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
Claim 26 objected to because of the following informalities: In lines 1-2, the recitation “a connecting” should be “a door connecting”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 15, 18, and 27-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 8,366,220 B2 (Oberhauser) in view of US 9,851,137 B2 (Tenbarge) and US 2013/0257238 A1 (Herron).
With respect to claim 15: Oberhauser discloses a cooling device, comprising: a cabinet (“appliance body” @ col. 3, line 10); a door (“door” @ col. 3, line 12) pivotably coupled to said cabinet (via the “multi-joint hinge” that includes fittings 10, 20) and movable between a closed position for at least partly closing said cabinet (Figs. 3-4, “the closing position of the closure element” @ col. 3, line 33) and an open position for allowing access to said cabinet (Figs. 1-2, “the closure element and hence also the hinge is opened” @ col. 3, lines 53-54); a hinge assembly (the “multi-joint hinge” that includes fittings 10, 20) for moving said door between the open position and the closed position; and a conduit configuration (cable 100 and the holding members 20, 30 holding the cable 100 on the fittings 10, 20) disposed on said hinge assembly and conducting a flexible conduit (cable 100) from said cabinet to said door, wherein said conduit configuration is configured to be movable between a serpentine position in which said conduit configuration is folded on said hinge assembly when said door is at the closed position (Figs. 3-4) and an elongated position in which said conduit configuration extends from said cabinet to said door when said door is at the open position (Figs. 1-2).
Oberhauser does not disclose “said conduit configuration further contains a chain structure having a plurality of chain links disposed in a sequential manner such that said flexible conduit is passing through said chain links and is taking a shape harmoniously with said chain structure with respect to a movement of said hinge assembly” as claimed.
Tenbarge Figs. 3-6B and col. 6, line 29 to col. 8, line 14 show it is known in the refrigerator art to use a routing harness 322 in the form of a commercially-available cable carrier/chain made by Igus Inc. Such cable carrier/chain supports cooling, electrical, etc. lines for movement.
Herron Figs. 4A-5C and [0072] also disclose a cable carrier 63 from Igus, which is attached to hinge linkages 51, 52 via attachment members 63c.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Oberhauser’s fittings 10, 20 to have a cable carrier/chain from Igus attached thereto, with Oberhauser’s cable 100 extending through said cable carrier/chain, in order to enclose the cable 100 in a protective carrier and/or to make unwanted separation of the cable 100 and hinge more difficult (having cable 100 inside a cable carrier/chain makes removal more difficult compared to Oberhauser’s clips 32).
In such a modification, the cable carrier/chain meets “a chain structure” as claimed. The links making up the cable carrier/chain meet “a plurality of chain links disposed in sequential manner” as claimed.
With respect to claim 18: See Tenbarge Figs. 6A-6B. When door 308 is open, the routing harness 322 extends to an extended and lengthened configuration. When door 308 is closed, the routing harness 322 retracts to a serpentine configuration.
See Oberhauser Figs. 3-4. With Oberhauser’s hinge modified to include a cable chain like Tenbarge’s routing harness 322, it is obvious for the cable chain to have a serpentine configuration when the door is closed analogously to Tenbarge Fig. 6B. This makes obvious “wherein said conduit configuration and said chain structure are in a shape having two generally U-shaped regions, when said door is at the closed position” as claimed.
With respect to claim 27: Oberhauser discloses wherein said hinge assembly contains a cabinet engaging element (body fitting 10) attached in use to said cabinet, a door engaging element (door fitting 20) attached in use to said door and a jointed member (levers 12, 14) extending between said cabinet engaging element and said door engaging element.
With respect to claim 28: Oberhauser discloses wherein said jointed member is movable between a collapsed position in which said jointed member extends in a parallel way to a width direction of said cabinet when said door is at the closed position (Figs. 3-4) and an extended position in which said jointed member extending from said cabinet to said door when said door is at the open position (Figs. 1-2).
Claim(s) 16-17 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 8,366,220 B2 (Oberhauser) in view of US 9,851,137 B2 (Tenbarge) and US 2013/0257238 A1 (Herron) as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of US 9,551,399 B2 (Tseng).
With respect to claim 16: Oberhauser, as modified, does not meet “wherein said chain links include a first type chain link configured to have a restricted rotation in a first rotation direction in order for said conduit configuration to fold in a form of a general U-shape when a plurality of first type chain links is connected to each other” as claimed.
Tseng shows it is known in the cable chain art to have chain links that are easily assembled and disassembled in a manner that restricts the rotation direction of the chain link in a desired direction. By flipping the chain link around/over, the direction in which the chain link is restricted is selectable. E.G., Tseng Fig. 11 shows the lowermost chain member 1 allowing counter-clockwise rotation, with the reversed upper two chain members 1 allowing clockwise rotation. This feature of the chain members 1 enables the serpentine configuration of Tseng Fig. 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the cable chain on Oberhauser’s hinge to be made of Tseng’s chain members 1, in order to conform the cable chain to a serpentine shape on the hinge. Using Tseng’s chain members 1 makes it easy to shape the cable chain to the curvatures and movements of the cable 100 and/or hinge.
In the combination, a set of chain members 1 connected together and rotating in the same direction, to thereby form a U-shape (U-shapes like Oberhauser Figs. 2-4, Tenbarge Fig. 6B, and/or Tseng Fig. 1) meets “wherein said chain links include a first type chain link configured to have a restricted rotation in a first rotation direction in order for said conduit configuration to fold in a form of a general U-shape when a plurality of first type chain links is connected to each other” as claimed.
With respect to claim 17: The reversed chain members 1, forming a U-shape bending in the opposite direction, meets wherein said conduit configuration contains at least one second type chain link having a second rotation limiting member configured to have a restricted rotation in a second rotation direction which is opposite to the first rotation direction and at least one of said second type of chain link is provided between two of said first type chain links in order for said conduit configuration to fold in a way for said conduit configuration to have the serpentine position when said door is in the closed position.
With respect to claim 19: In the combination, Tseng makes obvious wherein each of said first type chain links contains a first rotation limiting member (stopping portion 162) configured to limit rotation of said first type chain links in the first rotation direction.
With respect to claim 20: In the combination, Tseng makes obvious wherein both of said first type chain links and said second type chain links have a link body (Tseng Figs. 2-3: main body portion of chain member 1) with a connection recess (first pivot unit 18) formed therein and a connection protrusion (second pivot unit 19), wherein said connection protrusion and said connection recess are sized and shaped to each other for connecting link bodies to each other.
Claim(s) 21-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 8,366,220 B2 (Oberhauser) in view of US 9,851,137 B2 (Tenbarge), US 2013/0257238 A1 (Herron), and US 9,551,399 B2 (Tseng) as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of US 2004/0250525 A1 (Kobayashi) or US 5,638,672 (Furukawa).
With respect to claim 21: Oberhauser, as modified, does not meet “further comprising a cabinet connecting member having a link connection portion, said conduit configuration is connected to said cabinet by means of said cabinet connecting member having said link connection portion in order to be connected to said link body” as claimed.
Kobayashi discloses connecting ends of a cable chain with support members 20 and 30.
Furukawa Fig. 1 shows attaching a cable chain link member 12 to an object W1, W2 using holes 36, 40 and screws B1, B2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the cable chain to be connected to the cabinet using Kobayashi’s member 20 or 30 or using Furukawa’s holes 36, 40 and screws B1, B2 – in order to enclose and guide the conduit/cable to the cabinet.
This meets further comprising a cabinet connecting member (Kobayashi’s member 20 or 30 or the last link having the holes 36, 40) having a link connection portion (portion connected to the remaining cable chain), said conduit configuration is connected to said cabinet by means of said cabinet connecting member having said link connection portion in order to be connected to said link body.
With respect to claim 22: Oberhauser, as modified, meets wherein said link connection portion has at least one of a first engaging opening (the openings in the final link - like 20a of Furukawa and/or 18 of Tseng) formed therein and a first engaging projection (Kobayashi’s convex portions 21d, 21e or the projections on the final link – like 19 of Tseng and 22a/b of Furukawa) for connecting to said link body.
With respect to claim 23: Oberhauser, as modified, meets wherein said link connection portion has a slit formed therein for said flexible conduit to be passed through (Kobayashi Figs. 5-6 or Furukawa Fig. 1: slit/opening in the final link that enables the conduit to pass into the cable chain).
With respect to claim 24: Oberhauser, as modified, meets wherein said cabinet connecting member has a fixing portion adjacent to said link connection portion for connecting to said cabinet (Kobayashi Figs. 5-6: portion having holes 23 or Furukawa Fig. 1: portion including holes 36, 40 for screws B1, B2).
With respect to claim 25: Oberhauser, as modified, meets wherein said fixing portion has a screw hole (Kobayashi Figs. 5-6: holes 23 or Furukawa Fig. 1: holes 36, 40 for screws B1, B2) formed therein for screwing said fixing portion on said cabinet.
With respect to claim 26: Oberhauser, as modified, meets further comprising a door connecting member (the other of Kobayashi’s member 20 or 30 or the final link at the opposite end of the chain as the portion connected to the cabinet) having at least one of a second engaging opening formed therein for connecting to said link body (Kobayashi’s holding portion 32a or Furukawa’s holes 20a or Tseng’s holes 18), said conduit configuration is connected to said door by means of said door connecting member.
Claim(s) 15, 18, and 27-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,091,943 B2 (Ferreira) in view of US 9,851,137 B2 (Tenbarge) and US 2013/0257238 A1 (Herron).
With respect to claim 15: Ferreira discloses a cooling device (appliance 16), comprising: a cabinet (cabinet 34); a door (door panel 14) pivotably coupled to said cabinet and movable between a closed position for at least partly closing said cabinet and an open position for allowing access to said cabinet; a hinge assembly (articulating hinge 12) for moving said door between the open position and the closed position; and a conduit configuration (articulating wire chase 10) disposed on said hinge assembly and conducting a flexible conduit (flexible conduit 76) from said cabinet to said door, wherein said conduit configuration is configured to be movable between a serpentine position in which said conduit configuration is folded on said hinge assembly when said door is at the closed position (Fig. 8) and an elongated position in which said conduit configuration extends from said cabinet to said door when said door is at the open position (Fig. 11).
Ferreira does not disclose “said conduit configuration further contains a chain structure having a plurality of chain links disposed in a sequential manner such that said flexible conduit is passing through said chain links and is taking a shape harmoniously with said chain structure with respect to a movement of said hinge assembly” as claimed.
Tenbarge Figs. 3-6B and col. 6, line 29 to col. 8, line 14 show it is known in the refrigerator art to use a routing harness 322 in the form of a commercially-available cable carrier/chain made by Igus Inc. Such cable carrier/chain supports cooling, electrical, etc. lines for movement.
Herron Figs. 4A-5C and [0072] also disclose a cable carrier 63 from Igus, which is attached to hinge linkages 51, 52 via attachment members 63c.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Ferreira’s hinge 12 to have a cable carrier/chain from Igus attached thereto, with Ferreira’s conduit 76 extending through said cable carrier/chain, as an obvious variation of and/or functional equivalent to Ferreira’s articulating wire chase 10.
In such a modification, the cable carrier/chain meets “a chain structure” as claimed. The links making up the cable carrier/chain meet “a plurality of chain links disposed in sequential manner” as claimed.
With respect to claim 18: See Tenbarge Figs. 6A-6B. When door 308 is open, the routing harness 322 extends to an extended and lengthened configuration. When door 308 is closed, the routing harness 322 retracts to a serpentine configuration.
See Ferreira Fig. 8. With hinge 12 modified to include a cable chain like Tenbarge’s routing harness 322, it is obvious for the cable chain to have a serpentine configuration when the door is closed analogously to Tenbarge Fig. 6B and/or by following a path similar to conduit 76 in Ferreira Fig. 8. This makes obvious “wherein said conduit configuration and said chain structure are in a shape having two generally U-shaped regions, when said door is at the closed position” as claimed.
With respect to claim 27: Ferreira discloses wherein said hinge assembly contains a cabinet engaging element (cabinet engaging member 32) attached in use to said cabinet, a door engaging element (door engaging member 28) attached in use to said door and a jointed member (members 48, 50) extending between said cabinet engaging element and said door engaging element.
With respect to claim 28: Ferreira discloses wherein said jointed member is movable between a collapsed position in which said jointed member extends in a parallel way to a width direction of said cabinet when said door is at the closed position (Fig. 8) and an extended position in which said jointed member extending from said cabinet to said door when said door is at the open position (Fig. 11).
Claim(s) 16-17 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,091,943 B2 (Ferreira) in view of US 9,851,137 B2 (Tenbarge) and US 2013/0257238 A1 (Herron) as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of US 9,551,399 B2 (Tseng).
With respect to claim 16: Ferreira, as modified, does not meet “wherein said chain links include a first type chain link configured to have a restricted rotation in a first rotation direction in order for said conduit configuration to fold in a form of a general U-shape when a plurality of first type chain links is connected to each other” as claimed.
Tseng shows it is known in the cable chain art to have chain links that are easily assembled and disassembled in a manner that restricts the rotation direction of the chain link in a desired direction. By flipping the chain link around/over, the direction in which the chain link is restricted is selectable. E.G., Tseng Fig. 11 shows the lowermost chain member 1 allowing counter-clockwise rotation, with the reversed upper two chain members 1 allowing clockwise rotation. This feature of the chain members 1 enables the serpentine configuration of Tseng Fig. 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the cable chain on Ferreira’s hinge to be made of Tseng’s chain members 1, in order to conform the cable chain to a serpentine shape on the hinge. Using Tseng’s chain members 1 makes it easy to shape the cable chain to the curvatures and movements of the cable 100 and/or hinge.
In the combination, a set of chain members 1 connected together and rotating in the same direction, to thereby form a U-shape (U-shapes like Ferreira Fig. 8, Tenbarge Fig. 6B, and/or Tseng Fig. 1) meets “wherein said chain links include a first type chain link configured to have a restricted rotation in a first rotation direction in order for said conduit configuration to fold in a form of a general U-shape when a plurality of first type chain links is connected to each other” as claimed.
With respect to claim 17: The reversed chain members 1, forming a U-shape bending in the opposite direction, meets wherein said conduit configuration contains at least one second type chain link having a second rotation limiting member configured to have a restricted rotation in a second rotation direction which is opposite to the first rotation direction and at least one of said second type of chain link is provided between two of said first type chain links in order for said conduit configuration to fold in a way for said conduit configuration to have the serpentine position when said door is in the closed position.
With respect to claim 19: In the combination, Tseng makes obvious wherein each of said first type chain links contains a first rotation limiting member (stopping portion 162) configured to limit rotation of said first type chain links in the first rotation direction.
With respect to claim 20: In the combination, Tseng makes obvious wherein both of said first type chain links and said second type chain links have a link body (Tseng Figs. 2-3: main body portion of chain member 1) with a connection recess (first pivot unit 18) formed therein and a connection protrusion (second pivot unit 19), wherein said connection protrusion and said connection recess are sized and shaped to each other for connecting link bodies to each other.
Claim(s) 21-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,091,943 B2 (Ferreira) in view of US 9,851,137 B2 (Tenbarge), US 2013/0257238 A1 (Herron), and US 9,551,399 B2 (Tseng) as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of US 2004/0250525 A1 (Kobayashi) or US 5,638,672 (Furukawa).
With respect to claim 21: Ferreira, as modified, does not meet “further comprising a cabinet connecting member having a link connection portion, said conduit configuration is connected to said cabinet by means of said cabinet connecting member having said link connection portion in order to be connected to said link body” as claimed.
Kobayashi discloses connecting ends of a cable chain with support members 20 and 30.
Furukawa Fig. 1 shows attaching a cable chain link member 12 to an object W1, W2 using holes 36, 40 and screws B1, B2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the cable chain to be connected to the cabinet using Kobayashi’s member 20 or 30 or using Furukawa’s holes 36, 40 and screws B1, B2 – in order to enclose and guide the conduit/cable to the cabinet.
This meets further comprising a cabinet connecting member (Kobayashi’s member 20 or 30 or the last link having the holes 36, 40) having a link connection portion (portion connected to the remaining cable chain), said conduit configuration is connected to said cabinet by means of said cabinet connecting member having said link connection portion in order to be connected to said link body.
With respect to claim 22: Ferreira, as modified, meets wherein said link connection portion has at least one of a first engaging opening (the openings in the final link - like 20a of Furukawa and/or 18 of Tseng) formed therein and a first engaging projection (Kobayashi’s convex portions 21d, 21e or the projections on the final link – like 19 of Tseng and 22a/b of Furukawa) for connecting to said link body.
With respect to claim 23: Ferreira, as modified, meets wherein said link connection portion has a slit formed therein for said flexible conduit to be passed through (Kobayashi Figs. 5-6 or Furukawa Fig. 1: slit/opening in the final link that enables the conduit to pass into the cable chain).
With respect to claim 24: Ferreira, as modified, meets wherein said cabinet connecting member has a fixing portion adjacent to said link connection portion for connecting to said cabinet (Kobayashi Figs. 5-6: portion having holes 23 or Furukawa Fig. 1: portion including holes 36, 40 for screws B1, B2).
With respect to claim 25: Ferreira, as modified, meets wherein said fixing portion has a screw hole (Kobayashi Figs. 5-6: holes 23 or Furukawa Fig. 1: holes 36, 40 for screws B1, B2) formed therein for screwing said fixing portion on said cabinet.
With respect to claim 26: Ferreira, as modified, meets further comprising a door connecting member (the other of Kobayashi’s member 20 or 30 or the final link at the opposite end of the chain as the portion connected to the cabinet) having at least one of a second engaging opening formed therein for connecting to said link body (Kobayashi’s holding portion 32a or Furukawa’s holes 20a or Tseng’s holes 18), said conduit configuration is connected to said door by means of said door connecting member.
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 ANDREW ROERSMA whose telephone number is (571)270-3185. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:00.
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.
/ANDREW ROERSMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637