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 received on 4/21/26 are entered.
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 second stopper & second fitting part (cl. 8-10 & 19) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 1, 3, 5-6, 13-15, & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR20210082785) in view of Muterthies (6347849).
Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches the structure substantially as claimed, including an onboard refrigerator (1) that comprises: a cabinet (3); a drawer (2), wherein the drawer is slidably provided inside the cabinet (Figs. 5-7) via sliding means (22 on each side of 2 - see par. 25); but fail(s) to teach a sliding component having an included angle. However, Muterthies teaches a sliding component (10), wherein the sliding component comprises a first sliding member (18; or 18 & 26) and a second sliding member (14), the first sliding member is provided on a drawer (20), the second sliding member is provided at an inner wall surface (i.e., inner surface of 12) of a cabinet (12), the second sliding member has a sliding surface (A in Fig. 1 Annotated) that is sliding-fitted (via 52-57 & 66) to the first sliding member, and the sliding surface of the second sliding member and a plane (i.e., plane extending along upper surface of 16, labeled “C” in Fig. 1 Annotated) orthogonal to a height direction of the cabinet have an included angle therebetween in a first direction (Fig. 1), wherein the first direction is orthogonal to the height direction and a front-rear direction of the cabinet; wherein the sliding component further comprises a fixing base (16), the fixing base is provided inside the cabinet (Fig. 1), the second sliding member (14) is provided on the fixing base (Fig. 1), the fixing base has an oblique surface (B), the oblique surface forms the included angle with the plane (Fig. 1), the second sliding member is provided on the oblique surface, and the sliding surface (A) of the second sliding member (14) is parallel (Fig. 1) to the oblique surface (B).
PNG
media_image1.png
303
481
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to substitute a sliding component, as taught by Muterthies, for each of the sliding means of Kim, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to facilitate extension & retraction of the drawer, and because such an outcome would have been a predictable result of such a substitution of one known sliding means for another.
Regarding claim 3, Kim teaches a quantity of first sliding members (18 of Muterthies) is at least two, a quantity of second sliding members (14 of Muterthies) is at least two, each of the first sliding members corresponds to one instance of the second sliding members (as in Fig. 1 of Muterthies), the oblique surface (B of Muterthies) is a plurality of oblique surfaces (B of Muterthies on each of 16 of Muterthies), and each of the second sliding members corresponds to one instance of the plurality of oblique surfaces (as in Fig. 1 of Muterthies).
Regarding claim 5, Muterthies teaches an included angle that is greater than or equal to 30 degrees and less than or equal to 60 degrees (see Fig. 1, showing the angled between A & C or B & C to be ~42 degrees).
Regarding claim 6, Muterthies teaches a second sliding member (14) connected to an oblique surface (B) via unspecified fastening means. Additionally, Muterthies further teaches using screws (col. 4, lines 35-38) to detachably connect a first component to a second component. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to substitute screws, as taught by Muterthies, for the fastening means of Kim as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to facilitate repair & replacement of the second sliding members.
Regarding claim 13, Kim teaches a vehicle (par. 1-2), comprising: a vehicle body (par. 2); and an onboard refrigerator provided inside the vehicle body (par. 2).
Regarding claim 14, Kim as modified teaches a first sliding member (18 of Muterthies) and a drawer (2 of Kim) that are fixed to each other (as in col. 4, lines 35-38 of Muterthies), a second sliding member (14 of Muterthies) and a cabinet (3 of Kim) are fixed to each other (as in col. 4, lines 31-35 of Muterthies), and the first sliding member is slidable in a length direction of the second sliding member (as in col. 5, lines 1-3 of Muterthies).
Regarding claim 15, Kim as modified teaches an inner wall surface (i.e., inner surface of 3 of Kim) of a cabinet (3 of Kim) that comprises a bottom wall (i.e., bottom wall of 3 of Kim), the fixing base (16 of Muterthies) is provided (via the side walls of 3 of Kim) on the bottom wall (as in Fig. 1 of Muterthies), and the second sliding member (14 of Muterthies) is provided on the fixing base.
Regarding claim 20, Muterthies teaches a first sliding member (18 & 26) provided with a sliding rail (26), and a second sliding member (14) provided with a guide groove (i.e., groove along length of 14 - labeled “D” in Fig. 1 Annotated), and the sliding rail is sliding-fitted inside the guide groove (Fig. 1 & col. 5, lines 1-3).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR20210082785) & Muterthies (6347849) in view of Chiang (20100244643). Kim as modified teaches the structure substantially as claimed, including a fixing base (16 of Muterthies) and a drawer (2 of Kim); but fail(s) to teach a first stopper & a first fitting part. However, Chiang teaches stopping means (11, 22) comprising a first stopper (11) provided at a front end of a fixing base (i.e., base to which 10 is attached), and a first fitting part (22) is provided at a rear end of a drawer (i.e., drawer to which 20 is attached), and the first stopper is capable of fitting to the first fitting part to restrict a maximum opening degree of the drawer (Fig. 4). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add stopping means, as taught by Chiang, to the structure of Kim as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to prevent over-extension of the drawer.
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR20210082785) & Muterthies (6347849) in view of Ohshima (5135294). Kim as modified teaches the structure substantially as claimed, including a fixing base (16 of Muterthies) and a drawer (2 of Kim); but fail(s) to teach a rack or damping gear. However, Ohshima teaches braking means (5, 9) comprising a rack (5) is provided on a fixing base (3a), a damping gear (16) provided on a drawer (2a), and the damping gear and the rack are fitted (Fig. 4 & col. 4, line 7), and an installation frame (9a, 9b), the installation frame is provided at a bottom wall of the drawer (Fig. 3), the damping gear is provided on the installation frame (Figs. 4-5), and the rack is provided on the fixing base and extends in a length direction (Fig. 3) of a second sliding member (3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add braking means, as taught by Ohshima, to the structure of Kim as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to brake the drawer as it approaches the cabinet (as suggested by col, 4, lines 38-49 of Ohshima), thereby preventing damage to the drawer & the cabinet while reducing the noise produced by closure of the drawer.
Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR20210082785) & Muterthies (6347849) in view of Malinowski (5544998). Kim as modified teaches the structure substantially as claimed, including a sliding component (10 of Muterthies); but fail(s) to teach connectors. However, Malinowski teaches connecting means (40) comprising a rail (40) having two connectors (42) provided at two ends (Fig. 1) of a first sliding member (28), and the connectors are connected to the first sliding member and the drawer. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add connecting means, as taught by Malinowski, to the structure of Kim as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide additional support to the drawer (as suggested by col. 3, lines 21-22 of Malinowski). Hence, Kim as modified would teach connectors (42) that are plate members made of an unspecified material & connected to both the drawer & the first sliding member by unspecified securing means. Additionally, Applicant has not traversed the examiner’s assertion that making a rail from metal is well known in the art (see Admissions of Prior Art (APA), below). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to make each of the connecting means of Kim as modified from metal, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to increase their strength & durability. Hence, Kim as modified would teach connectors (42 of Malinowski) that are each metal-plate members. Additionally, Malinowski broadly teaches using thread members (18) to connect one component to another component. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to substitute thread members, as taught by Malinowski, for the unspecified securing means of Kim as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to facilitate repair & replacement of the drawer, connecting means, & first sliding member. Hence, Kim as modified would teach connectors (42 of Malinowski) detachably connected to a first sliding member (18 of Muterthies) and a drawer (2 of Kim), one end of each connector is connected to the first sliding member by a thread member (18 of Malinowski), and the other end of each connector is connected to the drawer by a thread member (18 of Malinowski).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR20210082785) & Muterthies (6347849) in view of Kueng (5584550). Kim as modified teaches the structure substantially as claimed, including a fixing base (16 of Muterthies) and a second sliding member (14 of Muterthies) connected to each other by screws (see above); but fail(s) to teach first & second installation sites. However, Kueng teaches securing means (16 & corresponding holes in 22) comprising a plurality of first installation sites (i.e., locations of 22 corresponding to 16) provided on a fixing base (22) that are separate in a length direction of the fixing base, a plurality of second installation sites (16) provided on a second sliding member (10) that are separate in a length direction of the second sliding member, and the plurality of first installation sites and the plurality of first installation sites correspond one to one (Fig. 4). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add securing means, as taught by Kueng, between the fixing base & second sliding member of Kim as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a stronger connection therebetween. Hence, Kim as modified would teach thread members (i.e., screws - see par. 10 above) that are connected to the plurality of first installation sites and the plurality of second installation sites (as in Fig. 4 of Kueng).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 8-10, & 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/21/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant contends the drawing amendments overcome the drawing objection set forth in the previous Office Action and above, because “Fig. 9 is added, which includes the features recited in claims 8-10 and 19” (Remarks at 8). However, Fig. 9 does not show either the second stopper or the second fitting part. Rather, Fig. 9 simply reproduces the text of claims 8-10 & 19 in a block diagram, with reference numerals drawn from par. 62-64 of the written description. Such a block diagram, however, does not actually depict any structural features (e.g., size, shape, configuration, location relative to other components) of either the second stopper or the second fitting part. At best, Fig. 9 merely describes these components. It does not, however, show either the second stopper or the second fitting part, as required by 37 CFR 1.83. Hence, the drawing objection has been maintained.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the claims (Remarks at 8-12) have been addressed in the prior art rejection above.
Admissions of Prior Art (APA): Applicant has not traversed the examiner's taking of Official Notice that the practice(s) of making a rail from metal is well known in the art. As such, said practice(s) is therefore viewed as being admitted prior art (APA). See MPEP 2144.03.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW ING whose telephone number is (571)272-6536. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 a.m. - 5 p.m.. 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.
/MATTHEW W ING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights