DETAILED ACTION
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 .
The following correspondence is a non-final Office Action for application no. 18/817,785 for a WALL-MOUNTED CABINET HANGING SYSTEM, filed on 8/28/2024. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because RN 118 does not look like a slot. 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.
The drawings are objected to because RN 131, 132 in Figs. 1, 2 appear to be inverted. 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.
The drawings are objected to because RN 127 is shown twice in Fig. 3. 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: RN 129. 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. 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: RN 200. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the structure of the first and second cabinets aligned on the top edge of the main bar must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
In addition to Replacement Sheets containing the corrected drawing figure(s), applicant is required to submit a marked-up copy of each Replacement Sheet including annotations indicating the changes made to the previous version. The marked-up copy must be clearly labeled as “Annotated Sheets” and must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change(s) to the drawings. See 37 CFR 1.121(d)(1). Failure to timely submit the proposed drawing and marked-up copy will result in the abandonment of the application.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 6 is redundant. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 sets forth a first fastener, second fastener and a fourth fastener but does not set forth a third fastener. Appropriate clarification is requested. Claims 2-8 are rejected for the same reasons as dependent on claim 1.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 1-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tooley (U.S. Pat. 11,766,121) in view of Schneider (U.S. Pat. 11,906,304).
Regarding claims 1 and 6, as best understood, Tooley teaches a wall-mounted cabinet hanging system comprising: a main bar comprised of an opening; a mounting bar comprised of a sliding screw mount; a first fastener that attaches to the mounting bar, the first fastener comprised of a rear surface comprised of a second fastener (back of first fastener serves as a second fastener because it attaches the first fastener to the sliding screw mount); an end cap comprised of a fourth fastener (38); and a cabinet holder (40) comprised of a fastening mechanism; but does not teach that the end cap is comprised of a stud finder. Schneider, however, teaches the use of a stud finder (312) in order to find studs and level surfaces with a laser. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable degree of success, to construct the end cap comprising a stud finder in order to provide a construction aid device to assist with secure and quick installation of the hanging system to a wall since the system is designed for attachment to wall studs (12).
[AltContent: textbox (Flat top edge)]
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (2nd fastener )][AltContent: textbox (Fastening mechanism)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (End car)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (1st fastener )][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Mounting bar)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Opening )][AltContent: textbox (Main bar)][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: textbox (Sliding screw mount)]
PNG
media_image1.png
306
534
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Tooley and Schneider teach the system of claim 1, wherein the main bar is comprised of a hollow main bar (triangular hollow area at the bottom, as shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3, Tooley and Schneider teach the system of claim 1, wherein the mounting bar is positioned within the main bar.
Regarding claim 4, Tooley and Schneider teach the system of claim 1, wherein the main bar is comprised of an accessory slot (27).
Regarding claim 5, Tooley and Schneider teach the system of claim 1, wherein the main bar is comprised of a flat top edge.
Regarding claim 7, Tooley and Schneider teach the system of claim 1, wherein the end cap attaches to the first fastener (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 8, Tooley and Schneider teach the system of claim 1, wherein the cabinet holder is comprised of a flat rear wall (angled wall is flat, as shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 9, Tooley teaches a wall-mounted cabinet hanging system comprising: a main bar (20) comprised of an opening; a first fastener (23); a mounting bar (30) comprised of a sliding screw mount (31); an end cap (35) comprised of a second fastener (36); and a cabinet holder (40) comprised of a fastening mechanism; but does not teach that the end cap is comprised of a stud finder comprised of a sensor. Schneider, however, teaches the use of a stud finder (100) comprised of a sensor (312) in order to find studs and level surfaces with a laser. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable degree of success, to construct the end cap comprising a stud finder comprised of a sensor in order to provide a construction aid device to assist with secure and quick installation of the hanging system to a wall since the system is designed for attachment to wall studs (12).
Regarding claim 10, Tooley and Schneider teach the system of claim 9, wherein the sensor is comprised of an electromagnetic sensor, a capacitive sensor, or a magnetic sensor (Fig. 4).
Regarding claims 11 and 12, Tooley and Schneider teach the system of claim 9, wherein Schneider teaches that the stud finder is comprised of a battery, but does not teach that the stud finder is comprised of a display screen and a charging port. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable degree of success, to construct the stud finder comprised of a display screen and a charging port in order to show the charge of the battery and in order to keep the battery charges for multiple uses since the use of a display and a charging port is necessary for the use and maintenance of electronic devices.
Regarding claim 13, Tooley and Schneider teach the system of claim 9, wherein the stud finder is comprised of a button (Schneider, 103).
Regarding claim 14, Tooley and Schneider teach the system of claim 9, wherein the cabinet holder is comprised of an angled rear wall (Fig. 2)
Regarding claim 15, Tooley and Schneider teach the system of claim 9, wherein the fastening mechanism is comprised of a clip, an angled clip, or an arm (see figure above).
Regarding claim 16, Tooley and Schneider teach the system of claim 9, wherein the first fastener and the second fastener are comprised of a pair of reciprocating fasteners (fasteners are reciprocating because they engage with each other).
Regarding claim 17, Tooley and Schneider teach the system of claim 9, wherein the sliding screw mount is positioned within the main bar and is aligned with the opening.
Regarding claim 18, Tooley and Schneider teach the system of claim 9, wherein the main bar is comprised of a flat top edge.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19 and 20 are allowed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. USP 4320935, 4544069, 5655821 (structural load systems)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NKEISHA J. SMITH whose telephone number is (571)272-5781. The examiner can normally be reached Normal hours: M/Th 7-4; T 9-5; W 7-3; F 7-4.
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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.
/NKEISHA SMITH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632 October 8, 2025