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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Drawings
Nine sheets for formal drawings were filed July 25, 2024 and have been accepted by the Examiner.
Specification
Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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 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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-8 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Mo et al. (CN 113126220 A) in view of Jeon (KR 2017-0039826 A).
Regarding claims 1, 3-6, 8, 15 and 16, Mo discloses a rack system (Figs. 1-6) of a fiber optic network (see “Background” section) and a method of separating adjacent rack assemblies in a rack system, comprising: an equipment rack (100) having a first vertical frame member (130 on right side) opposing a second vertical frame member (130 on left side); a plurality of rack assemblies arranged in a stack in the equipment rack between the first vertical frame member and the second vertical frame member with at least a first rack assembly (310) being vertically movable (accompanying description of Figs. 2-4 discloses shelves 210 and 310 have adjustable heights due to position adjusting hole 511) relative to an adjacent second rack assembly (210), each of the plurality of rack assemblies being configured to facilitate one or more optical connections (240) of the fiber optic network.
Still regarding claims 1, 3-6, 8, 15 and 16, Mo teaches the claimed invention except for a spacing apparatus. Jeon discloses a rack system comprising a plurality of rack assemblies (1 in Figs. 1-3) and at least one spacing apparatus comprising a plurality of scissor lifts (2) secured between a first rack assembly and a second rack assembly, each scissor lift being configured to vertically move one of the plurality of rack assemblies relative to a second rack assembly and an upper portion of the plurality of rack assemblies in the stack that is positioned above the first rack assembly to create a working space therebetween. Since both of the inventions relate to rack systems, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to use a spacing apparatus as disclosed by Jeon in the device of Mo for the purpose of facilitating the adjustment of the racks.
Regarding claim 2, the proposed combination of Mo and Jeon teaches the claimed invention except for specifically stating the height of the rack assemblies. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrive at the claimed height of each of the plurality of rack assemblies is approximately 1U in order to provide sufficient space and since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 7, the proposed combination of Mo and Jeon teaches the claimed invention except for specifically stating the scissor lift is selectively operable with a handheld tool. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the scissor lift selectively operable with a handheld tool in order to provide convenience for the user.
Regarding claim 14, Mo discloses a distribution frame of a fiber optic network including the rack system in Figs. 1-6 and the abstract.
Claims 9-13, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Mo et al. (CN 113126220 A) in view of Jeon (KR 2017-0039826 A), further in view of Schuessler (DE 102011079196 A1).
Regarding claims 9-12 and 17, the proposed combination of Mo and Jeon teaches the claimed invention except for the spacing apparatus comprises a motorized drive. Schuessler discloses a rack system comprising a plurality of rack assemblies (10b in Figs. 1-3) and at least one spacing apparatus comprising a motorized drive (17) configured to vertically move the first rack assembly relative to the second rack assembly, wherein the motorized drive comprises a gear (drive device may contain “a toothed belt”) located on the first rack assembly that is configured to engage a track (16) located on the equipment rack to drive vertical movement of the first rack assembly, the gear being selectively driven by a motor. Since all of the inventions relate to rack systems, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to use a motorized drive as disclosed by Schuessler in the device of the proposed combination of Mo and Jeon for the purpose of automating the adjustment of the racks. Further, one having ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to use a plurality of motorized drives, each motorized drive being configured to vertically move one of the plurality of rack assemblies since Schuessler discloses “[e]ach storage floor can have a separate drive device.” Finally, one having ordinary skill would find it obvious to house the gear and motor within a bracket in order to provide protection to the components and to form a robust device.
Regarding claims 13 and 18, Schuessler in view of the rejection above, further discloses a controller (17) operatively connected to each motorized drive; a human machine interface HMI (19) operatively connected to the controller, the HMI being configured to receive an operation input from a user (goods 15 held by user); the controller being configured to operate the rack system as follows: receive an operation input from the HMI indicative of the second rack assembly; and operate at least the motorized drive of the first rack assembly to vertically move the first rack assembly relative to the second rack assembly to create the working space therebetween in Figs. 2-3 and accompanying description.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRIS H CHU whose telephone number is (571)272-8655. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9AM-5PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Uyen-Chau Le can be reached on 571-272-239797. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Any inquiry of a general or clerical nature should be directed to the Technology Center 2800 receptionist at telephone number (571) 272-1562.
Chris H. Chu
/CHRIS H CHU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874 October 14, 2026
Prosecution Insights