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 .
Drawings
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 “at least two hanging boards” in Claim 1 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.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-4 are objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “the hanging board” should read “the hanging boards” or “one of the hanging boards” or something equivalent since hanging boards are established in Lines 1-2 of claim 1 and claims 2-4 depend from claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: the limitation “a hanging hole” in Line 3-4 should read “the hanging hole” since claim 1 establishes the hanging hole and claim 4 depends from claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “the external environment” should read “an external environment” since it was not previously established. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “the cross-sectional” should read “a cross-sectional” since it has not been previously established. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “the linear guide rail” should read “the linear guide rails” since claim 6 depends from claim 3 and claim 3 establishes at least three linear guide rails. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Perkins US 7055703 (hereinafter Perkins).
Re. Cl. 1, Perkins discloses: An adjustable mirror hanger (Fig. 8-10), comprises a rear board (10, Fig. 7 and shown in Fig. 10) extending left and right (see Fig. 7), at least two hanging boards (30, Fig. 8 and Col. 7, Lines 37-39) provided on the rear board (see Fig. 9-10), and a hanging hole (39, Fig. 8a) arranged on the hanging board (see Fig. 8a); wherein the hanging board slides left and right relative to the rear board (see Fig. 7, and 9-10, the brackets 30 can be slid laterally relative to 10).
Re. Cl. 2, Perkins discloses: the hanging board is adjusted up and down relative to the rear board (see Fig. 7, the boards 30 can be adjusted up and down to different 11s for instance or lifted within respective 11s).
Re. Cl. 3, Perkins discloses: the rear board is equipped with at least three linear guide rails (see 12, Fig. 9, shown having more than three in Fig. 7) extending along its length direction (see Fig. 7, left to right direction), with an equal spacing between two adjacent linear guide rails (see Fig. 9); wherein the hanging board is equipped with at least two linear runners (32, 33, Fig. 8) matching with the linear guide rails (see Fig. 9), with a spacing between two adjacent linear runners equaling to the spacing between two adjacent linear guide rails (see Fig. 10).
Re. Cl. 4, Perkins discloses: the hanging board includes an outer side board (35 or 37, Fig. 8) close to the rear board and an inner side board (31, Fig. 8-8a) far away from the rear board (see Fig. 9-10); wherein a top board (34 or 36, Fig. 8) is connected between the inner side board and the outer side board, and a hanging hole (39, Fig. 8a) is arranged on the inner side board (see Fig. 8).
Re. Cl. 6, Perkins discloses: the cross-sectional shape of the linear guide rail is T-shaped (see shape of 12, Fig. 9).
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.
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perkins in view of Chiang US 8136775 (hereinafter Chiang).
PNG
media_image1.png
828
584
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re. Cl. 5, Perkins does not disclose the inner side board also has a bottom opening, one end of which is connected to the hanging hole and the other end is connected to the external environment. Chiang discloses a hanging hole (see annotated figure 2) located on an inner side board (22) which has a bottom opening (see annotated figure 2), one end of which is connected to the hanging hole and the other end is connected to the external environment (see Fig. 2, the wider portion of the hanging hole is open to the environment so that 51 may pass into it).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the hanging hole of Perkins to include the bottom opening of Chaing with reasonable expectation of success since Chaing discloses a keyhole structure which advantageously enables a wider head of a fastener to pass through during initial assembly but then prevents the head from being removed once the assembly is completed. Further, such a modification would make the removal of the device secured to the hanging board easier since it would not require the fastener to be fully removed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kao US 2010/0300996, McCracken US 3838842, and Marks US 9237819 disclose other known adjustable hangers which are presented to the Applicant for their consideration.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER E GARFT whose telephone number is (571)270-1171. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m..
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.
/CHRISTOPHER GARFT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632