DETAILED ACTION
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the limitations of claim 7 are not clearly shown in the drawings. Specifically how the extension portion of the support member is insertable into the rotation member. 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-8, 12, 13, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(A)(1) as being anticipated by Nakano (2020/0057594).
Regarding Claim 1: Nakano teaches a display apparatus comprising: a display module (1a); a cabinet (2) to support the display module (figs. 1-3), the cabinet including an opening (multiple shown in fig. 3); an adjustment part (53) arrangeable in the display module (fig. 4) such that while the adjustment part is arranged in the display module, the adjustment part is movable with respect to the cabinet (paragraphs [0063] and [0065] and [0067]); a support member (31a), moveable within the cabinet (paragraphs [0065] and [0067]), and configured to support the adjustment part such that the adjustment part is moveable while supported on the support member (paragraphs [0065] and [0067]); a rotation member (31) coupleable to the support member and while coupled to the support member, the rotation member is configured to be rotatable such that the support member, the adjustment part, and the display module are moved based on a rotation of the rotation member (paragraphs [0065] and [0067]); and wherein the rotation member is accessible through the opening (figs. 3-7) of the cabinet to allow the rotation of the rotation member while the display module is supported on the cabinet (figs. 3-7).
Regarding Claim 2: Nakano teaches the rotation member comprises: a rotation body (screw portion of 31 in fig. 6) coupled to the support member; and a manipulation portion (top of bolt head in figs. 6-7) protruding from the rotation body to be exposed through the opening (figs. 6-7).
Regarding Claim 3: Nakano teaches the manipulation portion is manipulable through the opening (figs. 3-7).
Regarding Claim 4: Nakano teaches the cabinet comprises: a support frame (102, 103) on which the opening is formed (multiple openings in fig. 3) and configured to support a bottom of the rotation member (on 8 and 9) in order to prevent a movement of the rotation member along an up-down direction (figs. 6-7), and the rotation member moves the support member by rotating while being supported on the support frame (figs. 6-7).
Regarding Claim 6: Nakano teaches the adjustment part comprises: an adjustment part body (21), between the display module and the support member (figs. 3-7), and coupled to the display module (figs. 3-7); and a support portion (22) extending from the adjustment part body (figs. 3-7) toward the support member to be supported by the support member (figs. 3-7).
Regarding Claim 7: Nakano teaches the support member comprises: an extension portion (plate portions of 31a in figs. 6-7), insertable into the rotation member (figs. 3-7), and extending along an up-down direction (figs. 3-7) to be in contact with the support portion (figs. 3-7); and a coupling portion (screw hole of 31a in figs. 6-7) on one side of the extension portion and to which the rotation member is rotatably coupled (figs. 3-7).
Regarding Claim 8: Nakano teaches the display module comprises: a substrate (4) on which LEDs are mounted (paragraph [0049]); and a fixing frame (5), at a rear of the substrate (figs. 3-7), and to which the adjustment part body is fixed (figs. 3-7).
Regarding Claim 12: Nakano teaches further comprising: a left frame (figs. 3-7) at a left end of the display module (figs. 3-7); and a right frame (figs. 3-7) at a right end of the display module (figs. 3-7), wherein the support member is among a plurality of support members (figs. 3-7), and the plurality of support members comprises: a left support member (figs. 3-7) adjacent to the left frame (figs. 3-7); and a right support member (figs. 3-7) adjacent to the right frame (figs. 3-7).
Regarding Claim 13: Nakano teaches the rotation member is among a plurality of rotation members (figs. 3-7), the plurality of rotation members comprises: a left rotation member (figs. 3-7) rotatably coupleable to the left support member (figs. 3-7); and a right rotation member (figs. 3-7) rotatably coupleable to the right support member (figs. 3-7), and the left rotation member and the right rotation member allow a horizontal angle of the display module to be adjusted by being rotated (figs. 3-7 and paragraphs [0065] and [0067].
Regarding Claim 15: Nakano teaches further comprising: a plurality of magnets in the cabinet (paragraph [0078]); and a plurality of screws (all of 19, 20, and 21 are a screw with a magnet) in the display module (figs. 3-7), wherein the display module is coupled to the cabinet by magnetic attraction between the plurality of magnets and the plurality of screws (figs. 3-7).
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.
Claim(s) 5 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakano (2020/0057594) as applied to the claims above, and further in view of Nagamine (2003/0217495).
Regarding Claim 5: Nakano lacks a specific teaching of a cover configured to cover a rear of the display module, wherein the cover comprises an adjustment groove recessed from a circumference of the cover to allow manipulation of the rotation member through the opening.
Nagamine teaches a cover (back of 17) configured to cover a rear of the display module (fig. 8), wherein the cover comprises an adjustment groove (177) recessed from a circumference of the cover (fig. 7) to allow manipulation of the rotation member through the opening (figs. 16-17).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the apparatus of Nakano by having a cover configured to cover a rear of the display module, wherein the cover comprises an adjustment groove recessed from a circumference of the cover to allow manipulation of the rotation member through the opening as disclosed by Nagamine in order to allow for a more supportive section between each specific cabinet member in order to allow for a safer connection between the elements decreasing the chances the components failing and causing damage to the components of the apparatus which would require repair or replacement of the components.
Regarding Claim 14: Nakano teaches the cabinet is among a plurality of cabinets (2 in fig. 1), the plurality of cabinets comprise a first cabinet (any of 2) and a second cabinet (any other of 2) arranged along a horizontal direction (fig. 1), but lacks a specific teaching of the display apparatus further comprises a mounting shaft configured to penetrate a side frame of the first cabinet and a side frame of the second cabinet in order to couple the first cabinet and the second cabinet.
Nagamine teaches the display apparatus further comprises a mounting shaft (5 and 51) configured to penetrate a side frame of the first cabinet (fig. 16) and a side frame of the second cabinet (fig. 17) in order to couple the first cabinet and the second cabinet (fig. 17).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the apparatus of Nakano by having the display apparatus further comprises a mounting shaft configured to penetrate a side frame of the first cabinet and a side frame of the second cabinet in order to couple the first cabinet and the second cabinet as disclosed by Nagamine in order to allow for a more supportive section between each specific cabinet member in order to allow for a safer connection between the elements decreasing the chances the components failing and causing damage to the components of the apparatus which would require repair or replacement of the components.
Claim(s) 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakano (2020/0057594) as applied to the claims above, and further in view of Kim (2021/0392764).
Regarding Claim 9: Nakano lacks a specific teaching of the display module further comprises a mounting member between the substrate and the fixing frame to fix the substrate to the fixing frame, and the mounting member comprises a mounting groove recessed from a front surface of the mounting member.
Kim teaches the display module further comprises a mounting member (300) between the substrate (100) and the fixing frame (30) to fix the substrate to the fixing frame (fig. 2), and the mounting member (fig. 5) comprises a mounting groove (fig. 5) recessed from a front surface of the mounting member (fig. 5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the apparatus of Nakano by having the display module further comprises a mounting member between the substrate and the fixing frame to fix the substrate to the fixing frame, and the mounting member comprises a mounting groove recessed from a front surface of the mounting member as disclosed by Kim in order to allow for a more supportive section behind the display and attaching to the cabinet portion in order to allow for a safer connection between the elements decreasing the chances the components failing and causing damage to the components of the apparatus which would require repair or replacement of the components.
Regarding Claim 10: Nakano lacks a specific teaching of the display module further comprises a reinforcing frame between the substrate and the fixing frame.
Kim teaches the display module further comprises a reinforcing frame (200, 20) between the substrate and the fixing frame (30 and fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the apparatus of Nakano by having the display module further comprises a reinforcing frame between the substrate and the fixing frame as disclosed by Kim in order to allow for a more supportive section behind the display and attaching to the cabinet portion in order to allow for a safer connection between the elements decreasing the chances the components failing and causing damage to the components of the apparatus which would require repair or replacement of the components.
Regarding Claim 11: Nakano lacks a specific teaching of the reinforcing frame is a first reinforcing frame adhered to the substrate and display module further comprises: a second reinforcing frame coupleable to the fixing frame and the first reinforcing frame.
Kim teaches the reinforcing frame is a first reinforcing frame (200) adhered to the substrate and display module (fig. 2) further comprises: a second reinforcing frame (20) coupleable to the fixing frame and the first reinforcing frame (fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the apparatus of Nakano by having the reinforcing frame is a first reinforcing frame adhered to the substrate and display module further comprises: a second reinforcing frame coupleable to the fixing frame and the first reinforcing frame as disclosed by Kim in order to allow for a more supportive section behind the display and attaching to the cabinet portion in order to allow for a safer connection between the elements decreasing the chances the components failing and causing damage to the components of the apparatus which would require repair or replacement of the components.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY MICHAEL HAUGHTON whose telephone number is (571)272-9087. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-5p.
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, Imani Hayman can be reached at 571-270-5528. 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.
/ANTHONY M HAUGHTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841