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 § 112
1. 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 1-19 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. With respect to claims 1, 14, and 18, the claims recite the hinge support being hidden from view when the refrigerated cabinet is in a closed configuration. However claims 1, 14 and 18, only set forth the subcombination of the hinge and do not positively claim the cabinet nor the door. Thus it is unclear if the limitation regarding the hinge support being hidden from view when the cabinet is closed is part of the positively claimed invention or an intended use limitation thereby rendering the claim indefinite and the metes and bounds of patent protection being sought by application unascertainable. Furthermore regarding claims 3, 9, 11, 12, 15, 16 and 19 the claims positively recite the door (e.g. claim 3 recites the door thickness; claim 15 recites “supporting a weight of the mounted door comprising a panel and a frame” etc.) however the preamble of the claims is only claiming the hinge not the combination of the door and the hinge. Thus the metes and bounds of the protection sought is unclear. Claims 2, 4-8, 10, 13, and 17 are rejected for being dependent on claims 1 and 14.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. 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.
3. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN110374436 A (CN ‘436) in further in view of US 2019/0368247 A1 (Carbone).
With respect to claim 1, CN ‘436 shows a refrigerated cabinet hinge (Fig.2), comprising: a hinge support (2, Fig.2, Fig.9) mounted on an inner surface of a refrigerated cabinet (inner front surface of cabinet 1), the hinge support (2) comprising a planar portion (Fig.5), a linkage mechanism (5, Fig.4) comprising at least one pivot arm (51, 52, 53, Fig.7), the linkage mechanism comprising a proximal end and a distal end, the linkage mechanism (5) configured to rotatably attach to the hinge support (2) at the distal end; and a hinge bracket (4, Fig.7, Fig.2) configured to rotatably attach to the proximal end of the linkage mechanism (5), the linkage mechanism comprising a rotation shaft (Fig.3, Fig.6) of a mounted door articulating out of the refrigerated cabinet, wherein the hinge support (2) and the hinge bracket (4) fold on top of each other in the closed configuration (Fig.3).
With respect to claim 1, CN ‘436 shows the hinge bracket is hidden in a recess of the door (Fig.2) but doesn’t show the refrigerated cabinet in the closed position and thus doesn’t show the hinge support being hidden from view when the cabinet is closed.
Carbone shows a refrigerated cabinet hinge (202, Fig.3, Fig.4), the hinge support (204) being hidden from view when the refrigerator cabinet is in closed configuration (Fig.2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to hide the hinge support of CN ‘436 from view in the closed configuration of the cabinet, such as taught by Carbone, in order to provide aesthetically pleasing outer appearance of the refrigerated cabinet when the door is closed.
With respect to claim 2, the combination (CN ‘436) teaches wherein the hinge bracket (4, FIg.2) has a thickness configured to support a weight of the mounted door (3) comprising a panel (front panel of door 3, FIg.2) and a frame (inner frame of door Fig.1, Fig.2).
With respect to claim 3, the combination (CN ‘436) teaches wherein the hinge bracket (4) has a thickness supporting a mounted door (3). Modified CN ‘436 doesn’t explicitly disclose the thickness of the door is between 10mm to 50mm. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make the mounted door have a thickness of approximately 10 mm to 50 mm, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
With respect to claim 4, the combination (CN ‘436) teaches wherein the linkage mechanism (5) articulates the hinge support (2) around the hinge bracket (4) for the mounted door to wrap-around the refrigerated cabinet (FIg.8, FIg.9, CN ‘436/ Fig.2 in Carbone).
With respect to claim 5, the combination (CN ‘436) teaches wherein the linkage mechanism (5) articulates outwards for the mounted door (3, Fig.2) to articulate out, when the mounted door is opened (Fig.2).
With respect to claim 6, the combination (CN ‘436) shows wherein the linkage mechanism (5) and the hinge bracket (4) articulate outwards (Fig.2) for the mounted door to articulate around the refrigerated cabinet (Fig.2, Fig.8).
With respect to claim 7, the combination (CN ‘436) teaches wherein the linkage mechanism (5) folds the hinge support (2) on top of the hinge bracket (4, Fig.3) for the mounted door (3) to be flush fitted with the refrigerated cabinet(1/ also see Carbone Fig.2, Fig.10A), when the mounted door (124, Fig.3 in Carbone) is closed (see Fig.2).
With respect to claim 8, the combination (CN ‘436) shows wherein the at least one pivot arm (52, 53) comprises a pair of articulating bars (52, 53).
With respect to claim 9, the combination (CN ‘436) teaches wherein the hinge bracket (4) movement relative to the hinge support (2) is limited to a stable configuration, wherein in the stable configuration the refrigerated cabinet is opened without a toppling risk (Fig.1, Fig.2, Fig.8).
With respect to claim 10, the combination (CN ‘436) shows wherein the at least one pivot arm (51, 52, 53) comprises a substantially flat surface (see top surface of each arm, Fig.7).
With respect to claim 11, the combination (CN ‘436) teaches wherein the hinge support (2, Fig.7) is mounted on a surface (front inner surface) of the refrigerated cabinet (1, Fig.2).
With respect to claim 12, the combination (CN ‘436) teaches wherein the hinge support (2, Fig.8) is at least partially embedded into a body (a) of the refrigerated cabinet (Fig.8, Fig.9, see abstract).
With respect to claim 13, the modification doesn’t teach the hinge comprises metal. Carbone teaches the hinge comprises a metal (steel, section 0045). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make the hinge parts out of metal, such as taught Carbone, to provide a durable and sturdy material to support the door.
With respect to claim 14, CN ‘436 shows a refrigerated cabinet hinge (Fig.4), comprising: a hinge support (2, Fig.2) horizontally mounted on an inner surface of a refrigerated cabinet, the hinge support (2) comprising a planar portion (Fig.5); a linkage mechanism (5, FIg.2) comprising at least one pivot arm (51, 52, 53, FIg.7), the linkage mechanism (5) comprising a proximal end and a distal end, the linkage mechanism (5) configured to rotatably attach to the hinge support (2) at the distal end; and a hinge bracket (4, Fig.7) configured to rotatably attach to the proximal end of the linkage mechanism (5), the linkage mechanism (5) comprising a rotation shaft (see Fig.3-Fig.7) of a mounted door (3, Fig.2) articulating out of the refrigerated cabinet (1, Fig.6), wherein the hinge support (2) and the hinge bracket (4) fold on top of each other in the closed configuration (Fig.3).
With respect to claim 14, CN ‘436 shows the hinge bracket is hidden in a recess of the door (Fig.2) but doesn’t show the refrigerated cabinet in the closed position and thus doesn’t show the hinge support being hidden from view when the cabinet is closed.
Carbone shows a refrigerated cabinet hinge (202, Fig.3, Fig.4), the hinge support (204) being hidden from view when the refrigerator cabinet is in closed configuration (Fig.2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to hide the hinge support of CN ‘436 from view when the cabinet is closed, such as taught by Carbone, in order to provide aesthetically pleasing outer appearance of the refrigerated cabinet when the door is closed.
With respect to claim 15, the combination (CN ‘436) teaches wherein the hinge bracket (4, FIg.2) has a thickness supporting a weight of the mounted door (3) comprising a panel (front panel, FIg.2) and a frame (inner frame of door Fig.1, Fig.2), and wherein the hinge bracket (4) has a thickness. The combination doesn’t explicitly teach the thickness of the door is between 10mm to 50mm. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to make the mounted door have a thickness of approximately 10 mm to 50 mm, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
With respect to claim 16, the combination (CN ‘436) shows wherein the linkage mechanism (5, Fig.2) folds the hinge support (2) on top of the hinge bracket (4) for the mounted door (3) to wrap around the refrigerated cabinet (as shown in the cabinet in Fig.8 and Fig.9 of CN ‘436; and as shown in Fig.2 of Carbone), when the refrigerated cabinet is in the closed configuration (Fig.2, Carbone), the door (124) being flush fitted within an exterior housing of the refrigerated cabinet (108, FIg.2, Fig.3).
With respect to claim 17, the combination (CN ‘436) shows wherein the linkage mechanism (5, Fig.2) and the hinge bracket (4, Fig.2) articulate outwards for the mounted door (3) to articulate, when the mounted door (3) is opened (Fig.2).
With respect to claim 18, CN ‘436 shows a refrigerated cabinet hinge (Fig.2, Fig.3), comprising: a hinge support (2, Fig.2) mounted on a vertical edge of a refrigerated cabinet (1, FIg.2), the hinge support (2) comprising a structure comprising a vertical portion (middle section between the horizontal top and bottom flanges, Fig.4) and a horizontal portion (top portion); a linkage mechanism (5, FIg.4) comprising at least one pivot arm (51, 52, 53, Fig.7); the linkage mechanism (5) comprising a proximal end and a distal end, the linkage mechanism (5) configured to rotatably attach to the hinge support (2) at the distal end; and a hinge bracket (4, FIg.7) configured to rotatably attach to the proximal end of the linkage mechanism (5), the hinge bracket (4) comprising a hinge pin (see pins at proximal end of 51 and 52, Fig.7) that serves as a rotation shaft of a mounted door (3) articulating out of the refrigerated cabinet (1, FIg.2), wherein the horizontal portion (top flange of 2, FIg.3) of the hinge support (2) and the hinge bracket (4) are configured to fold on top of each other in the closed configuration (Fig.3).
With respect to claim 18, CN ‘436 shows the hinge is at a top end of the cabinet not the bottom. CN ‘436 shows the hinge bracket is hidden in a recess of the door (Fig.2) but doesn’t show the refrigerated cabinet in the closed position and thus doesn’t show the hinge support being hidden from view when the cabinet is closed.
Carbone teaches a pair of hinges (200, 202) one attached at the top and the other attached at the bottom of the cabinet having similar structure (paragraph 0044). Carbone teaches the hinge support (204) being hidden from view when the refrigerator cabinet is in closed configuration (Fig.2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the cabinet of CN ‘436 with a bottom hinge similar to the top hinge, such as taught by Carbone, in order to support the bottom of the door and result in uniform support and opening and closing of the door. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to hide the hinge support of CN ‘436 from view such as taught by Carbone, in order to provide aesthetically pleasing outer appearance of the refrigerated cabinet when the door is closed.
With respect to claim 19, the combination (CN ‘436) teaches wherein the hinge bracket (4, FIg.2) has a thickness supporting a weight of the mounted door (3) comprising a panel (front panel, FIg.2) and a frame (inner frame of door Fig.1, Fig.2), and wherein the hinge bracket (4) has a thickness supporting the mounted door thickness. The combination doesn’t explicitly teach the thickness of the door is between 10mm to 50mm. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to make the mounted door have a thickness of approximately 10 mm to 50 mm, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
With respect to claim 20, CN ‘436 shows a refrigerated cabinet (1, Fig.1), comprising: a housing (1); and a cabinet hinge (Fig.2-FIg.4), comprising: a hinge support (2, FIg.2) mounted on the refrigerated cabinet (1), the hinge support (2) comprising a planar portion; a linkage mechanism (5, Fig.2) comprising at least one pivot arm (51, 52, 53, FIg.7), the linkage mechanism (5) comprising a proximal end and a distal end, the linkage mechanism (5) configured to rotatably attach to the hinge support (2, FIg.2) at the distal end; and a hinge bracket (4, FIg.2) configured to rotatably attach to the proximal end of the linkage mechanism (5), the linkage mechanism (5) comprising a rotation shaft (Fig.3-Fig.7) of a mounted door (3) articulating out of the refrigerated cabinet (1), wherein the hinge support (2) and the hinge bracket (4) fold on top of each other in the closed configuration (Fig.3).
With respect to claim 20, CN ‘436 shows the hinge bracket is hidden in a recess of the door (Fig.2, Fig.9) but doesn’t show the refrigerated cabinet in the closed position and thus doesn’t show the hinge support being hidden from view when the cabinet is closed.
Carbone shows a refrigerated cabinet hinge (202, Fig.3, Fig.4), the hinge support (204) being hidden from view when the refrigerator cabinet is in closed configuration (Fig.2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to hide the hinge support of CN ‘436 from view in the closed configuration of the cabinet, such as taught by Carbone, in order to provide aesthetically pleasing outer appearance of the refrigerated cabinet when the door is closed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
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 HIWOT E TEFERA whose telephone number is (571)270-3320. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6PM.
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 5712703742. 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.
/HIWOT E TEFERA/Examiner, Art Unit 3637