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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The replacement sheets of drawings, filed March 27, 2026, have been approved by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the support bar (241,24) appears to be horizontal, not vertical in positioning. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: the support bar appears to be horizontal, not vertical in positioning. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-5 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN205682772) in view of Stoller (2007/0074481), Wiemer et al (2015/0182038) and Hu (CN111557544). Wang teaches a table (Fig. 1), comprising a tabletop (5,6), a table leg assembly (1-4), 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 (at 4). The tabletop (6) being hingedly (and thus removably) attached thereto (via 61,62,7). The table leg assembly comprises an upper support member (4) and a lower support member (1-3) wherein the upper support member is mounted on a side of the tabletop facing the ground. For claim 1, Wang fails to teach that the rear board is specifically detachably connected to the support mechanism; fails to teach a light strip between the boards, and fails to teach that the upper support member has a rectangular structure. 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 (via members 4 of Wang). Hu teaches a table having an upper support member (12-12.3) that has a rectangular upper structure (Fig. 6) comprising a support bar (one or both of the side bars 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 by using a rectangular frame for the support member structure, such as is taught by Hu, i.e. the front and rear beams of Hu would be used with the two side beams of Wang, to provide a stronger support structure for the table boards. One or both of the side beams (4 of Wang) providing the light strip support bar which is configures to provide a support force perpendicular to the ground for the light strip.
PNG
media_image1.png
913
1678
media_image1.png
Greyscale
For claim 2, Wang in view of Stoller, Wiemer and Hu further teaches that 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 3, Wang in view of Stoller, Wiemer and Hu further teaches that the an even number of support rods (3) are uniformly fixed on opposite sides along the circumference of the rectangular structure.
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.
For claim 8, Wang in view of Stoller, Wiemer and Hu further teaches that the tabletop is rectangular, circular, or irregularly shaped.
For claim 9, Wang in view of Stoller, Wiemer and Hu further teaches that the light strip is rectangular, circular, or irregularly shaped.
For claim 10, Wang in view of Stoller, Wiemer and Hu further teaches that the light strip comprises a power cord plug (105 of Wiemer), configured to connect to an external power source.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN205682772) in view of Stoller (2007/0074481), Wiemer et al (2015/0182038) and Hu (CN111557544) as stated above, and further in view of Gray et al (2007/0277710). Wang in view of Stoller, Wiemer and Hu teaches the limitations of claim 1, including first and second table tops. For claim 11, Wang in view of Stoller, Wiemer and Hu 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 connectable to 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 connectable to 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, Wiemer and Hu 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
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 12 and 13 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed March 27, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Addressing the arguments concerning the allowable subject matter noted in the previous Office action: it should be noted that not all of the limitations of claims 2, 3 and 6 were incorporated into claim 1, as required for allowance. Furthermore, in claim 6, the light strip bar was provided with the rectangular structure, i.e. a rectangular structure have a light strip bar attached therewith. In amended claim 1, the rectangular structure comprises a light strip bar. Therefore, one of the members of the rectangular structure itself can be considered the light strip bar.
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 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
April 22, 2026
/JANET M WILKENS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights