DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the reference numerals are not legible. 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 § 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.
Claims 38-41, 43, 44, 48-50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent 0898659 to Satterlee.
Regarding claim 38, Satterlee teaches an extendable photograph holder (display surface device) comprising: - a cover (front plate A) having front surface forming an internal channel (curled over upper end A’) securing a display support (plate B); - one or more extendable display surfaces (slide C) slidably coupled to a terminal portion of the cover (A); and - wherein the extendable display surface (C) is flush with the display support (plate B) positioned within the cover.
PNG
media_image1.png
322
556
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 39, Satterlee teaches the extendable display surface (C) further comprises a back surface (figures 2-3).
Regarding claim 40, Satterlee teaches the extendable display surface (C) further comprises an end surface.
Regarding claim 41, Satterlee teaches extendable display surface further comprises a top surface (inward turned scroll shaped portions C’).
Regarding claim 43, Satterlee teaches the extendable display surface (C) is a metal or a composite material (page 2, lines 19-24).
Regarding claim 44, Satterlee teaches display support (B) is secured to a frame.
Regarding claim 48, Satterlee teaches cover (A) is secured to a frame.
Regarding claim 49, Satterlee teaches an extendable photograph holder (display surface device) comprising: - a cover (front plate A) having front surface forming an internal channel (curled over upper end A’) securing a display support (plate B); - one or more extendable display surfaces (slide C) slidably coupled to a terminal portion of the cover (A); and wherein said display support (B) is secured to a frame (brace F)
Regarding claim 50, Satterlee teaches an extendable photograph holder (display surface device) comprising: - a cover (front plate A) having front surface forming an internal channel (curled over upper end A’) securing a display support (plate B); - one or more extendable display surfaces (slide C) slidably coupled to a terminal portion of the cover (A); and wherein said cover (A) is secured to a frame (brace F).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 45-47 are 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.
Regarding claim 45, Satterlee does not teaches a display surface device in combination with the other limitations of the claims and further wherein said extendable display surface is secured to said cover by a coupler selected from: a fitted joint, a rail coupler, an adjustable fastener, or plurality of fixed fastener positions.
Regarding claim 46, Satterlee does not teaches a display surface device in combination with the other limitations of the claims and further wherein said cover comprises one or more tabs securing the display support.
Regarding claim 47, Satterlee does not teaches a display surface device in combination with the other limitations of the claims and further said extendable display surface (C) comprises one or more tabs configured to secure the display support.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 38-41, 43, 44-50 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 CASSANDRA DAVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-6642. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 AM-4:30 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jonathan Liu can be reached at 571-272-8227. 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.
/CASSANDRA DAVIS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631
