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.
Claims 5-11 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.
Regarding claim 5, in line 1, the limitation “the worksurface” is not clear if this is referring to the primary worksurface or the auxiliary worksurface.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-4 & 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vonhausen et al. (US patent 4,612,863) (hereinafter Vonhausen).
Regarding claim 1, Vonhausen discloses a workstation comprising: an understructure (2, 5); a primary worksurface (3) supported by the understructure, wherein the primary worksurface comprises a front edge (edge opposite 27 in Fig. 1), a rear edge (edge adjacent 27 in Fig. 1) and opposite ends (Left & Right in Fig. 1), wherein the front and rear edges are spaced apart in a first direction and wherein the ends are spaced apart in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction (Fig. 1), wherein the primary worksurface is located at a first height adapted to accommodate a seated user positioned adjacent to and facing the front edge (Fig. 1); a support (29) extending upwardly from the primary worksurface; and an auxiliary worksurface (25) coupled to the support (Fig. 1) and vertically spaced from the primary worksurface (Fig. 1), wherein the auxiliary worksurface comprises a first edge (parallel to front edge in Fig. 1) spaced apart from a second edge (opposite front edge in Fig. 1) and a length, wherein the auxiliary worksurface is pivotable relative the primary worksurface between a use position (shown in solid lines in Fig. 1), wherein the first edge extends in the second direction and wherein at least a portion of the first edge overlies the front edge of the primary worksurface, and a stored position (shown in dashed lines in Fig. 1), wherein the first edge extends in the first direction, wherein the auxiliary worksurface is located at a second height adapted to accommodate a standing user positioned adjacent to and facing the first edge when the auxiliary worksurface is in the use position (Fig. 1).
Vonhausen does not disclose the support extending upwardly at a location closer to the front edge than the rear edge. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify Vonhausen wherein the support extending upwardly at a location closer to the front edge than the rear edge, because this arrangement would have moved the auxiliary work surface closer to a user of the desk and this location would have been obvious to try with a reasonable chance of success; additionally, it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claim 2, Vonhausen, as modified, teaches a workstation wherein the auxiliary worksurface is pivotably mounted to the support about a vertical axis (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 3, Vonhausen, as modified, teaches a workstation wherein the auxiliary worksurface is translatable relative to the vertical axis within a horizontal plane (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, Vonhausen, as modified, teaches a workstation wherein the understructure comprises a post (2), wherein the support is mounted to the post.
Regarding claim 12, Vonhausen, as modified, teaches the workstation as claimed. Vonhausen, as modified, does not teach wherein the support is disposed over the front edge of the primary worksurface. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify Vonhausen wherein the support is disposed over the front edge of the primary worksurface, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-11 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 13-23 are allowed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure because it gives a general state of the art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL J ROHRHOFF whose telephone number is (571)270-7624. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:00.
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, Dan 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.
/DANIEL J ROHRHOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637