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 .
This is the First Office action on the Merits from the examiner in charge of this application.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species I: Figs. 1-4 and 5-7 in the reply filed on 2/18/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that (i) the examiner has not discussed nor advanced any reasons leading to the to the conclusion that the disclosed relation does not prevent restriction; and (ii) the search and examination of all claims can be made without serious burden. This is not found persuasive because as clearly stated in the restriction requirement mailed on 12/18/2025: “the claims to the different species recite the mutually exclusive characteristics of such species’, and “the inventions require a different field of search (such as searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or search queries)”.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 4, 7-9, 11, and 16-19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 2/18/2026.
Regarding claim 4: the limitation recited therein of rotation of the driving member in a first direction corresponds with “rotation” (emphasis added) of the driven member in a second direction is drawn to a non-elected species.
Regarding claim 16: the recitation in lines 4-5 of “wherein the housing includes an inner surface defining a first plurality of threads (emphasis added) extending into the cavity” is drawn to a non-elected species.
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 1-3, 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 1: since the driven member is a part of the door adjustment feature, the recitation in claim 1, lines 7-8 of “the driven member is slidably movable relative to the door adjustment feature” renders the claim indefinite for failing to clearly define the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Claims 3, 5-6 are rejected as being dependent on, and failing to cure the deficiencies of, rejected claim 1.
Therefore, claim 1 and its dependent claims will be examined as best understood or so far as definite.
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, 5, 10, 12, and 14-15, as best understood or so far as definite, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2019/0301789 to Kim.
Kim discloses (Claim 1). An appliance, comprising: a door adjustment feature 60 (Figs. 8-23) including: a housing 61 defining a cavity; a driven member 64 slidably movable within the cavity of the housing 61; and a driving member 413,414 rotatably engaged with the driven member 64 and configured to adjust a position of the driven member 64 relative to the housing 61; and a bracket 51,52 coupled with the door adjustment feature 60, wherein the driven member 64 is slidably movable relative to the door adjustment feature to a position where the bracket 51,52 abuts the door adjustment feature (Fig. 14) and a position where the bracket is spaced from the door adjustment feature (Fig. 15); (Claim 2). The appliance of claim 1, wherein the driven member 64 includes a first plurality of engagement members 641 (Fig. 12) engaged with a second plurality of engagement members 414 of the driving member; (Claim 3). The appliance of claim 1, wherein the bracket 51,52 includes a horizontal member 52 and first and second arms (defined by 51), and wherein the horizontal member 52 extends orthogonally from the first and second arms; (Claim 5). The appliance of claim 1, wherein the door adjustment feature includes a cover 62 defining first and second apertures.
PNG
media_image1.png
796
870
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Claim 10). An appliance, comprising: a door adjustment assembly 60 including: a housing 61 defining a cavity; a driven member 64 positioned within the cavity; and a driving member 413,414 rotatably engaged with the driven member 64, wherein a portion 413 of the driving member extends from the housing 61; and a bracket 52 coupled with the door adjustment assembly 60 at a first end, wherein the bracket 52 is adjustable to abut the housing 61 of the door adjustment assembly 60 in a first condition (Fig. 14) and be spaced apart from the housing 61 of the door adjustment assembly in a second condition (Fig. 15); (Claim 12). The appliance of claim 10, wherein an actuating portion 673 of the driven member extends from the housing 61 and is coupled with the bracket; (Claim 14). The appliance of claim 10, further comprising: a track assembly 33,34 coupled with the bracket 52 via a drawer part 32, wherein the bracket 52 is moved in conjunction with a rail slide of the track assembly via drawer part 32; (Claim 15). The appliance of claim 10, wherein rotation of the driving member 413,414 in a first direction corresponds with movement of the driven member 64 in a first linear direction and rotation of the driving member in a second, opposite direction corresponds with movement of the driven member 64 in a second linear direction.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 10, 12-13, and 15, as best understood or so far as definite, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE 10012631 to Burattini.
Burattini discloses (Claim 1). An appliance, comprising: a door adjustment feature including: a housing 30 (Figs. 7-8) defining a cavity; a driven member 21,29 slidably movable within the cavity of the housing; and a driving member 26-28 rotatably engaged with the driven member 29 and configured to adjust a position of the driven member 29 relative to the housing 30; and a bracket 20 (Figs. 3-5) coupled with the door adjustment feature, wherein the driven member 29 is slidably movable relative to the door adjustment feature to a position where the bracket 20 abuts the door adjustment feature and a position where the bracket 20 is spaced from the door adjustment feature; (Claim 2). (Original) The appliance of claim 1, wherein the driven member includes a first plurality of engagement members 21e,27e,26f engaged with a second plurality of engagement members 28b,27d,26b of the driving member; (Claim 3). The appliance of claim 1, wherein the bracket 20 includes a horizontal member and first and second arms 20a (Fig. 5), and wherein the horizontal member extends orthogonally from the first and second arms; (Claim 5). The appliance of claim 1, wherein the door adjustment feature includes a cover 25 defining first and second apertures 25a-c; (Claim 10). An appliance, comprising: a door adjustment assembly including: a housing 30 defining a cavity; a driven member 21,29 positioned within the cavity; and a driving member 26-28 rotatably engaged with the driven member, wherein a portion 26a-28a of the driving member extends from the housing (such as shown in Fig. 6); and a bracket 20 coupled with the door adjustment assembly at a first end, wherein the bracket 20 is adjustable to abut the housing of the door adjustment assembly in a first condition and be spaced apart from the housing of the door adjustment assembly in a second condition; (Claim 12). The appliance of claim 10, wherein an actuating portion 21 of the driven member extends from the housing and is coupled with the bracket 20; (Claim 13). The appliance of claim 10, further comprising: a cover 25 coupled with the housing and defining a first aperture 25c and a second aperture 25a-b, wherein the first aperture 25c is configured to at least partially receive the driven member 21 and the second aperture 25a-b is configured to at least partially receive the driving member 26-28; (Claim 15). The appliance of claim 10, wherein rotation of the driving member 26-28 in a first direction corresponds with movement of the driven member 21,29 in a first linear direction and rotation of the driving member 26-28 in a second, opposite direction corresponds with movement of the driven member 21,29 in a second linear direction.
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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of US 2019/0120563 to Nguyen et al (hereinafter Nguyen).
Kim discloses all the elements as discussed above except for the limitations recited in claim 6.
However, Nguyen discloses (such as shown in Figs. 3 and 6) a housing 5b defining a cavity; a cover 5a; wherein the cover 5a includes clip apertures 15 configured to receive engagement arms 14 of the housing to couple the housing 5b with the cover 5a.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of Nguyen, to modify Kim to include the limitations in claim 6 of wherein the cover includes clip apertures configured to receive engagement arms of the housing to couple the housing with the cover with a reasonable expectation of success in order to increase the overall versatility of the appliance.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, and all show structures similar to various elements of applicant’s disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HANH VAN TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-6868. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:30.
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.
HVT
April 2, 2026
/HANH V TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637