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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: brake mechanism for movable stand base of a display device.
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 9 is 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 9 recites the limitation "a hole formed at a position corresponding to the inclined portion of the rotation plate" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For the purposes of examination, it appears the rotation plate does not have its own inclined surface but rather just a hole intended to be able to align with the inclined surface
Claim 9 will be treated as:
“a hole formed at a position of the rotation plate configured to correspond
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wiemers (EP 3418070 A1, and Wiemers hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 8, Wiemers discloses a movable stand base comprising:
a base case (36, fig. 1) configured to include an opening at a bottom surface thereof (fig. 1, opening through which 5 is attached to 36);
a wheel housing (14, fig. 4) inserted from a lower portion of the base case(figs. 1 and 8);
a wheel module (13, fig. 4) accommodated in the wheel housing (figs. 4 and 6-7);
an inclined portion (10, fig. 3) formed around the opening (figs. 1-4); and
a rotation (16, fig. 4) plate rotatably coupled to the base case while overlapping the opening of the base case and the inclined portion (figs. 4 and 8, “the locking device 6; 16 can be pivoted by an angle”, [0020]),
wherein,
when the rotation plate rotates, the rotation plate moves along the inclined portion and a height of the rotation plate protruding downward from the opening is changed (“during a pivoting movement of the fastener 6; 16, the inclined planes 9; 10; 19; 20 slide on one another in order thus to increase the distance between the fastener 6; 16 and the underside of the fastening flange 4; 14”, [0022]).
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.
Claims 1-3 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wiemers in view of Collignon et al. (US 4205413 A, and Collignon hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 1, Wiemers discloses a movable stand base comprising:
a base case (36, fig. 1);
a wheel housing (14, fig. 4) inserted from a lower portion of the base case (figs. 1 and 8);
a wheel module (13, fig. 4) placed in the wheel housing (figs. 4 and 6-7);
a rotation plate (16, fig. 4) rotatably coupled to a base case (fig. 8, “the locking device 6; 16 can be pivoted by an angle”, [0020]).
Wiemers does not explicitly disclose a brake ring that is located in the wheel housing, moves in a vertical direction while rotating during rotation of the rotation plate, wherein, when the brake ring moves downward, the brake ring restricts rotation of a wheel of the wheel module by contacting the wheel.
Collignon discloses a brake ring (84, fig. 3) that is located in a wheel housing (16, fig. 3), moves in a vertical direction during rotation of a rotation plate (77, figs. 4 and 6, “when the arm 18 of the actuator ring is moved from the position "B" to the position C, the cams 98 move against the ramps 104 and drive the brake shoe downward”, Col. 6, ln. 11-14), wherein, when the brake ring moves downward, the brake ring restricts rotation of a wheel of the wheel module by contacting the wheel (fig. 3, “drive the brake shoe downward to the position shown by the dotted line 84A in FIG. 3. This applies the buttons at the rearwardmost portion of the circle of buttons against the tire tread 97 to thereupon lock the caster wheel”, Col. 6, ln 13-17).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Wiemers to incorporate the teachings of Collignon so that it comprises a brake ring that is located in the wheel housing, moves in a vertical direction while rotating during rotation of the rotation plate, wherein, when the brake ring moves downward, the brake ring restricts rotation of a wheel of the wheel module by contacting the wheel, in order to provide a provide a brake element with textured surface to contact the wheel (“the buttons at the rearwardmost portion of the circle of buttons against the tire tread 97 to thereupon lock the caster wheel”, Col. 6, ln. 15-17 of Collignon).
Regarding Claim 2, Wiemers/Collignon discloses the movable stand base according to claim 1, wherein:
the wheel housing is formed in a cylindrical shape (figs. 4-5 of Wiemers, cylindrical shape of portion of housing covering 16); and
the wheel module includes
a caster bracket (12, fig. 4 of Wiemers;) rotatably coupled to a center of an upper portion of the wheel housing (through 33, fig. 4); and
the wheel coupled to the caster bracket to rotate around a second shaft perpendicular to a first shaft located at a center of rotation of the caster bracket (“having a roller or double roller mounted pivotably about a vertical axis on a horizontal transverse axis of a bearing body”, [0001] of Wiemers).
Regarding Claim 3, Wiemers/Collignon discloses the movable stand base according to claim 2, wherein the brake ring includes:
a frictional surface (18, fig. 4 of Wiemers) formed in a ring shape at a lower end of the stand base (fig. 4 of Wiemers), and configured to include an inclined surface (fig. 5: inclined curved surfaces of 96).
Regarding Claim 7, Wiemers/Collignon discloses the movable stand base according to claim 1, further comprising:
a lever (25, figs. 1-3 of Wiemers) extending from the rotation plate and exposed on a side surface of the base case (figs. 1-3 of Wiemers).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Honda et al. (US 20230380089 A1, and Honda hereinafter) in view of Wiemers, further in view of Collignon.
Regarding Claim 10, Honda discloses a display device comprising:
a main body (10, fig. 1);
a stand pillar configured to extend downward from the main body (20, fig. 1); and
a stand base (22, fig. 1) located at a lower portion of the stand pillar (fig. 1) and including a plurality of wheels (23, fig. 1). Honda does not explicitly disclose a base case; a wheel housing inserted from a lower portion of the base case; a wheel module placed in the wheel housing; a rotation plate rotatably coupled to the base case; and a brake ring that is located in the wheel housing, moves in a vertical direction while rotating during rotation of the rotation plate, wherein, when the brake ring moves downward, the brake ring restricts rotation of a wheel of the wheel module by contacting the wheel.
Wiemers discloses a base case (36, fig. 1);
a wheel housing (14, fig. 4) inserted from a lower portion of the base case (figs. 1 and 8);
a wheel module (13, fig. 4) placed in the wheel housing (figs. 4 and 6-7);
a rotation plate (16, fig. 4) rotatably coupled to a base case (fig. 8, “the locking device 6; 16 can be pivoted by an angle”, [0020]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Honda to incorporate the teachings of Wiemers so that the stand base includes a base case; a wheel housing inserted from a lower portion of the base case; a wheel module placed in the wheel housing; a rotation plate rotatably coupled to the base case, in order to provide housing structures and locking means to the wheel module (“the locking device (6; 16) is arranged … so that a locking function is also generated here independently of the position of the steering rollers by inserting the locking device” of Wiemers).
Collignon discloses a brake ring (84, fig. 3) that is located in a wheel housing (16, fig. 3), moves in a vertical direction during rotation of a rotation plate (77, figs. 4 and 6, “when the arm 18 of the actuator ring is moved from the position "B" to the position C, the cams 98 move against the ramps 104 and drive the brake shoe downward”, Col. 6, ln. 11-14), wherein, when the brake ring moves downward, the brake ring restricts rotation of a wheel of the wheel module by contacting the wheel (fig. 3, “drive the brake shoe downward to the position shown by the dotted line 84A in FIG. 3. This applies the buttons at the rearwardmost portion of the circle of buttons against the tire tread 97 to thereupon lock the caster wheel”, Col. 6, ln 13-17).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Honda/Wiemers to incorporate the teachings of Collignon so that it comprises a brake ring that is located in the wheel housing, moves in a vertical direction while rotating during rotation of the rotation plate, wherein, when the brake ring moves downward, the brake ring restricts rotation of a wheel of the wheel module by contacting the wheel, in order to provide a provide a brake element with textured surface to contact the wheel (“the buttons at the rearwardmost portion of the circle of buttons against the tire tread 97 to thereupon lock the caster wheel”, Col. 6, ln. 15-17 of Collignon).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6, and 11 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.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. §112(b) above but appears otherwise allowable if this rejection is overcome in line with the interpretation taken by the examiner.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claims 4 and 11, patentability exists, at least in part, with the claimed features of “a guide slot extending horizontally on a side surface of the wheel housing; and a guide protrusion protruding from an outer circumference of the brake ring and inserted into the guide slot, wherein the guide slot includes a slope obliquely inclined in a vertical direction; and when the brake ring rotates, a position of the brake ring is changed vertically as the guide protrusion moves along the guide slot”. Wiemers (EP 3418070 A1), Collignon (US 4205413 A), Wyse (US 7228936 B2), Shiery (US 6951034 B2), Yeo (US 20140238784 A1), Lin (US 20130174377 A1), Hartwich (US 20110069820 A1), Smith (US 20050189005 A1), Chiang (US 7175002 B2), Lewandowski (US 6460205 B1), Hamilton (US 9168785 B2), and Heiligenthal (US 4922574 A) are cited as teaching some elements of the claimed invention including a guide slot, a protrusion, a wheel housing, and/or a brake ring. However, the prior art, when taken alone, or, in combination, cannot be construed as reasonably teaching or suggesting all of the elements of the claimed invention as arranged, disposed, or provided in the manner as claimed by the Applicant.
For instance, Wiemers discloses a guide slot (39, fig. 4); and a guide protrusion (38, fig. 4) inserted into the guide slot; however Wiemers lacks the guide slot extending horizontally on a side surface of the wheel housing; and the guide protrusion protruding from an outer circumference of the brake ring, wherein the guide slot includes a slope obliquely inclined in a vertical direction; and when the brake ring rotates, a position of the brake ring is changed vertically as the guide protrusion moves along the guide slot.
Collignon discloses a guide slot (103, fig. 2); and a guide protrusion (98, fig. 2) inserted into the guide slot (fig. 2), wherein the guide slot includes a slope obliquely inclined in a vertical direction (104, fig. 2). However Collignon lacks the guide slot extending horizontally on a side surface of the wheel housing; the guide protrusion protruding from an outer circumference of the brake ring and inserted into the guide slot, wherein the guide slot includes a slope obliquely inclined in a vertical direction; and when the brake ring rotates, a position of the brake ring is changed vertically as the guide protrusion moves along the guide slot.
Regarding Claim 9, patentability exists, at least in part, with the claimed features of “a hole formed at a position of the rotation plate configured to correspond to the inclined portion; and a groove located at a lower portion of an upper end of the inclined portion, wherein the inclined portion is exposed through the hole, and when an end of the hole is fastened to the groove, the rotation plate protrudes downward from the opening; and when the rotation plate overlaps the inclined portion, the rotation plate is inserted into the opening”. Wiemers (EP 3418070 A1), Collignon (US 4205413 A), Wyse (US 7228936 B2), Shiery (US 6951034 B2), Yeo (US 20140238784 A1), Lin (US 20130174377 A1), Hartwich (US 20110069820 A1), Chiang (US 7175002 B2), Chen (US 9216754 B2), Gipson (US 11649923 B2), and Lin (US 11161372 B1) are cited as teaching some elements of the claimed invention including a guide slot, a protrusion, a wheel housing, and/or a brake ring. However, the prior art, when taken alone, or, in combination, cannot be construed as reasonably teaching or suggesting all of the elements of the claimed invention as arranged, disposed, or provided in the manner as claimed by the Applicant. For instance, Wiemers discloses a stand base comprising a hole (fig. 1, portion of 36 through 5 passes through); and a groove (29, fig. 2) but lacks the hole formed at a position corresponding to the inclined portion of the rotation plate; and the groove located at a lower portion of an upper end of the inclined portion, wherein the inclined portion is exposed through the hole, and when an end of the hole is fastened to the groove, the rotation plate protrudes downward from the opening; and when the rotation plate overlaps the inclined portion, the rotation plate is inserted into the opening. The cited art disclose some of the features listed above but does not cure the deficiencies of Wiemers.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Martin A Asmat-Uceda whose telephone number is (571)270-7198. The examiner can normally be reached 8 AM - 5 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, Allen L Parker can be reached at 303-297-4722. 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.
/ALLEN L PARKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2841
/MARTIN ANTONIO ASMAT UCEDA/ Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights