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 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 21, 23-24, & 26-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (20020050491) in view of Geisert (1247258).
PNG
media_image1.png
149
601
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 21, Kim teaches the structure substantially as claimed, including an appliance installation system, comprising: a support structure (14) having an upper surface and a lower surface (i.e., top & bottom surfaces of 14 - see Fig. 4); a cooking appliance (22, 32, 34) having a top surface (i.e., upper surface of 34) and a bottom surface (i.e., lower surface of 40); and connecting means (36, 52, 54) coupled to the top surface of the appliance, said coupling means installing the cooking appliance to the support structure proximate to the lower surface. Kim fail(s) to teach an aperture; a retaining assembly; and a coupling assembly. However, Geisert teaches connecting means comprising an aperture (2) defined in a support structure (one of C); at least one retaining assembly (3-11, 14) coupled to an upper surface (L in Fig. 3 Annotated) of the support structure (Fig. 3), wherein the at least one retaining assembly defines a channel (4) configured to align with the at least one aperture (Fig. 4), the at least one retaining assembly including: a lower cover (M) disposed adjacent to the upper surface (L) of the support structure (Fig. 3); an upper cover (N); a first side arm (one of J) disposed between the upper cover and the lower cover (Fig. 3); and a second side arm (other of J) disposed adjacent to the first side arm (Fig. 2), wherein proximal ends of the first side arm and the second side arm are arranged in a stacked configuration (Fig. 3) and distal ends of the first and second side arms are arranged coplanar relative to one another (implied by Figs. 2-3); and at least one coupling assembly (1) coupled to a top surface (P) of a second component (other of C), wherein the at least one coupling assembly is disposed within the channel (Figs. 2-3) and retained in position by the at least one retaining assembly (Figs. 2-3) to install the second component to the support structure proximate (Fig. 3) to a lower surface (Q). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute connecting means, as taught by Geisert, for each of the connecting means of Kim, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to selectively connect the cooking appliance to the support structure, because such an outcome would have been a predictable result of such a substitution of one known connecting means for another.
Regarding claim 23, Geisert teaches a first side arm (one of J) and a second side arm (other of J) that are biased to a retracted position (via 8-9) to retain (Fig. 2) the at least one coupling assembly (1) within the channel (4).
Regarding claim 24, Geisert teaches at least one coupling assembly (1) that has a locking feature (i.e., enlarged head of 1 - see Fig. 3) configured to adjust the first side arm (one of J) and the second side arm (other of J) to an extended position as the at least one coupling assembly is moved into the channel (implied by Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 26, Kim teaches a hook (14) coupled to a surface (16) proximate to the support structure (14), wherein the hook is configured to engage (Fig. 4) the bottom surface (i.e., lower surface of 40) of the cooking appliance (22, 32, 34).
Regarding claim 27, Kim as modified teaches at least one aperture (2 of Geisert) that includes a first aperture (2 of Geisert) spaced (implied by Figs. 3-4 of Kim, showing spacing between 36 & 52, and screw holes in 14 aligned with screws (54) passing through 36 & 52) from a second aperture (2 of Geisert), and at least one retaining assembly (3-11, 14 of Geisert) that includes a first retaining assembly (3-11, 14 of Geisert) aligned with the first aperture (as in Figs. 2-3 of Geisert) and a second retaining assembly (3-11, 14 of Geisert) aligned with the second aperture (as in Figs. 2-3 of Geisert), and further wherein the at least one coupling assembly (1 of Geisert) includes a first coupling assembly (1 of Geisert) coupled to a first side of the cooking appliance and a second coupling assembly (1 of Geisert) coupled to a second side of the cooking appliance (22, 32, 34 of Kim), the first coupling assembly configured to engage the first retaining assembly and the second coupling assembly configured to engage the second retaining assembly (as in Figs. 2-3 of Geisert).
Regarding claim 28, Kim teaches a storage assembly (13) having cabinets (13) disposed adjacent to the support structure (14), wherein a front surface of each of the cabinets is flush with a front surface (i.e., front surface of 22) of the cooking appliance (22, 32, 34) (implied by Fig. 4, showing front edge of the support structure (14) flush with the front surface of 22; and by Fig. 1, showing the front of the support structure (14) flush with the front surface of the cabinets (13)).
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (20020050491) & Geisert (1247258) in view of Iwata (4720622). Kim as modified teaches the structure substantially as claimed, including a cooking appliance (22, 32, & 34 of Kim) having a bottom surface (i.e., lower surface of 40); but fail(s) to teach a guide rail or guiding feature. However, Iwata teaches securing means (60, 101, & K in Fig. 7 Annotated) comprising a telescoping guide rail (60) selectively coupled to the bottom surface (19) of a cooking appliance (11); and a guiding feature (K) engaging the telescoping guide rail and configured to move between opposing ends of the telescoping guide rail (Figs. 6-7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add securing means, as taught by Iwata, to the system of Kim as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to strengthen the connection between the appliance & the wall.
PNG
media_image2.png
478
534
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 29 & & 31-42 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/23/26 regarding claims 21 & 23-28 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Said arguments have been addressed in the prior art rejection above.
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