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 .
This is the First Office action on the Merits from the examiner in charge of this application.
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, 3, 5-8, 10, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by USP 3491705 to Blanke.
Blanke discloses (Claim 1). A foldable desk 10, comprising: a tabletop 50, two outer legs 13 symmetrically arranged on a left side and a right side of the tabletop 50, and two inner legs 12 symmetrically arranged on the left side and the right side of the tabletop 50, wherein: an outer leg connecting rod 15 is connected to upper ends of the two outer legs 13, an inner leg connecting rod 14 is connected to upper ends of the two inner legs 12, each of the two outer legs 13 is rotatably connected to one of the two inner legs 12 disposed on a same side as a corresponding one of the two outer legs 13 in an X-structure, the tabletop 50 is located between the two outer legs 13, rear ends of sides of the tabletop 50 are rotatably connected to the two outer legs 13, a front end of a bottom surface of the tabletop 50 is disposed with a buckle 45 configured to be buckled to the inner leg connecting rod 14 when the foldable desk is unfolded for use, at least one of the two outer legs or the two inner legs is telescopic (such as sown in Figs. 1-5), and the tabletop 50 is configured to be placed horizontally or switched to be placed in a state in which a front of the tabletop is lower than a rear of the tabletop 50; (Claim 3). The foldable desk according to claim 1, wherein: the two inner legs 12 are telescopic, parts of the two inner legs 12 below pivot points 22,34 of the two inner legs 12 and the two outer legs 13 are telescopic, the tabletop 50 is configured to be placed horizontally when the two inner legs are fully retracted, and when the two inner legs are in an extended state, the tabletop is placed in the state in which the front of the tabletop is lower than the rear of the tabletop; (Claim 5). The foldable desk according to claim 1, wherein: the two outer legs 13 are telescopic, parts of the two outer legs 13 below pivot points of the two inner legs 12 and the two outer legs 13 are telescopic, the tabletop 50 is configured to be placed horizontally when the two outer legs are fully extended, and when the two outer legs are in a shortened state, the tabletop is placed in the state in which the front of the tabletop is lower than the rear of the tabletop; (Claim 6). The foldable desk according to claim 1, wherein: the buckle 45 is a C-shaped buckle, and a front end of a top surface of the tabletop is disposed with a blocking strip 58 (such as shown in Figs. 6-7); (Claim 7). A foldable desk, comprising: a tabletop 50, two outer legs 13 symmetrically arranged on a left side and a right side of the tabletop 50, and two inner legs 12 symmetrically arranged on the left side and the right side of the tabletop, wherein: each of the two outer legs 13 is rotatably connected to one of the two inner legs 12 disposed on a same side as a corresponding one of the two outer legs in an X-structure, the tabletop 50 is located between the two outer legs 13, rear ends of sides of the tabletop 50 are rotatably connected to the two outer legs 13, a front end of a bottom surface of the tabletop 50 is rotatably connected to upper ends of the two inner legs 12, at least one of the two outer legs or the two inner legs is telescopic (such as shown in Figs. 1-4), and the tabletop 50 is configured to be placed horizontally or switched to be placed in a state in which a front of the tabletop is lower than a rear of the tabletop; (Claim 8). The foldable desk according to claim 7, wherein: an outer leg connecting rod 15 is connected to upper ends of the two outer legs, an inner leg connecting rod 14 is connected to the upper ends of the two inner legs, and the bottom surface of the tabletop is disposed with a buckle 45 configured to be buckled to the inner leg connecting rod 14; (Claim 10). The foldable desk according to claim 7, wherein: the two inner legs 1 are telescopic, parts of the two inner legs 1 below pivot points 22,34 of the two inner legs 1 and the two outer legs 13 are telescopic, the tabletop 50 is configured to be placed horizontally when the two inner legs 1 are fully retracted, and when the two inner legs are in an extended state, the tabletop is placed in the state in which the front of the tabletop is lower than the rear of the tabletop; (Claim 12). The foldable desk according to claim 7, wherein: the two outer legs 13 are telescopic, parts of the two outer legs 13 below pivot points of the two inner legs 12 and the two outer legs 13 are telescopic, the tabletop is configured to be placed horizontally when the two outer legs are fully extended, and when the two outer legs are in a shortened state, the tabletop is placed in the state in which the front of the tabletop is lower than the rear of the tabletop.
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.
Claim(s) 2, 4, 9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blanke in view of USP 1152987 to Spalding.
Blanke discloses all the elements as discussed above except for the limitations in the above-listed claims.
However, Spalding discloses a foldable desk, comprising: a tabletop 18, two outer legs 1 symmetrically arranged on a left side and a right side of the tabletop 18, and two inner legs 1 symmetrically arranged on the left side and the right side of the tabletop 18, wherein: an outer leg connecting rod 17 is connected to upper ends of the two outer legs, an inner leg connecting rod 17 is connected to upper ends of the two inner legs, each of the two outer legs is rotatably connected to one of the two inner legs disposed on a same side as a corresponding one of the two outer legs in an X-structure, wherein: the two inner legs 1 are telescopic, parts of the two inner legs 1 above pivot points of the two inner legs 1 and the two outer legs 1 are telescopic, the tabletop is configured to be placed horizontally when the two inner legs are fully extended, and when the two inner legs are in a shortened state, the tabletop is placed in the state in which the front of the tabletop is lower than the rear of the tabletop, wherein: the two outer legs 1 are telescopic, parts of the two outer legs 1 above pivot points of the two inner legs 1 and the two outer legs 1 are telescopic, the tabletop is configured to be placed horizontally when the two outer legs are fully retracted, and when the two outer legs are in an extended state, the tabletop is placed in the state in which the front of the tabletop is lower than the rear of the tabletop.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of Spalding, to modify Blanke to include the limitations in (i) claims 2 and 9 of wherein: the two inner legs are telescopic, parts of the two inner legs above pivot points of the two inner legs and the two outer legs are telescopic, the tabletop is configured to be placed horizontally when the two inner legs are fully extended, and when the two inner legs are in a shortened state, the tabletop is placed in the state in which the front of the tabletop is lower than the rear of the tabletop; and (ii) claims 4 and 11 of wherein: the two outer legs are telescopic, parts of the two outer legs above pivot points of the two inner legs and the two outer legs are telescopic, the tabletop is configured to be placed horizontally when the two outer legs are fully retracted, and when the two outer legs are in an extended state, the tabletop is placed in the state in which the front of the tabletop is lower than the rear of the tabletop with a reasonable expectation of success in order to increase the overall versatility of the foldable desk.
Claim(s) 13-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blanke in view of Spalding, USP 1942603 to Johanson and USP 9113701 to Zhu.
Blanke discloses (Claim 13). A foldable desk 10, comprising: a tabletop 50, two outer legs 13 symmetrically arranged on a left side and a right side of the tabletop 50, and two inner legs 12 symmetrically arranged on the left side and the right side of the tabletop 50, wherein: each of the two outer legs 13 is rotatably connected to one of the two inner legs 12 disposed on a same side as a corresponding one of the two outer legs in an X-structure, the tabletop 50 is located between the two outer legs 13, rear ends of sides of the tabletop 50 are rotatably connected to the two outer legs 13, upper ends of the two inner legs support a front position of a lower side of the tabletop, and the tabletop is configured to be placed horizontally or switched to be placed in a state in which a front of the tabletop is lower than a rear of the tabletop; (Claim 14). The foldable desk according to claim 13, wherein: an outer leg connecting rod 15 is connected to upper ends of the two outer legs, an inner leg connecting rod 14 is connected to the upper ends of the two inner legs, the tabletop 50 is placed horizontally when the two inner legs are fully extended, and after the two inner legs are shortened, the tabletop is placed in the state in which the front of the tabletop is lower than the rear of the tabletop; (Claim 16). The foldable desk according to claim 14, wherein: a front end of a bottom surface of the tabletop 50 is disposed with a buckle 45, and the buckle 45 is buckled to the inner leg connecting rod 14 when the tabletop 50 is unfolded and placed horizontally; (Claim 17). The foldable desk according to claim 16, wherein: the buckle 45 is a C-shaped buckle, and a front end of a top surface of the tabletop is disposed with a blocking strip 58 (such as shown in Figs. 6-7).
The differences being that Blanke fails to clearly disclose the limitations in (i) claim 13 of the foldable desk 10 comprises one or more tensioning members connected to the two inner legs, the one or more tensioning members are connected to the two outer legs above a position of pivot points of the two outer legs and the two inner legs, the one or more tensioning members are located above the position of the pivot points of the two outer legs and the two inner legs, the one or more tensioning members are in a tensioned state when the foldable desk is unfolded for use; (ii) claim 13 of parts of the two inner legs 12 above the pivot points of the two inner legs 12 and the two outer legs 13 are telescopic; (iii) claim 15.
Regarding (i) and (iii), Johanson and Zhu both discloses a foldable desk, comprising: a tabletop (Johanson: 11; Zhu: 210), two outer legs (Johanson: 7; Zhu: 231) symmetrically arranged on a left side and a right side of the tabletop, and two inner legs (Johanson: 7; Zhu: 231’) symmetrically arranged on the left side and the right side of the tabletop, wherein: each of the two outer legs (Johanson: 7; Zhu: 231) is rotatably connected to one of the two inner legs (Johanson: 7; Zhu: 231’) disposed on a same side as a corresponding one of the two outer legs in an X-structure, the foldable desk comprises one or more tensioning members (Johanson: 12; Zhu: 232,232’) connected to the two inner legs, the one or more tensioning members are connected to the two outer legs above a position of pivot points of the two outer legs and the two inner legs, the one or more tensioning members are located above the position of the pivot points of the two outer legs and the two inner legs, the one or more tensioning members are in a tensioned state when the foldable desk is unfolded for use, wherein: the one or more tensioning members are linkage structures.
Regarding (ii), Spalding discloses a foldable desk, comprising: a tabletop 18, two outer legs 1 symmetrically arranged on a left side and a right side of the tabletop 18, and two inner legs 1 symmetrically arranged on the left side and the right side of the tabletop 18, wherein: an outer leg connecting rod 17 is connected to upper ends of the two outer legs, an inner leg connecting rod 17 is connected to upper ends of the two inner legs, each of the two outer legs is rotatably connected to one of the two inner legs disposed on a same side as a corresponding one of the two outer legs in an X-structure, wherein: the two inner legs 1 are telescopic, parts of the two inner legs 1 above pivot points of the two inner legs 1 and the two outer legs 1 are telescopic, the tabletop is configured to be placed horizontally when the two inner legs are fully extended, and when the two inner legs are in a shortened state, the tabletop is placed in the state in which the front of the tabletop is lower than the rear of the tabletop, wherein: the two outer legs 1 are telescopic, parts of the two outer legs 1 above pivot points of the two inner legs 1 and the two outer legs 1 are telescopic, the tabletop is configured to be placed horizontally when the two outer legs are fully retracted, and when the two outer legs are in an extended state, the tabletop is placed in the state in which the front of the tabletop is lower than the rear of the tabletop.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of Spalding, Johanson and Zhu, to modify Blanke to include the limitations in (i) claim 13 of the foldable desk 10 comprises one or more tensioning members connected to the two inner legs, the one or more tensioning members are connected to the two outer legs above a position of pivot points of the two outer legs and the two inner legs, the one or more tensioning members are located above the position of the pivot points of the two outer legs and the two inner legs, the one or more tensioning members are in a tensioned state when the foldable desk is unfolded for use; (ii) claim 13 of parts of the two inner legs 12 above the pivot points of the two inner legs 12 and the two outer legs 13 are telescopic; (iii) claim 15 of wherein: the one or more tensioning members are webbing straps, linkage structures, ropes, or chains with a reasonable expectation of success in order to increase the overall versatility of the foldable desk.
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 HANH VAN TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-6868. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:30.
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.
HVT
March 27, 2026
/HANH V TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637