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 Objections
Claims 9, 10, & 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claims 9 & 10, “inculde” should be “include”.
In claim 13, “bepositioned” should be “be positioned”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 6 & 13 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.
In claim 6, applicant utilizes the phrase “the circuit board is configured to include” it is unclear if such a phrase positively recites the limitations that follows (i.e., does configured to include mean that the circuit board can include such elements or does it mean that the circuit board does include such elements). For examination purposes the limitation will be understood as “the circuit board includes”.
Claim 13 includes the limitation “wherein upper end… second sealing groove” It is unclear as to what this limitation means in light of the specification. The disclosure appears to indicate that the upper and lower ends of the first and second sealing groove do not face each other (e.g. see Fig.18 of the instant application). It is not understood what this limitation was intended to impart. As examiner cannot make a reasonable interpretation as to what said limitation was intended to entail, the limitation will be ignored for examination purposes.
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(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Heo (US20110241508A1).
As to claim 1, Heo teaches laundry treatment apparatus comprising: a first treatment apparatus (ref 100) comprising a first front panel (ref 115) provided at a front side thereof and a first drum configured to receive laundry therein [0047]; a second treatment apparatus (ref 200) positioned on the first treatment apparatus, the second treatment apparatus comprising a second front panel provided at a front side (see Fig.1) thereof and a second drum configured to receive laundry therein [0047]; and a control panel (ref 120/220 including refs 180 & 10) provided between the first front panel and the second front panel and providing a user interface (UI, see refs 150/250) configured to control at least one of the first treatment apparatus or the second treatment apparatus [0048-0049], wherein the control panel comprises: a cover panel (refs 120/220) comprising a front surface portion defining an appearance of the control panel, an upper surface portion extending backwards from an upper portion of the front surface portion, and a lower surface portion extending backwards from a lower portion of the front surface portion (see Fig.7); and an electrical component module coupled to the cover panel behind the cover panel, and wherein the electrical component module comprises: a supporter (ref 180); a flat display positioned on a front surface of the supporter (refs 150/250 & [0064]); and a circuit board (ref 10) positioned behind the supporter and electrically connected to the flat display.
As to claim 2, Heo teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 1, wherein the supporter is provided on the front surface thereof with a display seating portion at which the flat display is positioned (see Figs.1 & 6-8 also [0054].
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(s) 3-4 & 7-8 & 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heo (US20110241508A1) in view of Kwon (US20170121889A1).
As to claims 3-4, 7-8, & 13 -14, Heo teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Heo does not disclose the structure of the display in great specificity. However, the structure of a display unit which encompasses the presence of a display, supporter, and a circuit board is known in the art, as seen by Kwon.
Kwon discloses an art related laundry treating appliance (abstract), wherein a display structure within a control panel includes: a cover (ref 134); a supporter ( refs 131-132, & 135-136) with a display (ref 132); a circuit board (ref 135); the supporter having a front portion to receive the display (ref 131a); a first sealing holder which receives a first sealing member (ref 133); the first sealing holder has a first sealing groove in which the sealing member is provided (see Figs.15-20); a sealing cover (ref 137) behind the board; a second sealing holder (portion of ref 131 which receives ref 138) and a second sealing member (ref 138); the sealing cover has a front surface portion with sealing projections (see outer wall of groove area defining a projection portion) which project forward and face the second sealing member; the supporter has front surface, upper surface, and lower surface such that an intermediate groove (see Fig.20 stepped portion of outer wall between ref 131f and 131g defining a groove); the supporter has front surface, upper surface, and lower surface such that an intermediate groove (see Fig.20 stepped portion of outer wall between ref 131f and 131g defining a groove). The construction of Kwon allows for the usage of a seals proximate the circuit board and display which prevent moisture intrusion [0139 & 0145].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify the control panel and display structure of Heo to utilize the structure of Kwon in order to allow for the usage of seals to prevent moisture intrusion (Kwon [0139 & 0145]).
As to claim 12, Modified Heo teaches the apparatus of claim 7 wherein the sealing cover has a surface area less than the front surface of the supporter (see Figs.15-16, which showcase the front surface of the supporter has various surface features while the sealing cover is relatively smooth, thus a skilled artisan would reasonably understand the surface area of the supporter front surface to be greater). Alternatively, a skilled artisan would recognize that such a feature is a mere variation in the shape of the front surface of the supporter. So long as the supporter is capable of performing the desired function with respect to holding and supporting the elements thereon, a skilled artisan would find it obvious to utilize any shape, including those having a greater surface area than that of the sealing cover (see MPEP 2144.04).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heo (US20110241508A1) in view of Feser (US20220151084A1).
As to claim 5, Heo teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose the supporter being configured to couple to the upper surface portion and the lower surface portion. However, it is known in the art to couple a supporter to a front panel as seen by Feser.
Feser discloses an art related control panel for a domestic appliance (abstract), wherein it is shown that a supporter is provided with coupling elements (Figs.8-12 ref 32/34) in order to couple to a front panel.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Heo to include coupling elements to couple the supporter to the front panel, as is known in the art (Feser [0083]). It is in the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a known manner of coupling a supporter and front panel, when one is not explicitly disclosed, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heo (US20110241508A1) in view of Russo (US20160194804A1) and Roose (US20100025214A1).
As to claim 6, Heo teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose the circuit board being configured to include a light-emitting member configured to emit light and a touch button comprising a touch sensor configured to sense a user's touch. However, the use of touch sensors and led on circuit boards is known in the art, as seen by Russo and Roose.
Russo discloses an art related control panel for a laundry apparatus (abstract), wherein it is known to utilize capacitive sensors (i.e., touch sensors) on a PCB [0069-0070] in order to allow for touch buttons/regions.
Roose discloses an art related control panel (abstract) for a laundry apparatus [0001], wherein it is known to utilize LEDs on a circuit board [0058-0059, 0063-0065] for aesthetics and ease of use [0003].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Heo to implement LEDs and touch sensors on the circuit board in order to provide an aesthetically pleasing and easy to use control panel (Roose [0003]). Further, it is in the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize well known elements for a circuit board (i.e., touch sensors and LEDs), as they have been commonly used in the field.
Claim(s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heo (US20110241508A1) in view of Kwon (US20170121889A1) as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Ben (US20150315739A1).
As to claim 10, Modified Heo teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 8, wherein Kwon indicates that a hole is provided in order for cabling and wiring to connect to and from the circuit board and a sealing member is provided in order to seal around the cable [0149-0152]. The presence of a wiring hole is a well-known feature in the art, as further seen by Ben.
Ben discloses an art related laundry treating appliance (abstract), wherein a wiring hole is provided (see Fig.4b ref 21) in order to allow for the passage of wiring to and from the control unit [0058].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Heo to implement a wiring hole and a sealing member in order to allow for wiring to connect to and from the circuit board (Ben [0058] & Kwon [0149-0152]), as is well known in the art. Further, a skilled artisan would also find it obvious to implement the sealing member to thereby protect the wiring and circuit board for an external environment as much as possible. The only difference between Modified Heo and the invention of claim 10, is the placement of the wiring hole being on the front surface of the sealing cover. However, a skilled artisan recognizes that the wiring hole may be provided in any location, so long as wiring can be made to and from the circuit board. Thus, a skilled artisan would find it obvious to implement such a wiring hole in any location, including the claimed arrangement, with no unexpected results associated therewith (see MPEP 2144.04).
As to claim 11, Modified Heo teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 10, wherein wiring hole also incorporates a projection (see Ben Fig.4b projecting portion around ref 21) which extends from the wiring hole in a direction and is disposed around the wiring hole. In the case of the wiring hole being provided on a rear cover (i.e., the sealing portion), such a projection would extend backwards.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heo (US20110241508A1) in view of Kwon (US20170121889A1) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Gerstmayr (US20200296851A1) and Park (US20130107495A1).
As to claim 15, Modified Heo teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 7, wherein the supporter comprises: a supporter front surface portion defining an appearance of the supporter; a supporter upper surface portion formed at an upper side of the supporter front surface portion; and a supporter lower surface portion formed at a lower side of the supporter front surface portion (see Kwon Figs.15-16). Modified Heo further showcase that a side surface of the supporter is provided with a coupler that projects rearwards (Kwon ref 131c) and a corresponding coupler is provided at the associated location on the sealing cover (Kwon ref 137a). Although Modified Heo does not disclose the coupler being provided on an upper and lower surface, a skilled artisan would recognize that such a feature is a duplication of parts to provide further fastening portions at further locations (see MPEP 2144.04) with a reasonable expectation of further securing the assembly together. Further, the usage of coupling elements to couple casing portions together is known in the art, as seen by Gerstmayr and Park
Gerstmayr discloses an art related control panel for a household appliance (abstract), wherein it is shown that upper and lower surfaces of a casing can be provided with coupling portions that project rearwardly in order to couple with corresponding elements on a rear portion to which the casing couples (see Fig.5 refs 222a/222b & Fig.4 ref 66/67).
Park discloses an art related washing machine control panel (abstract), wherein it is known that a front casing can be provided with rearwardly extending protrusions (ref 123) to cooperate with a corresponding coupling element (ref 113) on a rear casing.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Heo to utilize rearwardly coupling projections to couple the front and rear casing portions, as such are known elements for the coupling of casing portions. It is in the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a known manner of connecting casing portions, in addition to or in place of, another known manner of coupling two portions together with a reasonable expectation of success. Accordingly, a skilled artisan would find such a feature to be an obvious design choice one of ordinary skill in the art can make. Further, such changes are within the purview of Kwon (see [0138]).
Claim(s) 18-19 & 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heo (US20110241508A1) in view of Kwon (US20170121889A1) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Bas (US20150043135A1) and Kim (US20050178164A1).
As to claim 18, Modified Heo teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 7, wherein Kwon indicates that hooks or other various elements can be utilized for the connection of the sealing cover to another element [0138]. Modified Heo does not explicitly disclose the sealing cover comprises at least one cover panel engaging protrusion which projects toward the upper surface portion or the lower surface portion of the cover panel, and wherein the cover panel comprises a first restraining protrusion which projects inwards and is positioned behind the cover panel engaging protrusion to restrain the sealing cover at a rear side of the sealing cover. However, a skilled artisan recognizes that such structure is generally known in the art for the connection and retaining of two elements to each other as seen by Bas and Kim.
Bas discloses an art related appliance control assembly (abstract), wherein it is known the utilize cooperating protruding elements on opposing surface of two elements of a control panel assembly which are intended to restrained together (Figs.7-11). Bas further showcases the protrusion of one element is behind the protrusion of the other in order to restrain the elements to prevent unintended removal (see refs 401/501).
Kim discloses an art related control panel for a laundry appliance (abstract), wherein it is shown that corresponding protruding portions (Fig.8 refs 211 & 155) can be provided upwardly and inwardly in order to allow one protrusion to be located behind another to restrain the two elements of the control panel assembly together.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Heo to utilize protrusion retaining elements, as seen by Bas and/or Kim, in order to couple the rear sealing cover and cover panel, as such structures are known in the art for the coupling of components. Since Modified Heo does not explicitly disclose the manner in which the two components are connected, it is in the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a known connection structure with a reasonable expectation of success.
As to claim 19, Modified Heo teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 18, wherein a slit is configured to be formed around the first restraining protrusion, the slit being closed at a front end thereof and surrounding the first restraining protrusion (see Bas Fig.4).
As to claim 21, Modified Heo teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 18, wherein the cover panel further comprises a third restraining protrusion (e.g., see Bas Figs.4-9, another of the projections), which projects in an inward direction of the cover panel so as to be positioned behind the supporter and to constrain a position of the supporter (i.e., since the sealing cover is located behind the supporter and sandwiches the supporter it reads on the claim and performs the indicated function of constraining the supporter).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heo (US20110241508A1) in view of Kwon (US20170121889A1) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Pellegrin (US20190003103A1).
As to claim 20, Modified Heo teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 18, but does not disclose the cover panel further comprises a second restraining protrusion, which projects in an inward direction of the cover panel so as to be positioned behind the supporter and which is inserted into a groove formed in the supporter to restrain a position of the supporter. However, such a structure for the connection of the components is known in the art, as seen by Pellegrin.
Pellegrin discloses an art related control panel for a household appliance (abstract), wherein it is shown that a cover panel (ref 48) can be provided with inwardly projecting protrusions (refs 116 and included screw, see [0078]) which are received behind the supporter (ref 68) via a rear sealing cover (ref 78) and within a groove (ref 126) of the supporter.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Heo to utilize protrusion structure of Pellegrin in order to couple the control assembly together, as such structures are known in the art for the coupling of components. Since Modified Heo does not explicitly disclose the manner in which the two components are connected, it is in the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a known connection structure with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heo (US20110241508A1) in view of Kwon (US20170121889A1) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Kim (US20050178164A1).
As to claim 22, Modified Heo teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 7, wherein Kwon indicates that hooks or other various elements can be utilized for the connection of the sealing cover to another element [0138]. Modified Heo does not explicitly disclose the sealing cover further comprises a cover panel coupler which projects from one of upper and lower portions thereof, wherein the cover panel further comprises an electrical component module coupler which is formed at a location corresponding to the cover panel coupler, and wherein one of the cover panel coupler and the electrical component module coupler is formed as a protrusion and is received in a protrusion-receiving hole in another of the cover panel coupler and the electrical component module coupler.
Kim discloses an art related control panel for a laundry appliance (abstract), wherein it is shown that cover panel can be provided with a protrusion (ref 215/211) and a rear surface can be provided with a coupler which projects upwardly (ref 155) that has a protrusion receiving hole (refs151 or portion where ref 211 is received) in order to connect and retain two components.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Heo to utilize protrusion and hole retaining structure, as seen by Kim, in order to couple the rear sealing cover and cover panel, as such structures are known in the art for the coupling of components. Since Modified Heo does not explicitly disclose the manner in which the two components are connected, it is in the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a known connection structure with a reasonable expectation of success.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 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: Although the references of record do showcase the second sealing holder being configured to include a second sealing groove into which the second sealing member is inserted (see Kwon Figs.15-20). The references of record, fail to teach or suggest the feature of the sealing projection being inserted into the sealing groove along while also maintaining the requisite structure required by the intervening claims. Thus, claim 9 is considered t contain allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAIR CHAUDHRI whose telephone number is (571)272-4773. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:00am to 5:00pm EST.
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, Michael Barr can be reached at (571)272-1414. 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.
/OMAIR CHAUDHRI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711
Prosecution Insights