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 § 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) 1-6, 16 & 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fox (US patent 1,778,666).
Regarding claim 1, Fox discloses an extendable table, comprising: at least one leg (P1: 94) that primarily extends in a vertical direction so as to define a vertical axis; a frame (15, 21) that is supported by the at least one leg; a first leaf (20) slidably supported by the frame; a second leaf (20) slidably supported by the frame; a third leaf (22) supported by the frame and selectively disposed between the first leaf and the second leaf; a lift assembly that includes a lifting arm (31) that contacts the third leaf; and a roller assembly that includes a guide plate (39) that selectively receives the lifting arm of the lift assembly, wherein the lift assembly and the roller assembly cooperate to move the third leaf between an undeployed position (Fig. 1) and a deployed position (Fig. 2) based upon movement of at least one of the first leaf and the second leaf.
Regarding claim 2, Fox discloses an extendable table wherein when the third leaf is in the deployed position a top surface of the first leaf, a top surface of the second leaf, and a top surface of the third leaf cooperate to define a tabletop of the table that is coplanar (Fig. 2) and when the third leaf is in the undeployed position the top surface of the first leaf and the top surface of the second leaf are not coplanar with the top surface of the third leaf (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 3, Fox discloses an extendable table wherein the lifting arm is pivotably connected to the frame (via 32) and the guide plate is rigidly connected to the second leaf (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 4, Fox discloses an extendable table wherein the first leaf and the second leaf each slide with respect to the frame to define a sliding axis (horizontal) and the guide plate primarily extends along the sliding axis (Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 5, Fox discloses an extendable table wherein the second leaf defines a second leaf length along the sliding axis (Fig. 4) and the guide plate defines a guide plate length along the sliding axis (Fig. 4), and wherein the guide plate length is less than the second leaf length (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 6, Fox discloses an extendable table wherein the second leaf length is more than two times the guide plate length (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 16, Fox discloses an extendable table wherein the guide plate defines a track (40, 40, 41) that selectively receives a guide pin (32) of the lifting arm, the track including a deployed portion (end of 40) that defines a deployed portion length (Fig. 4), an undeployed portion (end of 41) that defines an undeployed portion length (Fig. 4), and a transition portion (41) that defines a transition portion length, the guide pin of the lifting arm moving through the undeployed portion length, the transition portion length, and the undeployed portion length when the third leaf moves between the undeployed position and the deployed position, and wherein the undeployed portion length is greater than the deployed portion length (Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 17, Fox discloses an extendable table wherein the transition portion length is less than the undeployed portion length and a sum of the transition portion length and the deployed portion length is less than the undeployed portion length (Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 20, Fox discloses an extendable table, comprising: a frame (15, 21) defining a generally concealed cavity (space inside 15 & 21); a first leaf (20) supported by the frame and slidable along a first plane horizontally); a third leaf (22) supported by the frame and vertically moveable between a deployed position (Fig. 2) and an undeployed position (Fig. 1), wherein the third leaf is generally coplanar with the first plane when in the deployed position; and a lift assembly (31) connected to the third leaf, the lift assembly translating sliding movement of the first leaf into vertical movement of the third leaf, so that selective sliding movement of the first leaf causes the third leaf to vertically displace between the deployed position and undeployed position, wherein the lift assembly is located within the cavity of the frame.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-15, 18 & 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.
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
Prosecution Insights