DETAILED ACTION
Application Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This action is in response to Applicant’s submission dated 08/23/2024. Claim(s) 1–12 are pending.
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(s) 1–3, 6, & 9–12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2020/0087844 to Griffin-Nelson.
With regard to claim 1, Griffin-Nelson discloses a laundry treating apparatus (abstract) comprising: a cabinet (12) including a front panel (14) having a first opening defined therein (Fig. 1; ¶ 0018); an accommodating portion disposed inside the cabinet to accommodate therein laundry (Fig. 3); a door (24) disposed on the front panel and configured to open and close the first opening (Fig. 1; ¶ 0019); and a control panel (80) disposed on the front panel (14) and having an output area (82) where a screen is output (Fig. 5; ¶ 0028), wherein the control panel (80) includes: a central portion including the output area and having straight edges with respect to the front panel (Fig. 5); and a side portion positioned at each of two lateral ends of the central portion and having a curved edge with respect to the front panel (14) (Fig. 5), wherein a width of the control panel defined based on a width direction of the cabinet (12) is equal to or greater than a shortest distance between one of two lateral ends of the front panel (14) and the control panel (80) and equal to or smaller than ½ a width of the front panel (14) (Fig. 1).
With regard to claim 2, Griffin-Nelson further discloses the shortest distance between the one of the two lateral ends of the front panel (14) and the control panel (80) is equal to or smaller than ⅓ times the width of the front panel (Fig. 1).
With regard to claim 3, Griffin-Nelson further discloses the width of the control panel (80) is equal to or greater than ⅓ times and equal to or smaller than ½ times a width of the door (24) (Fig. 1).
With regard to claim 6, Griffin-Nelson further discloses a width of the output area (82) is equal to or greater than 2 times a shortest distance between an outermost end of the side portion and the output area (82) (Fig. 5).
With regard to claim 9, Griffin-Nelson further discloses a width of the output area (82) is equal to or greater than ½ times and equal to or smaller than ⅔ times the width of the control panel (80) (Fig. 5).
With regard to claim 10, Griffin-Nelson further discloses a distance between an outermost end of the output area (82) and an outermost end of the side portion based on the width direction is equal to or smaller than 1/10 times the width of the front panel (14) (Fig. 1).
With regard to claim 11, Griffin-Nelson further discloses a width of the output area (82) is equal to or greater than 2 times a height of the output area (82) defined based on a height direction of the cabinet (12) (Fig. 5).
With regard to claim 12, Griffin-Nelson further discloses a height of the output area (82) defined based on a height direction of the cabinet (12) is equal to or greater than 1/10 times a height of the door (24) (Fig. 5).
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, 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 4–5 & 7–8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Griffin-Nelson.
With regard to claim 4, Griffin-Nelson fails to explicitly disclose a height of the control panel defined based on a height direction of the cabinet is equal to or greater than ⅛ times and equal to or smaller than ⅙ times a height of the door. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have a height of the control panel defined based on a height direction of the cabinet be equal to or greater than ⅛ times and equal to or smaller than ⅙ times a height of the door, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
With regard to claim 5, Griffin-Nelson fails to explicitly disclose a width of the side portion is equal to or greater than 1/10 times a width of the central portion. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have a width of the side portion be equal to or greater than 1/10 times a width of the central portion, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
With regard to claim 7, Griffin-Nelson fails to explicitly disclose a width of the output area is equal to or greater than ¼ times and equal to or smaller than ⅓ times a width of the door. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have a width of the output area be equal to or greater than ¼ times and equal to or smaller than ⅓ times a width of the door, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
With regard to claim 8, Griffin-Nelson fails to explicitly disclose a width of the output area is equal to or greater than ⅔ times a width of the central portion. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have a width of the output area be equal to or greater than ⅔ times a width of the central portion, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: see attached PTO-892. Applicant is encouraged to review the cited references prior to submitting a response to this office action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID J LAUX whose telephone number is (571)270-7619. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:30 M-F.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at (571) 272-9059. 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.
/DAVID J LAUX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
August 4, 2026
Prosecution Insights