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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, each projection having a rectangular shape must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 9-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Claim 9 recites that each projection can rotate greater than ninety degrees while at least partially in the associated locking section.
There is no disclosure regarding how is this achieved. Although the projection is disclosed as being capable of rotating more than 90 degrees (from the position shown in fig. 5A to the position shown in fig. 5C) it does not appear to be able to do so while at least partially in the locking section. On the other hand, it is the cover the one capable of rotating to a resting angle of more than 90 degrees while the projection is at least partially in the locking section (see Applicant’s par. [0013]).
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, 7-16 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.
In regard to claims 3 and 11, the claim is indefinite because there appears to be no proper antecedent basis for “a second non-vertical surface” since there is no “first” one in the precedent claim (claim 1 and 9 respectively). It appears that claim 3 should depend from claim 2 (and claim 11 from claim 10) which claims a first non-vertical surface, and so the claim will be interpreted as such.
In regard to claims 7 and 15, the claim is indefinite because it recites that rotation to the open position is restricted by contact between the projection and the non-vertical surface of the second wall, however, the assembly is being claimed as being configured to allow the cover to rotate between open and closed positions, thus rendering the scope of the claim unascertainable. It is assumed that what is intended to be claimed is that further rotation in the opening direction (rather than to the open position) is restricted by contact between the projection and the non-vertical surface of the second wall as disclosed by Applicant’s specification par. [0015].
In regard to claims 8 and 16, the claim is indefinite because it recites that rotation to the closed position is restricted by contact between the projection and a vertical surface…., however, the assembly is being claimed as being configured to allow the cover to rotate between open and closed positions, thus rendering the scope of the claim unascertainable. It is assumed that what is intended to be claimed is that further rotation in the closing direction (rather than to the closed position) is restricted by contact between the projection and a vertical surface … as disclosed by Applicant’s specification par. [0014].
In regard to claim 9, the claim is indefinite because it recites that each projection can rotate greater than ninety degrees while at least partially in the associated locking section.
It is unclear to the Examiner how can the projection rotate more than 90 degrees while at least partially in the associated locking section. Although the projection is capable of rotating more than 90 degrees (from the position shown in fig. 5A to the position shown in fig. 5C) it does not do so while at least partially in the locking section, thus rendering the scope of the claim unascertainable.
In regard to claim 12, the claim is indefinite because it recites that each projection has a rectangular shape, however, said rectangular shape is not shown in the drawings. Furthermore, par. [0017] of the specification discloses that the projection 24 may be formed as a rectangular bar that include ends 80, 82 that may be rounded and lateral surfaces 84, 86 and 88 (that is five sides). However, a rectangular shape is defined as a four-sided shape, thus there being uncertainty on whether the shape of the projection is in fact rectangular (four sides).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1-3, 5-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over G. C. Werner US 3130651 (hereinafter ‘Werner’).
In regard to claim 1, Werner teaches a closure assembly, comprising:
a frame (10);
a cover (15); and
a hinge assembly (see fig. 3) selectively connecting the frame to the cover to rotate between an open position (fig. 2) and a closed position (fig. 5), wherein the hinge assembly is configured to allow the cover to rotate between an open position and a closed position (see col. 1, ln. 60), and wherein the hinge assembly includes:
at least one tine (not labeled but seen in fig. 7, the tine is the portion comprising projection 31) formed on an edge of the cover (see figs. 3 and 7),
a projection (31) extending from the at least one tine (fig. 7),
at least one wall (18) formed on an upper surface of the frame (see fig. 6), and
a slot (20) formed in the at least one wall (see col. 1, ln. 70) and configured to receive the projection (as shown in fig. 6),
wherein the slot includes a rotation section (channel extending from the opening to portion 22), an opening (not labeled but shown as the opening to seat 14 as seen in fig. 7) radiating from the rotation section, and a locking section (23) radiating from the rotation section (see col. 2, ln. 1-5),
wherein the locking section is configured to allow the cover to rotate to an angle greater than ninety degrees (see figs. 2 and 6 clearly showing the cover resting against portion 24 at more than ninety degrees) when the projection is at least partially in the locking section (fig. 6), and wherein the locking section and the opening have a non-180 degree angular offset relative to one another (note from the figures that the locking section is at a different plane or level than the opening thus at a non- 180 degree).
In the event Applicant disagrees with the notion that Werner’s cover is allowed to rotate to an angle greater than ninety degrees, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to allow the cover to rotate more than ninety degrees so as to allow the cover to rest against margin 24 as disclosed by Werner (see col. 2, ln. 23).
In regard to claims 2, 3, 10 and 11, Werner teaches the claimed invention wherein the rotation section is defined by a first and a second non-vertical surface positioned vertically above the locking section (See figs. 4, 7. Note that the channel has two horizontal surfaces which are both at a level above the locking section).
In regard to claims 5 and 13, Werner teaches the claimed invention wherein the projection is configured to rotate within the rotation section (see figs. 4 and 5. Note that Werner discloses the cover is “pivotally movable” (see col. 2, ln. 16) thus making the projection configured to rotate.
In regard to claims 6 and 14, Werner teaches the claimed invention wherein the locking section is defined by a vertical surface of a first wall and a non-vertical surface of a second wall that opposes the first wall (See figs. 4-6 -Note that there is a vertical wall right at the end of portion 22, and a non-vertical surface (curved portion) opposite to it right before the non-vertical surface of the channel which is part of the rotation section.
In regard to claims 7 and 15, Werner teaches, as best understood (see 112(b) rejection above), the claimed invention wherein rotation to the open position (in the opening direction) is restricted by contact between the projection and the non-vertical surface of the second wall (see fig. 6, note that the projection contacts the curved portion and does not allow the cover to continue to rotate in the opening direction).
In regard to claims 8 and 16, Werner teaches, as best understood (see 112(b) rejection above), the claimed invention wherein rotation to the closed position (in the opening direction) is restricted by contact between the projection and a vertical surface defining the locking section and a vertical surface defining a portion of the rotation section (see fig. 6, note that the projection contacts the locking section and does not allow the cover to continue to go back to the closing position).
In regard to claim 9, Werner teaches a closure assembly, comprising:
a frame (10);
a cover (15); and
a hinge assembly (see fig. 3) selectively connecting the frame to the cover to rotate between an open position (fig. 2) and a closed position (fig. 5), wherein the hinge assembly includes:
first and second tines (see fig. 3 and col 1, ln. 65 -not labeled but seen in fig. 3, the tines are the portions comprising projection 31 (note that only one is shown in fig. 7) formed on an edge of the cover (see figs. 3 and 7),
a projection (31) extending from each of the tines (fig. 3),
first and second walls (18, 19) formed on an upper surface of the frame (see fig. 6), and
a slot (20) formed in each wall (see col. 1, ln. 70) and configured to receive the projection (as shown in fig. 6), wherein each slot includes an opening (not labeled but shown as the opening to seat 14 as seen in fig. 7) a rotation section (channel extending from the opening to portion 22), and a locking section (23 -see col. 2, ln. 1-5), and wherein:
each opening is configured to allow passage of the associated projection into and out of the associated rotation section (see col. 2, ln. 13),
each rotation section is configured to allow rotation of the associated projection (see figs. 2 and 5 and col. 2, ln. 19), and
each locking section is defined by a vertical surface and an angled surface (See figs. 4-6 -Note that there is a vertical wall right at the end of portion 22, and, per broadest reasonable interpretation, the curved surface opposite the vertical surface is an angled surface as it is well known in the art that a curve is made of many local angles) separated by a distance that is larger than a width of the associated projection (see fig. 6 clearly showing the distance is larger than the projection 31) such that each projection can rotate greater than 90 degrees while at least partially in the locking section (note that the projection of Werner is round thus allowing it to rotate more than 90 degrees in the locking section), wherein each locking section is vertically offset relative to the associated opening (as seen in figs. 4-6) such that the associated projection must move laterally (through channel 20) to pass from the locking section to the opening (as indicated by arrows 34 in fig. 6).
In regard to claim 12, Werner teaches the claimed invention wherein each projection has a rectangular shape defined by a length and a width and wherein the length is coplanar with upper and lower surfaces of the cover. Per broadest reasonable interpretation, the projections of Werner have a rectangular shape as seen in fig. 3. Note that in the view shown in fig. 3 the projections are shown having a rectangular shape (both labeled with reference number 31) and having a width and a length both measure in the same plane as the cover. Note that fig. 3 is a top view thus in the same plane.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record does not teach or suggest a closure assembly as recited in claim 1 wherein the projection is positioned in a recess formed in the tine.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAOLA AGUDELO whose telephone number is (571)270-7986. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM - 5PM.
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, Brian E Glessner can be reached at 571-272-6754. 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.
/PAOLA AGUDELO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633