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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1-20 have been examined.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 15-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12116034. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all of the elements of claims 15-19 are provided in claim 15 of 12116034. Additionally, with respect to claim 20, claim 15 recites “a backrest adjusting mechanism disposed between a backrest tube and a frame of an infant carrier” and would have been obvious to use on an infant carrier having a backrest tube and frame as recited in the preamble.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 9, 14-17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (EP 2336000) in view of Zehfuss (US 2016/0046314). Li teaches an adjusting mechanism for a handle tube comprising: an outer cover fixed at the frame (fig. 4: 130A); an inner cover (fig. 4: 130B) connected to the handle tube and pivoted to the outer cover via a pivot shaft (fig. 4: 149); a driving member (fig. 4: 144) movably disposed between the outer cover and the inner cover; a locking member (figs. 4,6: 140A, 140B) movably disposed on the driving member; and an operating member (fig. 7: 172) connected to the driving member for driving the driving member to move between a first position and a second position, switching of the driving member between the first position and the second position (shown in figs. 7 and 8) driving the locking member to selectively lock or release the outer cover and the inner cover, wherein at least three first locking portions are disposed on the outer cover (figs. 4, 9: 184A, 184B, 186A, 186B; paragraph 0041), and wherein at least one of the at least three first locking portions is located between the first locking member and the second locking member when the outer cover and the inner cover are locked (fig. 9: when 140A,B are locked to 184A,B then 186A,B are between the first and second locking member).
Li does not teach wherein the handle tube may be used for the backrest tube of an infant carrier. However, Zehfuss teaches use of a similar rotatable tube for the backrest of an infant carrier (fig. 7: 2D). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use the same handle tube adjusting mechanism on the backrest tube of an infant carrier in order to provide the same ease of movement.
As concerns claim 2, Li, as modified, teaches wherein two second locking portions are disposed on the inner cover (figs. 4 and 6: 140A and 140B slide within/extend from two slots in 142), and the first and second locking members are cooperated with the two second locking portions, respectively, and selectively cooperated with two of the at least three first locking portions, respectively, to selectively lock or release the outer cover and the inner cover (As shown in fig. 9).
As concerns claim 3, Li, as modified, teaches wherein the at least three first locking portions and the two second locking portion are a slot structure respectively (figs. 4, 6, 9: they are all slots).
As concerns claim 4, Li, as modified, teaches wherein the driving member comprises two driving slots formed thereon (fig. 5: 164), and the first and second locking members are slidably cooperated with the two driving slots, respectively (through pins 156).
As concerns claim 9, Li, as modified, teaches wherein the driving member is pivoted to the pivot shaft (fig. 5: 162).
As concerns claims 14 and 20, Li, as modified, teaches an infant carrier comprising a frame, a backrest tube and the backrest adjusting mechanism of claim 1 (as discussed in claim 1 in combination with Zehfuss).
As concerns claim 15, Li teaches an adjusting mechanism for a handle tube comprising: an outer cover fixed at the frame (fig. 4: 130A); an inner cover (fig. 4: 130B) connected to the handle tube and pivoted to the outer cover via a pivot shaft (fig. 4: 149); a driving member (fig. 4: 144) movably disposed between the outer cover and the inner cover; a locking member (figs. 4,6: 140A, 140B) movably disposed on the driving member; and an operating member (fig. 7: 172) connected to the driving member for driving the driving member to move between a first position and a second position, switching of the driving member between the first position and the second position (shown in figs. 7 and 8) driving the locking member to selectively lock or release the outer cover and the inner cover, wherein at least three first locking portions are disposed on the outer cover (figs. 4, 9: 184A, 184B, 186A, 186B; paragraph 0041), wherein the locking member comprises a locking head (fig. 4: distal end of 140A), and a lengthwise direction of the locking head is parallel to a motion plane of the driving member (the locking heads rotate inward as the driving member rotates), wherein a plurality of first locking portions are disposed on the outer cover (fig. 9: 184A,B and 186A,B), and wherein when the driving member is switched between the first position and the second position, the locking head moves along the lengthwise direction to be engaged with or disengaged from selected one of the plurality of first locking portions for locking or releasing the outer cover and the inner cover (paragraph 0041).
Li does not teach wherein the handle tube may be used for the backrest tube of an infant carrier. However, Zehfuss teaches use of a similar rotatable tube for the backrest of an infant carrier (fig. 7: 2D). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use the same handle tube adjusting mechanism on the backrest tube of an infant carrier in order to provide the same ease of movement.
As concerns claim 16, Li, as modified, teaches wherein at least one second locking portion is disposed on the inner cover (fig. 6: slots in 142 containing locking members 140A,B), and the locking member is cooperated with the at least one second locking portion and selectively cooperated with one of the plurality of first locking portions, to selectively lock or release the outer cover and the inner cover.
As concerns claim 17, Li, as modified, teaches wherein the driving member comprises at least one driving slot formed thereon (fig. 5: 164), and the locking member is slidably cooperated with the at least one driving slot (through pin 156).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-8, 10-13 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 18 and 19 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 well as upon filing of a proper terminal disclaimer.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Li and Zehfuss fails to teach:
wherein each of the two driving slots is a long arc-shaped slot having a first end close to the pivot shaft, and a second end away from the pivot shaft;
a pulling member having a first end fixedly connected to the operating member, and a second end fixedly connected to the driving member, wherein a guiding structure is formed on the driving member for guidance of the pulling member, and wherein the guiding structure is an arc-shaped slot, and the pulling member is partially disposed in the arc-shaped slot
an elastic member connected between the driving member and the outer cover; wherein when the driving member moves from the first position to the second position, the driving member abuts against the elastic member to cause elastic deformation of the elastic member for making the elastic member have a tendency to keep driving the driving member to move to the first position;
an accommodating cavity is formed on the outer cover and has an opening facing inward, the inner cover covers the opening, and the driving member is located in the accommodating cavity; and wherein the inner cover comprises a cover board and a connection tube disposed at two sides of the cover board, the cover board covers the accommodating cavity, and the backrest tube is inserted into the connection tube.
Further, there is no teaching, suggestion or motivation to modify the prior art absent hindsight.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY J BRINDLEY whose telephone number is (571)270-7231. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 9am-5pm.
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, David Dunn can be reached at 5712726670. 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.
/TIMOTHY J BRINDLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636