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 .
Application Status
Claims 41-61 are pending;
Claims 41, 48, 52 and 61 are currently amended; claims 42-47 and 49-51 were previously presented; claims 52-61 are withdrawn
Claims 41-51 are rejected herein.
Information Disclosure Statement
As of the date of this action, an information disclosure statement (IDS) has been filed on 04/17/2024 and reviewed by the Examiner.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 41-51 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the current interpretation of Kim ‘305 as necessitated by the amendment to the claims. The Applicant correctly understood the rejection based on reference Kim ‘305 as set forth in the non-final office action mailed on February 11, 2026 and presented arguments addressing that rejection in the remarks on page 2.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 48 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 41 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. In light of the disclosure, it is unclear how a plurality of spring-loaded suspension blocks (110) configured to be attached to the bottom supports, and receive the edges of the first row of frames in a vertical direction. As shown in Fig. 3B, the frames appear to be outside of the blocks. Furthermore, pages 14-16 address how the frames are aligned in all directions and fails to disclose receiving the frames in a vertical direction.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 41-47 and 49-51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim (U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 20200205305 A1).
Regarding claim 41, Kim a kit for aligning and fixing within a first tolerance range a support structure for a tiled display wall composed of a plurality of display modules wherein the support structure comprises:
a plurality of channel profiles (R) configured to be arranged vertically and fixed to a wall or a structure,
a plurality of frame assemblies (Fig. 9) comprising at least one frame (460, 470), wherein each frame is configured to receive at least one display module (20) in a depth direction, and each frame has an edge, the plurality of frame assemblies are configured to be arranged in a first row of frames, wherein the plurality of frame assemblies is configured to be arranged within a first tolerance range (tolerance required for insertion of 500), wherein the kit comprises:
a plurality of bottom supports (430 bottom) configured to be aligned within a second tolerance range larger than the first tolerance range [capable as shown in Figs. 6A-6B when in titled configuration], and configured to be mounted on the channel profiles,
a plurality of top supports (100 top) configured to be mounted on the channel profiles, and
supporting means (200, 300, 400 bottom) comprising a plurality of spring-loaded suspension blocks (450) configured to be attached to the bottom supports (430 bottom), and receive the edges of the first row of frames in a vertical direction, such that, when the frame assemblies are laid on the supporting means, the supporting means receive the edges of the first row of frames and support the frame assemblies while aligning and fixing the frame assemblies, within the first tolerance range, to the top supports (see Figs. 5-10 for configuration).
Regarding claim 42, Kim teaches top fixation means (fastening flanges and 420 top) provided in the top supports, the top fixation means further comprising means to adjust at least one of the horizontal, the vertical and the depth position of the upper portion of the first row of frames with respect to a reference plane, or further comprising bottom fixation means (431 bottom) provided in the bottom supports (430 bottom), the bottom fixation means further comprising means to adjust at least one of the horizontal, the vertical and the depth position of the lower portion of the first row of frames with respect to a reference plane.
Regarding claim 43, Kim teaches the bottom fixation means comprise a bottom fixation point (central reference point of 420 bottom) for fixing the bottom portion of the first row of frames to the channel profile.
Regarding claim 44, Kim teaches the bottom fixation point (central reference point at 420) is provided in a fixation frame (430 bottom) comprising a slot (slot of 430 receiving 420), wherein at least one of the position of the bottom fixation point is configured to be adjusted within the frame for fixing the horizontal and/or vertical position of the first row of frames and/or wherein the depth of the fixation point is configured to be adjusted for fixing the depth of the first row of frames (see Fig. 6A and 6B for configuration).
Regarding claim 46, Kim teaches the supporting means (430 bottom) are coupled to the bottom supports, wherein the coupling mechanism (411) is a hooking mechanism.
Regarding claim 47, Kim teaches the top fixation means comprises a top fixation point (central point at 420 top) for fixing the upper portion of the first row of frames to the channel profiles, and/or wherein the top fixation point is provided in a fixation frame comprising a slot, wherein the position of the top fixation point is configured to be adjusted within the frame, and/or wherein the top fixation point is further configured to adjust the depth of the upper portion of the row of frames (see Figs. 6A-6B for configuration).
Regarding claim 49, Kim teaches a support structure for a tiled display wall, the support structure comprising:
a plurality of channel profiles (R) configured to be arranged vertically and fixed to a wall or a structure [capable/intended use],
a plurality of frame assemblies (460, 470) comprising at least one frame, wherein each frame is configured to receive at least one display module (20), the plurality of frame assemblies are configured to be arranged in a row of frames,
and further comprising the kit according to claim 41.
Regarding claim 50, Kim teaches the frames are provided with horizontally slotted holes (holes of 410 and/or 500) in the upper and/or lower portions for fixing the frames into the top and/or bottom supports, and/or wherein the slotted holes are provided in the corners of the frames.
Regarding claim 51, Kim teaches wherein individual frame assemblies are fixed to each other with connection plates (plate members defining the frames 460, 470) provided along the edges.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim 48 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 20190191574 A1).
Regarding claim 48, Kim teaches the kit. However, Kim is silent to disclose a ruler. The Examiner takes the official notice that providing a rigid ruler comprising a spirit level with an installation kit is old and well known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the invention of Kim having a ruler comprising a spirit level, such that, the rigid ruler being configured to mechanically transfer the orientation of an aligned upper or lower row of frames, and the spirit level being configured to provide a spirit level reference of an aligned upper or lower row of frames to align the row of frames with respect to the aligned upper or lower row of frames, and/or wherein the spirit level is an analog or digital spirit level. The motivation would have been to facilitate the installation of the display system.
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 MUHAMMAD IJAZ whose telephone number is (571)272-6280. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11:00 am-10:00 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 5712728227. 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.
MUHAMMAD IJAZ
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3631
/Muhammad Ijaz/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631
Prosecution Insights