apparatus wherein a combined width of the countertop (120 of Butler) and the retractable shelf (8A of Arnold) is approximately the same as a width of a countertop extension (D of Butler) coupled to the cabinet, the countertop extension being configured to: rotate (implied by par. 33 of Butler) away from the cabinet to reach a deployed extension position (Fig. 1 of Butler), the countertop extension in the deployed extension position being oriented in a direction approximately parallel to the countertop of the cabinet (Figs. 1-2 & par. 32 of Butler).
PNG
media_image2.png
382
530
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 27, Arnold teaches a retractable shelf (8A) that includes: a housing (E in Fig. 2 Annotated) situated underneath the retractable shelf (Fig. 2), wherein the housing is exposed in response to the retractable shelf being situated in the deployed position (Fig. 2), and wherein the housing is situated below the countertop in response to the retractable shelf being situated in the retracted position (Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image3.png
490
463
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Butler (20180332961), Mosis (20030019031) & Arnold (GB2170101) in view of Mortun (20170373430). Butler as modified teaches the structure substantially as claimed, including a power receptacle (290 of Butler - see par. 15 above); but fail(s) to teach a retractable charging port situated at the retractable shelf. However, Mortun teaches an outlet (10) comprising a retractable charging port (12). Additionally, mere rearrangement of parts has been held to involve only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add an outlet, as taught by Mortun, to the retractable shelf of Butler modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to supply power to users located on the same side of the apparatus as the retractable shelf, and to supply power to taller users. Hence, Butler as modified would teach a retractable charging port (12 of Mortun) situated at the retractable shelf (8B of Arnold). For the reasons stated in par. 19 above, it is reasonable to conclude that, in the apparatus of Butler as modified, the retractable charging port would be electrically coupled to the power receptable, and the retractable charging port would be configured to carry electrical power received by the power receptacle.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 MATTHEW ING whose telephone number is (571)272-6536. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 a.m. - 5 p.m.. 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.
/MATTHEW W ING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637