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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-16 is/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.
MPEP 2173.05(p), which recites in part: “II. PRODUCT AND PROCESS IN THE SAME CLAIM A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. See In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litigation, 639 F.3d 1303, 1318, 97 USPQ2d 1737, 1748-49 (Fed. Cir. 2011).” (emphasis in bold added). For more info, see also Federal Circuit’s analysis of claim indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. § 112 ¶ 2 in IPXL Holdings, L.L.C. v. Amazon.com, Inc. – that a single claim covering both an apparatus and a method of use of that apparatus is indefinite.
Claim 1 in last 2 lines recites in part: “wherein, the second gear is configured to be spaced apart from the first gear when the swiveling mechanism is rotated”. As best understood by Examiner, the above recited limitations include a specific action achieved when using the apparatus (display device) by rotating the swiveling mechanism thereof in a method of using the display device, rather than reciting structural features and limitations for the apparatus of the display device itself. Furthermore, the word “when” in above limitation clearly indicates the specific moment when an event for the action step has occurred or transpired.
In other words, for the sake of better understanding and clarity, Examiner is interpreting the above set of limitations taken from claim 1 as equivalent as the following method steps: Step 1 as follow: maintaining a swiveling mechanism at stationary rested state, with the second gear is engaged with the first gear (see also [0061]). Step 2 as follow: rotating the swiveling mechanism, wherein, the second gear is configured to be spaced apart from the first gear (see also [0060]).
Furthermore, as evidenced by instant disclosure found in [0060] ~ [0063] of specification, an action on the swivel top bracket 6 lifted upward, the first gear 61 would be separated from the second gear 71, while another further action on the swivel top bracket 6 to be pressed downward, the first gear 61 is engaged with the second gear 71. Meanwhile, providing a load on the display set 1 (see [0062]), the first gear 61 and the second gear 71 may be engaged. In short, various actions must be performed to cause the second gear to be configured to be spaced apart from the first gear.
Furthermore, it is also obvious that the display device cannot rotate the swiveling mechanism by itself without any action being performed on the display device, or by such actions discussed in [0133] of instant application, when a user or operator may hold the display set 1 to swivel.
Therefore, drawing reference to totality of above discussions, claimed features in last 2 lines of claim 1 are directed to the subject matter of a method of using a display device by performing action on a swiveling mechanism thereof, which are beyond the scope of the apparatus claim of the display device itself. As a result, in accordance with MPEP 2173.05(p), claim 1 is deemed indefinite because a single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite.
Regarding claim 15, which recites “wherein, when an orientation of the swiveling mechanism moves to a first position, the second gear is separated from the first gear”.
As best understood by Examiner, the above limitation of claim 15 is equivalent to a conditional limitation directing to result features for (the second gear is separated from the first gear) achieved directly by an action step in a method of using the display device by moving the orientation of a swiveling mechanism thereof. In other word, limitations of claim 15 is directly equivalent to the following method step limitation: moving an orientation of the swiveling mechanism from original position to a first position for the display device. Furthermore, the word “when” in above limitation clearly indicates the specific moment when an event has occurred or transpired. It is is also obvious that the display device cannot move the swiveling mechanism orientation by itself without any action being performed on the display device, or by such actions discussed in [0133] of instant application, when a user or operator may hold the display set 1 to swivel. As a result, in accordance with MPEP 2173.05(p), claim 15 is deemed indefinite because a single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite.
Regarding claim 16, which recites “wherein the orientation of the swiveling mechanism changes from a second position to the first position when the swiveling mechanism is lifted”. As best understood by Examiner, the above limitation of claim 16 is equivalent to the following: “changing orientation of the swiveling mechanism from a second position to the first position while lifting the swiveling mechanism “, which are a series of combined action steps for a method of using the display device (see [0138] of instant application for more details). Furthermore, the word “when” in above limitation clearly indicates the specific moment when an event has occurred or transpired.
It is also obvious that the display device cannot lift the swiveling mechanism by itself without any action performed on the display device, as discussed in [0138] of instant application, when the user or operator lift the display set 1 upward. As a result, in accordance with MPEP 2173.05(p), claim 16 is deemed indefinite because a single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite.
By virtue of dependency upon base claim 1, dependent claims 2-16 are also 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.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 9-11 is/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. As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal and statutory requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a). Previously cited prior art Wang fails to disclose or teach “wherein a first latch that is in contact with the first bent portion and the second bent portion is provided on the swivel bottom plate, and a second latch that is in contact with one of the first bent portion and the second bent portion is provided on the stopper plate” of claim 9. By virtue of dependency upon claim 9, claims 10-11 likewise also contain allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Jang Jae Yong (KR20200078903A) discloses a swivel mechanism with upper plate and lower plate and a driving gear meshed with an internal gear. Chu (US20230243461A1) discloses a display stand with a gear assembly for rotating the display device. Choi (US12298802B2) discloses a rotator assembly for display apparatus having first gear and second gear meshed for driving rotation of the display apparatus.
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 DING Y TAN whose telephone number is (303)297-4271. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 8:00am MT--5:00pm MT. 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 telephone number 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DING Y TAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3632
/TERRELL L MCKINNON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Prosecution Insights