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 .
Double Patenting
Claims 1-19 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over the claims of copending Application No. 18/902915. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both the copending and instant applications teach rails, brackets, predetermined features, & ventilation holes. Thus, the invention of the claims in the copending application is in effect a species of the generic invention of claims 1-19. It has been held that the generic invention is anticipated by the species, see In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed Cir. 1993). Since claims 1-19 are anticipated (fully encompassed) by the claims of the copending application, they are not patentably distinct there from, regardless of any additional subject matter present in the claims of the copending application. This is a provisional obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 1-3, 9, & 14-15 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over the claims of copending Application No. 18/980633. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both the copending and instant applications teach rails, brackets, & predetermined features. Thus, the invention of the claims in the copending application is in effect a species of the generic invention of claims 1-3, 9, & 14-15. It has been held that the generic invention is anticipated by the species, see In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed Cir. 1993). Since claims 1-3, 9, & 14-15 are anticipated (fully encompassed) by the claims of the copending application, they are not patentably distinct there from, regardless of any additional subject matter present in the claims of the copending application. This is a provisional obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 1-3, 9, & 14-15 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over the claims of copending Application No. 18/967249. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both the copending and instant applications teach rails, brackets, & predetermined features. Thus, the invention of the claims in the copending application is in effect a species of the generic invention of claims 1-3, 9, & 14-15. It has been held that the generic invention is anticipated by the species, see In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed Cir. 1993). Since claims 1-3, 9, & 14-15 are anticipated (fully encompassed) by the claims of the copending application, they are not patentably distinct there from, regardless of any additional subject matter present in the claims of the copending application. This is a provisional obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen (20140327352).
Regarding claim 1, Chen ‘352 teaches a supporting device comprising: a first rail (12); a second rail (18) displaceable relative to the first rail along a longitudinal direction (i.e., line parallel to the length of 10, 12, & 18); a third rail (10) movably mounted between the first rail and the second rail; a first predetermined feature (14) arranged on one of the first rail and the third rail; and a second predetermined feature (16) arranged on another one of the first rail and the third rail; wherein when the second rail and the third rail displace relative to the first rail along a predetermined direction parallel to the longitudinal direction (Fig. 1), the first predetermined feature and the second predetermined feature abut against each other for reducing a displacement speed of the third rail relative to the first rail along the predetermined direction (par. 27). Note that, if Fig. 5 is rotated 90 degrees clockwise, such that the first rail (12) is above the second rail (18), and the sidewalls (24 - see Fig. 2) constitute left & right sides of the third rail (10), then the transverse and height directions would respectively extend along lines “X” and “Y” in Fig. 5 Annotated from Chen ‘352. Hence, Chen ‘352 teaches a structure wherein the first predetermined feature (14) and the second predetermined feature (16) are configured to abut against each other along a transverse direction (X), and the transverse direction is perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (i.e., line parallel to the length of 10, 12, & 18) and a height direction (Y) perpendicular to the longitudinal direction.
PNG
media_image1.png
250
709
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Chen ‘352 teaches a supporting device wherein when a second rail (18) and a third rail (10) displace relative to a first rail (12) along another predetermined direction opposite to the predetermined direction, the first predetermined feature and the second predetermined feature abut against each other for reducing a displacement speed of the third rail relative to the first rail along the another predetermined direction (par. 27).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-3, 9-12, 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (20230099003) in view of Chen (20140327352).
Regarding claims 1, 10, & 14, Chen ‘003 teaches the structure substantially as claimed, including a supporting device comprising: a first rail (40); a second rail (36) displaceable relative to the first rail along a longitudinal direction (Fig. 8 & par. 38); a third rail (34) movably mounted between the first rail and the second rail (par. 38); but fail(s) to teach first & second predetermined features. However, Chen ‘352 teaches deceleration means (14, 16) comprising a first predetermined feature (14) arranged on one of a first rail (12) and a third rail (10); and a second predetermined feature (16) arranged on another one of the first rail and the third rail. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add deceleration means, as taught by Chen ‘352, between the first & third rails of Chen ‘003, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to reduce noise & increase reliability (as suggested by par. 29 of Chen ‘352). Note that, if Fig. 5 of Chen ‘003 is rotated 90 degrees counterclockwise, such that the first rail (40) is below the second rail (36), and the first & second walls (42a-42b - see Fig. 3) constitute left & right sides of the first rail (40), then the transverse and height directions would respectively extend along lines “X1” and “Y1” in Fig. 5 Annotated from Chen ‘003. Hence, Chen ‘003 as modified would teach a structure wherein when the second rail (36 of Chen ‘003) and the third rail (34 of Chen ‘003) displace relative to the first rail (40 of Chen ‘003) along a predetermined direction parallel to the longitudinal direction (D1 of Chen ‘003), the first predetermined feature (14 of Chen ‘352) and the second predetermined feature (16 of Chen ‘352) abut against each other for reducing a displacement speed of the third rail relative to the first rail along the predetermined direction (as in par. 27 of Chen ‘352); wherein the first predetermined feature and the second predetermined feature are configured to abut against each other along a transverse direction (X1 of Chen ‘003), and the transverse direction is perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (D1 of Chen ‘003) and a height direction (Y1 of Chen ‘003) perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (see Fig. 5 Annotated from Chen ‘003).
Regarding claims 2 & 15, Chen ‘003 as modified teaches a structure wherein when the second rail (36 of Chen ‘003) and the third rail (34 of Chen ‘003) displace relative to the first rail (40 of Chen ‘003) along another predetermined direction opposite to the predetermined direction, the first predetermined feature (14 of Chen ‘352) and the second predetermined feature (16 of Chen ‘352) abut against each other for reducing a displacement speed of the third rail relative to the first rail along the another predetermined direction (as in par. 27 of Chen ‘352).
Regarding claim 3, Chen ‘003 teaches a first bracket (26, 48) and a second bracket (28, 50) displaceable relative to the first bracket along the longitudinal direction (par. 41), the first bracket comprising a first side and a second side opposite to the first side (Figs. 4-5), the second bracket being connected to the first side of the first bracket in an extending or retracting manner (Fig. 5 & par. 51), and the first rail (40), the second rail (36) and the third rail (34) being arranged on the second side of the first bracket (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 9, Chen ‘003 teaches a first bracket (26, 48) and the second bracket (28, 50) that have different longitudinal lengths (Fig. 5).
PNG
media_image2.png
380
609
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Chen ‘003 as modified teaches a supporting device comprising: a first bracket (26, 48 of Chen ‘003); two slide rails (34, 40 of Chen ‘003) arranged on the first bracket and displaceable relative to each other along a longitudinal direction (D1 of Chen ‘003 - see par. 38 of Chen ‘003); a first predetermined feature (14 of Chen ‘352) arranged on one of the two slide rails; a second predetermined feature (16 of Chen ‘352) arranged on another one of the two slide rails; a second bracket (28, 50 of Chen ‘003) displaceable relative to the first bracket along the longitudinal direction (par. 41 of Chen ‘003); at least one ventilation hole structure (A in Fig. 5 Annotated from Chen ‘003) arranged on one of the first bracket and the second bracket (Fig. 5 of Chen ‘003); wherein when the two slide rails displace relative to each other along the longitudinal direction (D1 of Chen ‘003), the first predetermined feature and the second predetermined feature abut against each other for reducing a relative displacement speed of the two slide rails (as in par. 27 of Chen ‘352).
Regarding claim 11, Chen ‘003 teaches an additional slide rail (36), and one (34) of the two slide rails (34, 40) being movably mounted between another one (40) of the two slide rails and the additional slide rail (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 12, Chen ‘003 teaches a first bracket (26, 48) comprises a first side and a second side (Figs. 3-5), the second bracket (28, 50) is connected to the first side of the first bracket (Fig. 5) in an extending or retracting manner (par. 41), and the two slide rails (34, 40) and the additional slide rail (36) are arranged on the second side of the first bracket (Figs. 3-4).
Regarding claim 14, Chen ‘003 as modified teaches a supporting device adapted for a rack comprising a first post (30a of Chen ‘003) and a second post (30b of Chen ‘003), the supporting device comprising: a first bracket (26, 48 of Chen ‘003) configured to be mounted on the first post (Fig. 2 of Chen ‘003), the first bracket comprising a first side and a second side opposite to the first side (Figs. 3-5 of Chen ‘003); a second bracket (28, 50 of Chen ‘003) configured to be mounted on the second post (Fig. 2 of Chen ‘003), the second bracket being connected to the first side of the first bracket in an extending or retracting manner (par. 41 of Chen ‘003); a first rail (40 of Chen ‘003) arranged on the second side of the first bracket (Figs. 3-4 of Chen ‘003); a second rail (36 of Chen ‘003) arranged on the second side of the first bracket and displaceable relative to the first rail along a longitudinal direction (Fig. 8 & par. 38 of Chen ‘003), the second rail being configured to support an electronic apparatus (par. 37 of Chen ‘003); a third rail (34 of Chen ‘003) movably mounted between the first rail and the second rail (par. 38 of Chen ‘003); a first predetermined feature (14 of Chen ‘352) arranged on one of the first rail and the third rail; a second predetermined feature (16 of Chen ‘352) arranged on another one of the first rail and the third rail; wherein when the second rail and the third rail displace relative to the first rail along a predetermined direction parallel to the longitudinal direction (D1 of Chen ‘003), the first predetermined feature and the second predetermined feature abut against each other for reducing a displacement speed of one of the third rail and the second rail relative to the first rail along the predetermined direction (as in par. 27 of Chen ‘352).
Claims 4, 13, & 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (20230099003) & Chen (20140327352) in view of Palker (20050211647).
Regarding claims 4, 13, & 16, Chen ‘003 as modified teaches the structure substantially as claimed, including first (26, 48 of Chen ‘003) & second (28, 50 of Chen ‘003) brackets; but fail(s) to teach first & second ventilation hole structures that can communicate with each other. However, Palker teaches venting means (48, 88) comprising at least one first ventilation hole (48) structure arranged on a first bracket (20) and at least one second ventilation hole structure (88) arranged on a second bracket (22), and when the second bracket is located at a predetermined position relative to the first bracket, the at least one first ventilation hole structure being located at a position corresponding to the at least one second ventilation hole structure (implied by Figs. 2a-2b). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add venting means, as taught by Palker, to the first & second brackets of Chen ‘003 as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to allow the passage of air therethrough, thereby facilitating cooling of any components mounted thereupon (as suggested by par. 45 & 50 of Palker).
Regarding claims 13 & 16, Chen ‘003 as modified teaches at least one ventilation hole structure (A of Chen ‘003 and 48 & 88 of Palker) wherein, when the first bracket (26, 48 of Chen ‘003) and the second bracket (28, 50 of Chen ‘003) are mounted on the first post (30a of Chen ‘003) and the second post (30b of Chen ‘003), respectively (as in Fig. 2 of Chen ‘003), the at least one first ventilation hole structure (48 of Palker) and the at least one second ventilation hole structure (88 of Palker) being communicated with each other for dissipating heat generated from a predetermined portion of the electronic apparatus supported by the second rail located at a retracted position relative to the first rail (implied by Figs. 1-2b of Palker).
Claims 5-8 & 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (20230099003), Chen (20140327352), & Palker (20050211647) in view of Chen (20150189989).
Regarding claims 5 & 17, Chen ‘003 as modified teaches the structure substantially as claimed, including a first bracket further comprises a first wall (B of Chen ‘003), a second wall (C of Chen ‘003) and a lateral wall (D of Chen ‘003) connected between the first wall and the second wall, & at least one first ventilation hole structure (48 of Palker) comprising a second part (48 of Palker) arranged on the lateral wall of the first bracket (as in Figs. 3a-3c of Palker). Chen ‘003 as modified fail(s) to teach a second part of a first ventilation hole structure. However, Chen ‘989 teaches a first ventilation hole structure (E-F in Fig. 6A Annotated) that comprises a first part (E) and a second part (F), the first part of the at least one first ventilation hole structure is arranged on a first wall (G) of a first bracket, and the second part of the at least one first ventilation hole structure is arranged on a lateral wall (H) of the first bracket. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add a first part, as taught by Chen ‘989, to the first & second brackets of Chen ‘003 as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to allow the passage of air therethrough, thereby facilitating cooling of any components mounted thereupon.
Regarding claims 6 & 18, Chen ‘989 teaches a first part (E) & a second part (F) of at least one first ventilation hole structure (E-F) that are communicated with each other (Fig. 6A).
Regarding claims 7 & 19, Chen ‘003 as modified teaches at least one first ventilation hole structure (48 of Palker & E of Chen ‘989) that comprises a plurality of first ventilation hole structures arranged at intervals along the longitudinal direction (as in Figs. 3a-3b of Palker).
Regarding claim 8, Chen ‘003 as modified teaches at least one second ventilation hole structure (88 of Palker & E of Chen ‘989) and the at least one first ventilation hole structure (48 of Palker & E of Chen ‘989) that have identical structures (as in Figs. 3a-3c & 4a-4c of Palker).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/9/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant contends that Chen ‘352 fails to teach first & second predetermined features configured to abut against each other along a transverse direction (Remarks at 10-11). This argument is not persuasive for the reasons stated in the prior art rejection above. Applicant also argues that the claimed apparatus “can provide unexpected technical effects” (Remarks at 11). However, applicant provides no factual evidence to support this apparent allegation of secondary considerations. The arguments of counsel cannot take the place of evidence in the record.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW ING whose telephone number is (571)272-6536. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 a.m. - 5 p.m.. 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.
/MATTHEW W ING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights