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 § 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.
Claims 1-4, 6-9, 13-17, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen (U.S. Pub. No. 20160278232).
With respect to claim 1, Chen discloses a drawer runner system, comprising: a rail (Fig. 9, supporting base 200) having a mounting plate (vertical wall of supporting base 200); a top engagement portion (Fig. 9, upper supporting portion 206) and a bottom engagement portion (lower supporting portion 206), the top and bottom engagement portions (upper and lower 206) extending in parallel along the rail (supporting base 200 is a second embodiment of supporting base 26 as shown in Figs. 3 and 8, the upper/lower supporting portions 206 of supporting base 206 extend parallel similarly to upper/lower supporting portions 52 of supporting base 26); and a runner member (Fig. 9, second rail 202) having a top sliding surface (upper wall 208a) for sliding engagement with the top engagement portion (upper 206) and a bottom sliding surface (lower wall 208b) for sliding engagement with the bottom engagement portion (lower 206); wherein i) a lateral width the top sliding surface (upper wall 208a) is greater than a lateral width of the top engagement portion (Fig. 9 shows upper 206 fits within 208a, therefore the lateral width of upper 206 is less than the lateral width of 208a) and/or ii) a lateral width of the bottom sliding surface (lower wall 208b) is greater than a lateral width of the bottom engagement portion (Fig. 9 shows lower 206s fit within 208b, therefore the lateral width of lower 206 is less than the lateral width of 208b); and wherein the runner member (second rail 202) and the rail (supporting base 200) are moveable laterally relative to each other (second rail 202 and supporting base 200 are individual pieces assembled together to form a slide rail assembly and are therefore capable of moving laterally relative to each other before and during assembly or during disassembly by laterally pulling the second rail 202 out of the supporting base 200. Further, the left-side contour of 208a and 208b as shown in annotated Fig. 9 below, the radius of 208a and 208b is larger than the radius of support portions 206 and would therefore allow for some lateral movement between 202 and 200 when assembled).
PNG
media_image1.png
686
691
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 9
With respect to claim 2, Chen further discloses wherein the top and bottom engagement portions are vertically aligned (Fig. 9 shows upper supporting portion 206 is vertically aligned with lower supporting portion 206).
With respect to claim 3, Chen further discloses wherein: the lateral width of the top sliding surface (upper wall 208a) is greater than the lateral width of the top engagement portion (Fig. 9 shows upper supporting portion 206 fits within upper wall 208a, therefore the lateral width of upper 206 is less than the lateral width of 208a); and the lateral width of the bottom sliding surface (lower wall 208a) is greater than the lateral width of the bottom engagement portion (Fig. 9 shows lower supporting portion 206 fits within lower wall 208b, therefore the lateral width of lower 206 is less than the lateral width of 208b).
With respect to claim 4, Chen further discloses wherein the top engagement portion (upper supporting portion 206) and/or the bottom engagement portion (lower supporting portion 206) is provided with a radius (Fig. 9 shows upper/lower 206 are curved and therefore have a radius).
With respect to claim 6, Chen further discloses wherein the rail (supporting base 200) comprises a top flange extending downwards (see annotated Fig. 9 below, downwardly extending top flange), and an upper lip extending upwards from the top flange (see annotated Fig. 9 below, upwardly extending upper lip), wherein an interface between the top flange and the upper lip forms the top engagement portion (upper supporting portion 206 is formed where the downwardly extending top flange and the upwardly extending upper lip meet).
PNG
media_image2.png
367
401
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 9
With respect to claim 7, Chen further discloses wherein the rail (supporting base 200) comprises a bottom flange extending upwards (see annotated Fig. 9 below, upwardly extending bottom flange), and a bottom lip extending downwards from the bottom flange (see annotated Fig. 9 below, downwardly extending bottom lip), wherein an interface between the bottom flange and the bottom lip forms the bottom engagement portion (lower supporting portion 206 is formed where the downwardly extending bottom lip and the upwardly extending bottom flange meet).
PNG
media_image3.png
425
451
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 9
With respect to claim 8, Chen further discloses wherein the mounting plate (vertical wall of supporting base 200), the top engagement portion (upper supporting portion 206), and the bottom engagement portion (lower supporting portion 206) are integrally formed (the cross section of supporting base 200 as shown in Fig. 9 shows that the upper/lower supporting portions are continuous and integral with the vertical wall portion).
With respect to claim 9, Chen further discloses wherein a lateral distance between the mounting plate and the top engagement portion and/or the bottom engagement portion (lateral distance between and the vertical wall of supporting base 200 and upper/lower supporting portion 206) is greater than a lateral width of the runner member times 0.5 (Fig, 9 shows that upper/lower 206 sit at a center/halfway point of second rail 202 in a lateral direction, and a gap exists between the vertical wall of supporting base 200 and the vertical wall of second rail 202, therefore the lateral distance between and the vertical wall of supporting base 200 and upper/lower supporting portion 206 has to be greater than half the lateral width of the second rail 200).
With respect to claim 13, Chen further discloses wherein the runner member (second rail 202) has a shape of a polygon (second rail 202 is analogous to second rail 28 of the first embodiment, which is shown in Fig. 6A-6B as being rectangular) or a shape of a cylinder.
With respect to claim 14, Chen further discloses wherein the top sliding surface (208a) and/or the bottom sliding surface (208b) is at least partly concave (Fig. 9 shows 208a and 208b are concave to accommodate the convex structure of upper/lower supporting portions 206).
With respect to claim 15, Chen further discloses wherein: the top sliding surface (208a) and/or the bottom sliding surface includes an outer end wing, an inner end wing, and a central sliding portion extending from the outer end wing to the inner end wing (see annotated Fig. 9 below, outer end wing, inner end wing, central sliding portion); and wherein a vertical distance between an outer edge of the top sliding surface and an outer edge of the bottom sliding surface (see annotated Fig. 9 below, vertical distance (VD) between outer edges of 208a and 208b) is larger than a vertical opening distance between the top and bottom engagement portion (see annotated Fig. 9 below, vertical opening distance (VOD) between upper and lower 206), thereby preventing the runner member from being laterally displaces out of the rail (the inner end wing and outer end wing structures of second rail 202 would prevent it from moving entirely out of supporting base 200 during longitudinal sliding of the rail).
PNG
media_image4.png
817
443
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 9
With respect to claim 16, Chen further discloses wherein the central sliding portion is at least partly provided with a radius (Fig. 9, central concave portion of 208a/208b is curved and therefore has a radius).
With respect to claim 17, Chen further discloses wherein the radius of the central sliding portion of the top sliding surface (central concave portion of 208a) is equal to or greater than a radius of the top engagement portion (Fig. 9, the radius of upper 206 appears to be less than or equal to the radius of central concave portion of 208a), and/or the radius of the central sliding portion of the bottom sliding surface (central concave portion of 208b) is equal to or greater than a radius of the bottom engagement portion (the radius of lower 206 appears to be less than or equal to the radius of central concave portion of 208b).
With respect to claim 28, Chen further discloses wherein: when the runner member (second rail 202) is in a distal position, the runner member is disposed a first distance from the mounting plate (as explained in the claim 1 rejection above, one or ordinary skill would understand that the second rail 202 is removable from supporting base 200 and therefore a distal position in which the second rail is removed from the supporting base would result in a distal position in which the second rail is a first/farthest distance from the supporting base); when the runner member is in a proximal position, the runner member is disposed a second distance from the mounting plate (upon assembly, the second rail 202 would be pushed into the supporting base 200 and any inward horizontal force would result in a second/closest distant to the supporting base); when the runner member is in an intermediate position between the distal position and the proximal position, the runner member is disposed a third distance from the mounting plate (after assembly and during normal operation, the second rail 202 would sit at a third/intermediate distance from the supporting base as shown in Fig. 9); the second distance is less than the first distance (as explained above, the second distance is the closest distance between second rail 202 and supporting base 200); and the third distance is less than the first distance and is greater than the second distance (the third/intermediate distance would be between the first/farthest distance and the second/closest distance).
Claims 1, 10, 20-21, 27, and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lazar (U.S. Pat. No. 4331369).
With respect to claim 1, Lazar discloses a drawer runner system (Figs. 2-4), comprising: a rail (Fig. 2, floating slide 3) having a mounting plate (vertical wall of floating slide 3); a top engagement portion (Fig. 3, contact area of face portion 19) and a bottom engagement portion (contact area of face portion 20), the top and bottom engagement portions extending in parallel along the rail (Figs. 2 and 2 show face portions 19 and 20 extend parallel to each other along floating slide 3); and a runner member (Fig. 4, slide guide 5) having a top sliding surface (Figs. 3 and 4, upper surface of smaller shaft 24) for sliding engagement with the top engagement portion (Fig. 3, upper surface of 24 abuts the contact area of face portion 19) and a bottom sliding surface (lower surface of smaller shaft 24) for sliding engagement with the bottom engagement portion (Fig. 3, lower surface of 24 abuts the contact area of face portion 20); wherein i) a lateral width the top sliding surface (upper surface of smaller shaft 24) is greater than a lateral width of the top engagement portion (face portion 19) and/or ii) a lateral width of the bottom sliding surface (lower surface of smaller shaft 24) is greater than a lateral width of the bottom engagement portion (Fig. 3 shows face portions 19 and 20 fit within the horizontal area of upper/lower surfaces of 24, therefore the lateral width of the contact area of face portions 19/20 are less than the lateral width of the upper/lower surfaces of 24); and wherein the runner member (slide guide 5) and the rail (floating slide 3) are moveable laterally relative to each other (Several lateral gaps within the sliding assembly that would allow for lateral movement between the slide guide 5 and the floating slide 3, such as the channel formed between flange 25 and end portion 18 (Fig. 4), the channel formed between face portions 19/20 and the vertical wall of floating slide 3 (Fig. 3), and the channel 16 formed between face flanges 21/22 and the vertical wall of sheath 4 (Fig. 3). See the Response to Arguments section for further detail).
With respect to claim 10, Lazar further discloses wherein the runner member (slide guide 5) is capable of being turned in relation to a drawer side wall (Col. 3, lines 32-38 describe a method for attaching slide guide 5 to chassis 2 which includes the cylindrical stud portion 24 being threaded and inserted into hole 8 from one side of the chassis 2, then a nut is screwed onto the threaded portion from the other side of the chassis, therefore the slide guide 5 is capable of being inserted and turned within the chassis hole 8 during assembly).
With respect to claim 20, Lazar further discloses wherein a total width of the drawer runner system is less than 14mm (Fig. 3, dimension D is “0.210 inch or smaller” which is equal to 5.334mm or smaller, therefore the total width (from the leftmost end of slide guide 5 to the rightmost end of floating slide 3) is reasonably less than 14mm).
With respect to claim 21, Lazar discloses a chest of drawers comprising a cabinet (Fig. 1, rack 1), at least one drawer (chassis 2), and at least one drawer runner system (assembly of floating slide 3, rack sheath 4, and slide guide 5), the at least one drawer runner system comprising: a rail (floating slide 3) having a mounting plate (vertical wall of floating slide 3); a top engagement portion (contact area of face portion 19) and a bottom engagement portion (contact area of face portion 20), the top and bottom engagement portions extending in parallel along the rail (Figs. 2 and 2 show face portions 19 and 20 extend parallel to each other along floating slide 3); and a runner member (slide guide 5) having a top sliding surface (upper surface of smaller shaft 24) for sliding engagement with the top engagement portion (upper surface of 24 abuts the contact area of face portion 19) and a bottom sliding surface (lower surface of smaller shaft 24) for sliding engagement with the bottom engagement portion (lower surface of 24 abuts the contact area of face portion 20), wherein a lateral width of at least one of the top sliding surface or the bottom sliding surface is greater than a lateral width of the corresponding top engagement portion or bottom engagement portion, respectively (Fig, 3 face portions 19 and 20 fit within the horizontal area of upper/lower surfaces of 24, therefore the lateral width of the contact area of face portions 19/20 are less than the lateral width of the upper/lower surfaces of 24).
With respect to claim 27, Lazar further discloses wherein the rail is mounted on the cabinet (Figs. 1 and 2, floating slide 3 is mounted to rack 1 via rack sheath 4); and the runner is mounted on the at least one drawer (Figs. 2 and 3, slide guide 5 is mounted on a side wall of chassis 2).
With respect to claim 32, Lazar further discloses wherein the runner member (slide guide 5) has a first vertical height on a first lateral side of the runner member (vertical height of hexagonal flange 26 is located on a left side of floating slide 3 as shown in Fig. 3) and a second vertical height on an opposite, second lateral side of the runner member (diameter X of end portion 18 which is located on a right side of floating slide 3); and the first vertical height is greater than the second vertical height (Figs. 3 and 4 show the vertical height of hexagonal flange 26 is greater than diameter X).
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 5 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lazar (U.S. Pat. No. 4331369).
With respect to claim 5, Lazar discloses the limitation set forth above. Lazar is silent to the lateral width of the top engagement portion (contact area of face portion 19) and/or the lateral width of the bottom engagement portion (contact area of face portion 19) being 1mm or less, but discloses dimension D as shown in Fig. 3 is 0.210 inches (5.334mm) or less.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the lateral width of the top/bottom engagement portion to be 1mm or less since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change is size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(A). It is further noted that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. MPEP 2144.05. One having ordinary skill would modify the dimensions of the contact portions of Lazar such that they fit within dimension D (5.334mm or less) with appropriate spacing and clearance to allow for low friction sliding of the sliding assembly.
With respect to claim 11, Lazar discloses the limitation set forth above. Lazar is silent to the material of the runner member and rail.
In an alternate embodiment, Lazar discloses wherein the runner member is composed of a plastic and/or the rail is composed of a metal (Col. 4, lines 65-68, “floating slide 51 is substantially identical to the floating slide 3 of FIG. 3 except that in FIG. 9, the member is shown as cast or extruded from a single piece of metal”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the floating slide of the first embodiment such that is made of metal, as taught by the second embodiment, in order to provide a durable rail with low frictional resistance. It is further noted that it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. See MPEP 2144.07.
Claims 18 and 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (U.S. Pub. No. 20160278232) in view of Reiss (U.S. Pat. 5085524).
With respect to claim 18, Chen discloses the limitation set forth above. Chen further discloses wherein the central sliding portion (concave surface of upper wall 208a) has two portions provided with a radius (left-side of concave surface of 208a and right-side of concave surface of 208a). Chen fails to disclose wherein the central sliding portion has a horizontal portion, the horizontal portion being arranged as an intermediate portion between two portions provided with a radius.
Reiss discloses a central sliding portion has a horizontal portion (Figs. 3 and 4, flat horizontal land 94), the horizontal portion being arranged as an intermediate portion between two portions (inclined surfaces 96 and 102).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the central sliding portion of the upper wall of Chen such that it has a flat horizontal intermediate portion, such as taught by Reiss, (resulting in a horizontal portion between two portions provided with a radius) with a reasonable expectation of success in order to reduce the contact area between the top supporting portion and the upper wall thereby reducing the amount of friction between the two, and to further allow a given load to be spread out over a greater volume of load bearing material (Col. 7, lines 32-35).
With respect to claim 29, Chen discloses the limitation set forth above except wherein: when the runner member is in a distal position, the top engagement portion and/or the bottom engagement portion is engaged with the outer end wing and is disposed spaced apart from the inner end wing; when the runner member is in a proximal position, the top engagement portion and/or the bottom engagement portion is offset toward the inner end wing and is disposed spaced apart from the outer end wing; and when the runner member is in an intermediate position between the distal position and the proximal position, the top engagement portion and/or the bottom engagement portion is disposed spaced apart from the outer end wing and from the inner end wing.
Reiss discloses wherein: a runner member (Figs. 2-3, guide block portion 20) is capable of moving to a distal position (gaps between guide block 20 and web portions 50 allow slide member 16 be pulled away from the guide block to a first/distal position in which radius 60 would abut outer inclined surface 96), the top engagement portion and/or the bottom engagement portion (radius 60 of flange 52) is engaged with an outer end wing (outer inclined surface 96) and is disposed spaced apart from an inner end wing (inner inclined surface 102); the runner member is capable of moving to a proximal position (gaps between guide block 20 and web portions 50 allow slide member 16 be pushed toward the guide block to a second/proximal position in which radius 60 is spaced apart from outer inclined surface 96), the top engagement portion and/or the bottom engagement portion (radius 60 of flange 52) is offset toward the inner end wing (inner inclined surface 102) and is disposed spaced apart from the outer end wing (outer inclined surface 96); and the runner member is capable of moving to an intermediate position between the distal position and the proximal position (position of guide block 20 as shown in Fig. 2), the top engagement portion and/or the bottom engagement portion (radius 60 of flange 52) is disposed spaced apart from the outer end wing and from the inner end wing (Fig. 2 shows radius 20 is spaced apart from the inner and outer inclined surfaces 96 and 102).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the second rail of Chen such that the upper wall has a flat, horizontal section formed between the inner and outer end wings, such as taught by Reiss, with a reasonable expectation of success in order to reduce the contact area between the top supporting portion and the upper wall thereby reducing the amount of friction between the two, and to further allow a given load to be spread out over a greater volume of load bearing material (Col. 7, lines 32-35).
Claims 30-31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (U.S. Pub. No. 20160278232) in view of Guiles (U.S. Pub. No. 20080067905)
With respect to claim 30, Chen discloses the limitation set forth above except wherein the rail further includes a bump configured to limit contact between the runner member and the mounting plate, the bump projecting from the mounting plate toward the runner member and arranged between the top engagement portion and the bottom engagement portion.
Guiles discloses a rail further includes a bump (see annotated Fig. 4 below, bridge 57 includes a bump) configured to limit contact between a runner member and a mounting plate (Fig. 3A, bump of bridge 57 limits contact between the vertically extending edge of track 31 and the vertically extending wall of glide 34), the bump projecting from the mounting plate toward the runner member (Figs. 3A and 4, the bump projects from a vertical wall of bridge 57 toward track 31) and arranged between a top engagement portion and a bottom engagement portion (Fig. 3A, bump is arranged between top flange 50 and bottom flange 51).
PNG
media_image5.png
295
367
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Annotated 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 modify the supporting base of Chen such that it includes a bump, such as taught by Guiles, in order to prevent unwanted friction between the supporting base and the sliding second rail especially if the second rail undergoes a lateral force that may cause its vertical wall to abut the vertical wall of the supporting base, and to further maintain a constant distance between the supporting base and the second rail.
With respect to claim 31, Chen in view of Guiles discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination further discloses wherein: the bump has an elongated shape and extends along the mounting plate in a longitudinal direction of the rail (Guiles, Fig. 4 shows the bump is elongate and extends along the same direction as bridge 57 and would therefore extend in the same direction as the supporting base 200 of Chen); and when the runner member (Chen, second rail 202) is in a proximal position in which the runner member is disposed proximal to the mounting plate (Chen, Fig. 5B shows the slide assembly in a retracted state in which the second rail 202 would remain within the central area of the supporting base 200), the bump abuts the runner member providing a limited contact area between the runner member and the mounting plate (elongate bump of Guiles as included on the supporting base 200 of Chen would abut the second rail 202 limiting the contact between the vertical walls of 200 and 202).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 19 would be allowable for disclosing the rail has a horizontal front section, and intermediate retardation section tilted vertically upwards relative to the front section, and a rear section tilted vertically downwards relative to the front section.
Neither Chen nor Lazar discloses a rail having an intermediate retardation section that tilts upwards or a rear section that tilts downwards relative to the horizontal front section. Chen’s supporting base 200 is an elongate rectangular plate houses an elongate rectangular second rail 202 which retracts and extends along the supporting base. Based on this configuration, it would be improper hindsight to reconstruct the supporting base such that an intermediate section tilts downward and a rear section tilts upwards. Similarly, Lazar’s floating slide 3 is an elongate rectangular plate that slides within elongate rectangular rack sheath 4 therefore tilting intermediate and rear sections are incompatible with this design.
Response to Arguments
U.S.C. §102(a)(1) Rejections
Chen (U.S. Pub. No. 20160278232); Lazar (U.S. Pat. No. 4331369)
Applicant's arguments filed 6/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant has amended independent claim 1 to include the limitation “wherein the runner member and rail are moveable laterally relative to each other” and argues that neither Chen nor Lazar discloses that the runner member and the rail are moveable laterally relative to each other. Examiner disagrees.
Chen
The runner member (second rail 202) and rail (supporting base 200) are individual pieces assembled together to form the slide rail assembly of Fig. 9 and are therefore capable of moving laterally relative to each other before and during assembly, such as pushing/snapping the second rail 202 into the supporting base 200, or during disassembly by laterally pulling the second rail 202 out of the supporting base 200. Applicant argues that the “tight, complementary engagement” of the support portions 206 and the upper and lower walls 208a and 208b “would prevent lateral movement between the supporting base 200 and the second rail 202” however, Fig. 9 shows that the contours of the support portions 206 do not match the contours of the upper and lower walls 208a and 208b in such a way that would prevent lateral movement. As made evident by the left-side contour of 208a and 208b as shown in annotated Fig. 9 below, the radius of 208a and 208b is larger than the radius of support portions 206 and would therefore allow for some lateral movement when assembled. Therefore, Chen discloses all of the limitations of amended claim 1 and the rejection is maintained.
PNG
media_image1.png
686
691
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 9
Lazar
Applicant argues that Lazar fails to disclose the runner member (slide guide 5) and rail (floating slide 3) are moveable laterally relative to each other citing Col. 3, lines 5-9 which states “The face portions 19 and 20 of the floating slide 3 extend over the end portion 18 so that the slide guide 5 cannot be moved relative to the floating slide 3 in the plane of the papers.” The Examiner notes that this statement describes the face portions 19 and 20 of floating slide 3 acting as lips which would prevent the end portion 18 of the slide guide 5 from being entirely removed from the channel 15 of floating slide 3. This does not mean that any and all relative lateral movement is prevented. Several lateral gaps within the sliding assembly that would allow for lateral movement between the slide guide 5 and the floating slide 3, such as the channel formed between flange 25 and end portion 18 (Fig. 4), the channel formed between face portions 19/20 and the vertical wall of floating slide 3 (Fig. 3), and the channel 16 formed between face flanges 21/22 and the vertical wall of sheath 4 (Fig. 3). Further, it is understood in the art that a structure of a floating slide requires some clearance in the longitudinal, lateral, and transverse directions in order to allow for sliding and would therefore allow for some lateral movement between the relatively slidable parts. Therefore, Chen discloses all of the limitations of amended claim 1 and the rejection is maintained.
It is further noted that the amended claim 1 does not define a specific degree of lateral movement between the runner member and rail.
U.S.C. §102(a)(1) Rejections – Andersson (U.S. Pat. No. 11229286)
Applicant argues that Andersson fails to disclose the limitations of independent claims 1 and 21. Examiner agrees. However, further search and consideration have produced a reference that discloses the limitations of these claims. Therefore, a second action non-final has been made above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, and all show structures similar to various elements of applicant’s disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH IRENE ARTALEJO whose telephone number is (571)272-4292. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-6.
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, 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.
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.
/E.I.A./ Examiner, Art Unit 3637 /DANIEL J TROY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights