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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on February 7, 2024. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the Chinese application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 24.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 4.
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, the rectangular or irregularly shaped light strip, the battery module, and the detachable connector between the table units must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.(claims 9, 10, 11 and 13)
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 § 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.
Claims 1, 8, 9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hinsdill (1,229,458). Hinsdill teaches a table (Fig. 1), comprising a tabletop (1,2), a table leg assembly (5), and a light strip (9; strip of wood holding lights 10), wherein the tabletop comprises a first table board (1) and a second table board (2), and the first table board and the second table board are detachably connected (via 5,11 and fasteners-see Fig. 4); wherein both ends of the light strip are placed on the table leg assembly (middle portions of outer 5,11) and the light strip is disposed between the first table board and the second table board (Fig. 1). Wherein the tabletop is rectangular, circular, or irregularly shaped. Wherein the light strip is rectangular, circular, or irregularly shaped.
Hinsdill further teaches a table (Fig. 1), comprising a tabletop (1,2), a table leg assembly (5), and a light strip (9), wherein the tabletop comprises a first table board (1) and a second table board (2), and the first table board and the second table board are detachably connected (via 5,11 and fasteners-see Fig. 4); wherein both ends of the light strip are placed on a support mechanism (11, 5 top flanges) and the light strip is disposed between the first table board and the second table board, and the support mechanism is fixed on the first table board and/or the second table board (Fig. 3) and/or the table leg assembly (5, 11).
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.
Claims 11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinsdill (1,229,458) in view of Gray et al (2007/0277710). As stated above, Hinsdill teaches the limitations of claims 1 and 12, including first and second table tops. For claims 11 and 13, Hinsdill fails to teach that the first table board and/or the second table board comprises at least two independent table units, wherein the table units are connected by a detachable connector and form a continuous tabletop surface. Gray teaches a first table board and/or the second table board (1, both sides in Fig. 1) comprising at least two independent table units (12), wherein the table units are connected by a detachable connector (25; Fig. 4) and form a continuous tabletop surface. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the table of Hinsdill by using table sections, such as is taught by Gray, for the first and/or second table boards, to provide for easy assembly and/or to provide for sectional removable of the table boards because of damage, etc. Furthermore, it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04
Claims 1, 2, 8-10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN205682772) in view of Stoller (2007/0074481) and Wiemer et al (2015/0182038). Wang teaches a table (Fig), comprising a tabletop (5,6), a table leg assembly (1-3), wherein the tabletop comprises a first table board (6) and a second table board (5), and the first table board and the second table board are connected via a support mechanism (4). The tabletop (6) being hingedly (and thus removably) attached thereto (via 61,62,7). For claims 1 and 12, Wang fails to specifically teach that the rear board is specifically detachably connected to the support mechanism and fails to teach a light strip between the boards. Stoller teaches a board detachably connected to a support mechanism (416 via fasteners 466; see paragraph 0049). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the table of Wang by using fasteners, such as is taught by Stoller, between the rear table board and support mechanism, to provide a specific means to attach the rear board to the support mechanism/legs. The means also allowing for detachment of the member for easy replacement. Wiemer teach a light strip (104) spanning the length of a horizontal surface. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the table of Wang in view of Stoller by adding a light strip, such as is taught by Wiemer, between the boards of Wang, to provide decorative and illumination functions on the table. Wang in view of Stoller and Wiemer would further teach that both ends of the light strip are placed on the table leg assembly/support mechanism (via members 4 of Wang).
For claim 2, Wang in view of Stoller and Wiemer further teaches that the table leg assembly comprises an upper support member (3 of Wang) and a lower support member (1), wherein the upper support member is mounted on a side of the tabletop facing the ground (via 4), and the lower support member is connected to the upper support member by a fastener (2) for providing an upward support force to the tabletop.
For claim 8, Wang in view of Stoller and Wiemer further teaches that the tabletop is rectangular, circular, or irregularly shaped.
For claim 9, Wang in view of Stoller and Wiemer further teaches that the light strip is rectangular, circular, or irregularly shaped.
For claim 10, Wang in view of Stoller and Wiemer that the light strip comprises a battery module and/or a power cord plug (105 of Wiemer), wherein the battery module is configured to accommodate a battery, and the power cord plug is configured to connect to an external power source.
Claims 11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN205682772) in view of Stoller (2007/0074481) and Wiemer et al (2015/0182038) as stated above, and further in view of Gray et al (2007/0277710). Wang in view of Stoller and Wiemer teaches the limitations of claims 1 and 12, including first and second table tops. For claims 11 and 13, Wang in view of Stoller and Wiemer fails to teach that the first table board and/or the second table board comprises at least two independent table units, wherein the table units are connected by a detachable connector and form a continuous tabletop surface. Gray teaches a first table board and/or the second table board (1, both sides in Fig. 1) comprises at least two independent table units (12), wherein the table units are connected by a detachable connector (25; Fig. 4) and form a continuous tabletop surface. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the table of Wang in view of Stoller and Wiemer by using table sections, such as is taught by Gray, for the first and/or second table boards, to provide for easy assembly and/or to provide for sectional removable of the table boards because of damage, etc. Furthermore, it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN205682772) in view of Stoller (2007/0074481) and Wiemer et al (2015/0182038) as stated above, and further in view of Hu (CN111557544). Wang in view of Stoller and Wiemer teaches the limitations of claims 1 and 2, including a table having an upper and lower support member. The lower support member comprises an even number of support rods (four). For claim 3, Wang in view of Stoller and Wiemer fails to teach that the upper support member has a rectangular structure, wherein the support rods are uniformly fixed on opposite sides along the circumference of the rectangular structure. Hu teaches a table having an upper support member (12-12.3) that has a rectangular upper structure (Fig. 6), wherein support rods (3) are uniformly fixed on opposite sides along the circumference of the rectangular structure. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the table of Wang in view of Stoller and Wiemer using a rectangular frame for the support member structure, such as is taught by Hu, in place of the two beams presently used, to provide a stronger support structure for the table boards.
For claim 4, Wang in view of Stoller, Wiemer and Hu further teaches that
the lower support member comprises four support rods (3,c-see annotated figure).
For claim 5, Wang in view of Stoller, Wiemer and Hu further teaches that
the table leg assembly further comprises a base (1), wherein the base comprises two longitudinal support rods (a; see annotated figure) respectively mounted to a lower end of the lower support member and a transverse support rod (b; see annotated figure) fixedly connected to the two longitudinal support rods on the same side. Although the transverse support rod is not connection to the ends of the longitudinal support rods, it would have been an obvious consideration to move the transverse support rod to the rear ends of the longitudinal support rods, to provide more unobstructed leg room under the table while still providing lower frame reinforcement.
PNG
media_image1.png
913
1678
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 7 are 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. References D1013423; 20230363528; 11592171; D925950; 20160312994; 2943897; and 20150182038 teach various tables.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANET M WILKENS whose telephone number is 571-272-6869. The examiner can normally be reached Mon thru Thurs 7am-5:30pm EST.
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.
Wilkens
January 29, 2026
/JANET M WILKENS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637