DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Claims 8-11 & 39-54 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on May 18, 2026. It is noted that the examiner withdrew the above identified claims since a review of the claimed scope indicated subject matter which was not part of the elected embodiment. Regarding Claim 8 (and its dependents), the scope indicates that each cubby element is open at a top of the cubby element which is directed to the non-elected embodiment of Species G. Regarding Claim 39 (and its dependents), the scope indicates a false back defining a hidden cavity between the false back and a back panel which is likewise directed to the non-elected embodiment of Species G.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS’s) submitted on October 31, 2025 were in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
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, 3-4, 12 & 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chung [US 2015/0108880]. Chung teaches of a modular cabinet assembly (note fig. 3 for instance) comprising: a first cubby element (bottom left (302) for example – fig. 3) having a box shaped configuration and bounding a first compartment (shown), the first cubby element having a front face that extends vertically between a top face and an opposing bottom face and that extends laterally between a first side face and an opposing second side face, the front face encircling an opening to the first compartment, the first cubby element having a first width extending between the first side face and the opposing second side face (note figs. 1-3 for instance); and a second cubby element (can be either the bottom right or top left (302) for example – fig. 3) having a box shaped configuration and bounding a second compartment (shown), the second cubby element having a front face that extends vertically between a top face and an opposing bottom face and that extends laterally between a first side face and an opposing second side face, the front face of the second cubby element encircling an opening to the second compartment, the second cubby element having a second width extending between the first side face and the opposing second side face of the second cubby element (all shown in the figures); wherein the first width is substantially equal to a height of the first cubby element (defined as a cube), wherein the second width is substantially equal to a height of the second cubby element (same as the first cubby element); wherein the first and second cubby elements are selectively secured to one another (disclosed [0022]), either in a lateral side-by-side configuration, or stacked one atop another (both orientations shown in fig. 3). As to Claim 3, the first width of the first cubby element is substantially equal to the height of the first cubby element, and the second width of the second cubby element is substantially equal to the height of the second cubby element (as shown and disclosed). As to Claim 4, the first width of the first cubby element is substantially equal to twice the height of the first cubby element (such would be the case when cubby element (304) is now defined as the first cubby element and rotated 90 degrees when assembled in the modular unit), and the second width of the second cubby element is substantially equal to twice the height of the second cubby element (again, this aspect is covered when another cubby element (304) is relied upon as the second cubby element and rotated 90 degrees when assembled in the modular unit). As to Claim 12, again Chung teaches of a modular cabinet assembly (fig. 3) comprising a first cubby element (bottom left (302) for example) having a box shaped configuration and bounding a first compartment, the first cubby element having a front face that extends vertically between a top face and an opposing bottom face and that extends laterally between a first side face and an opposing second side face, the front face encircling an opening to the first compartment, the first cubby element having a first width extending between the first side face and the opposing second side face (all shown and described); and a second cubby element (such as (304) when rotated 90 degrees within the modular furniture unit) having a box shaped configuration and bounding a second compartment, the second cubby element having a front face that extends vertically between a top face and an opposing bottom face and that extends laterally between a first side face and an opposing second side face, the front face of the second cubby element encircling an opening to the second compartment, the second cubby element having a second width extending between the first side face and the opposing second side face of the second cubby element (all shown and disclosed); a third cubby element (306) having a box shaped configuration and bounding a third compartment, the third cubby element having a front face that extends vertically between a top face and an opposing bottom face and that extends laterally between a first side face and an opposing second side face, the front face of the third cubby element encircling an opening to the third compartment, the third cubby element having a third width extending between the first side face and the opposing second side face of the second cubby element (all shown and disclosed) wherein the first width is (x) and is substantially equal to a height of the first cubby element (viewed as a basic cube), so that the first compartment of the first cubby element is substantially square (shown and disclosed); wherein the second width is substantially equal to twice the first width (2x) (as mapped (304) rotated 90 degrees is disclosed as a double wide box) ;wherein the third width is substantially equal to three times the first width (3x) (while (306) is disclosed as a triple wide box); and wherein the first, second and third cubby elements are selectively secured to one another, directly or indirectly, either in a lateral side-by-side configuration, or stacked one atop another (note the coupled arrangement of the modular furniture units shown and the ability to be arranged in a varying manner – [0022]-[0023]). As to Claim 38, again, Chung teaches of a modular cabinet assembly (fig. 3 for example) comprising a plurality of cubby elements each having an identical configuration (shown), each of the plurality of cubby elements having a box shaped configuration with a front face encircling an opening to a compartment (shown); wherein the plurality of cubby elements includes a first cubby element (upper left (302) for instance – fig. 3) removably coupled to a second cubby element (upper right (302) for instance – fig. 3), the second cubby element being disposed lateral in a side-by-side relationship relative to the first cubby element (as shown); and a third cubby element (306) removably coupled to the first cubby element, the third cubby element being disposed vertically on top of the first cubby element (as shown).
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 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chung. Chung teaches applicant’s basic inventive claimed modular cabinet assembly as previously outlined (mapped), including the capacity of a fourth cubby element (another box of the modular furniture unit for example) having a box shaped configuration and bounding a fourth compartment, the fourth cubby element having a front face that extends vertically between a top face and an opposing bottom face and that extends laterally between a first side face and an opposing second side face, the front face of the fourth cubby element encircling an opening to the fourth compartment, the fourth cubby element having a fourth width extending between the first side face and the opposing second side face of the second cubby element (all shown and disclosed); but Chung does not explicitly state that the fourth width is substantially equal to 1.5 times the first width (1.5x). However, Chung does state that “one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that more or fewer boxes may be used, and that boxes of different sizes and shapes may be used, without departing from the scope of the present disclosure”. Accordingly, the position is taken that it would have been an obvious matter of personal preference to vary the shape or size of an element (such as utilizing a fourth cubby element that has a one and a half times width as that of the width of the first cubby element) depending upon the needs and/or preferences of the user, with a reasonable expectation of success, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size or configuration of a component. A change of this degree is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) (The court held that the configuration of the claimed disposable plastic nursing container was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant). Furthermore, the Federal Circuit has held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). Regarding Claim 15, as modified, the fourth compartment of the fourth cubby element would be rectangular in keeping with the rectangular shapes of all the other cubby elements for positive coupling purposes.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure – see the attached Form PTO-892 showing various modular cabinet assemblies having different sized modules that are combined to form modular unit.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES O HANSEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6866. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8 am - 4:30 pm.
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. 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.
JOH
June 15, 2026
/James O Hansen/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights