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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1 (figs. 1-10) in the reply filed on 3/5/26 is acknowledged. Applicant submits that claims 1-10 are drawn to the elected group.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the term “can.” Noting that “through which the convex part can pass” is not a positive limitation but only requires the ability to so perform. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3 and 5-6 are 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.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the convex part" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if “the convex part” is one of the “at least one convex part” previously recited. It is unclear if “the convex part” is the sole part or at least one of the convex parts that helically extends about the rotation axis of the lock member? As written, the scope of the claim is unclear.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the rotation axis" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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) 1, 3-4 and 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 9,067,514 to Oh et al.
Regarding claim 1, Oh ‘514 discloses a slide lock device for a slide device, wherein the slide device comprises a rail 110 and a slider 120 slidably supported on the rail 110, the rail being provided with multiple locking holes 112 arranged in an extension direction of the rail, the slide lock device comprises a casing 131 joined to the slide 120, at least one lock member 133/133a supported by the casing to be rotatable between a release position and a lock position, an urging member 134 urging the lock member 133/133a toward the lock position, and an operating member 135 displaceably supported by the casing 131 and contacting the lock member 133/133a, the lock member comprises at least one convex part 133 configured to be engaged with the locking holes 112 (fig. 5) when the lock member 133/133a is in the lock position and to be disengaged from the locking holes 112 (fig. 6) when the lock member 133/133a is in the release position, and when the operating member 135 is moved from an initial position to a post-operation position, the operating member 135 presses the lock member 133/133a and moves the lock member from the lock position to the release position (col. 4, lines 30-55).
Regarding claim 3, Oh ‘514 discloses, wherein the convex part 133 extends helically about a rotation axis 133a of the lock member, and the casing 131 is provided with a helical groove (between walls 131b) for slidably receiving the convex part 133, as best understood.
Regarding claim 4, Oh ‘514 discloses, wherein the convex part 133 protrudes from the casing 131 when the lock member 133/133a is in the lock position, and the convex part 133 is positioned within the casing 131 when the lock member 133133a is in the release position.
Regarding claim 7, Oh ‘514 discloses, wherein the slider 120 includes an upper wall and a pair of side walls 121 extending downward from the upper wall, the casing 130 is joined to a bottom surface of the upper wall and is disposed between the pair of side walls (figs 5-6), and parts of the pair of side walls 121 opposing the casing 130 are formed with an opening 124 through which the convex part can pass.
Regarding claim 8, Oh ‘514 discloses, wherein the operating member 135 protrudes above the upper wall (via 135c as part of the operating member 135) by passing through an operation hole 123 formed in the upper wall (fig. 1).
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.
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 9,067,514 to Oh et al.
Concerning method claims 9-10 in view of the structure disclosed by Oh ‘514, the method of operating the device would have been obvious, since it is the normal and logical manner in which the device could be used.
Regarding claim 9, Oh ‘514 discloses an assembly method for a slide device, wherein the slide device comprises a rail 110, a slider 120 slidably supported on the rail, and a slide lock device 130 provided on the slider 120 and configured to be engaged with the rail 110, the rail being provided with multiple locking holes 112 arranged in an extension direction of the rail, the slide lock device comprises a casing 131/135 joined to the slider 120, at least one lock member 133 supported by the casing 131/135 to be rotatable between a release position and a lock position, an urging member 134 urging the lock member 133 toward the lock position, and an operating member 135b displaceably supported by the casing 131/135 and contacting the lock member 133, and the lock member 133 comprises at least one convex part (end portion that engages in openings 112 – figs 5-6) configured to be engaged with the locking holes 112 when the lock member 133 is in the lock position (fig. 5) and to be disengaged from the locking holes 112 when the lock member 133 is in the release position (fig. 6), the assembly method comprising: a step of assembling the slide lock device 130 by mounting the lock member 133, the urging member 134, and the operating member 135b to the casing 131; a step of mounting the casing 131 to the slider 120; and a step of mounting the slider 120 to the rail 110.
Regarding claim 10, Oh ‘514 discloses, wherein the casing includes multiple casing members 131/135, and the step of assembling the slide lock device comprises: a step of mounting the urging member 134 to the lock member 133; a step of making one of the multiple casing members 131 support the lock member 133 to which the urging member 134 is mounted and the operating member 135; and a step of joining the multiple casing members 131/135 to each other.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 is 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.
Claims 5-6 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and will be used in subsequent office action rejections.
The list of supports is as follows: US-20220080862-A1 OR US-20170305305-A1 OR US-11358498-B2 OR US-6959900-B2 OR US-5950978-A OR JP-S63192138-U.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MONICA E MILLNER whose telephone number is (571)270-7507. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4:00pm.
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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.
/MONICA E MILLNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Prosecution Insights