++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 .
The following correspondence is a non-final Office Action for application # 18931267, entitled: MOUNTING PLATE, filed on 11/24/2024. Claims 11-23 are pending.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 20 states, “The mounting plate according to claim 10, wherein the body is f metal…” It is believed that claim 20 should depend from claim 11, as claim 10 is canceled. Further, it is submitted that the phrase: “the body is f metal,” should read: “the body is made of metal.” Appropriate correction is required.
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) 11-13 and 17-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fieger (U.S. Pub. 20210247111) in view of Mimlitch, III et al. (U.S. Pub. 20020104942).
Regarding claim 11, Fieger teaches a mounting plate for an expansion valve in a refrigerant circuit, comprising a body 15 with a flat portion (as seen in Figs. 1-2), the body 15 has a substantially rectangular design (as seen in Fig. 2), and two short sides and two long sides (see Fig. 2 below), where the body 15 has edges, where two basically U-shaped cutouts 18,19 are formed in the body 15, through which connecting tubes 11,12 pass, where the connecting tubes 11,12 are vaporizer connecting tubes. However, Fieger fails to teach where at least part of the edges of the body 15 are raised in order to reinforce the body 15. Mimlitch teaches a bracket 10 comprising a flat body 20, having raised edges 70,80,110,130.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the body of Fieger’s bracket to have raised edges, in order to reduce deflection and buckling of the bracket, as taught to be desirable by Mimlitch (see discussion in para. [0030], lines 10-12).
Regarding claim 12, Mimlitch teaches the mounting plate, where the raised edges 70,80,110,130 of the body 20 are oriented at an angle between 80 degrees and 100 degrees with respect to a plane through the flat portion of the body 20 (as seen in Fig. 1 of Mimlitch).
Regarding claim 13, Mimlitch teaches the mounting plate, where at least one edge of one or both of the two U-shaped cutouts is raised. The Examiner notes that Mimlitch teaches where the perimeter of his bracket’s 10 body 20 has raised edges.
Regarding claim 17, Mimlitch teaches the mounting plate, where a raised edge of a U-shaped cutout 18,19 is connected to a raised edge 70,80,110,130 of one of the long sides.
Regarding claim 18, Mimlitch teaches the mounting plate, where a raised edge 70,80,110,130 of one of the short sides is connected to the raised edge of the long side.
Regarding claim 19, Mimlitch teaches the mounting plate, where the raised edges 70,80,110,130 of the short side and the long side are on the same side of the body 15.
Regarding claim 20, Mimlitch teaches the mounting plate, where the body 20 is made of metal, and the raised edges 70,80,110,130 are formed in a shaping process, that includes one of deep drawing or molding. The Examiner notes that Mimlitch discusses the process of making his bracket 10 in para. [0056].
Regarding claim 21, Mimlitch teaches the mounting plate, where the raised edges 70,80,110,130 of the body 15 are oriented at substantially 90 degrees to the plane through the flat body 15.
PNG
media_image1.png
387
615
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 14-16 and 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fieger and Mimlitch as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Mazur (U.S. Pat. 5312080).
Regarding claim 14, Fieger and Mimlitch are discussed above, and teach the mounting plate. However, Fieger and Mimlitch fail to teach where the mounting plate further comprises at least one hole in the body, where an edge of the at least one hole which is raised. Mazur teaches a bracket 64 made of a mounting plate that has at least one hole in the body, where an edge of the at least one hole which is raised.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the bracket body of Fieger and Mimlitch to have raised threaded holes, in order to provide a means for securing fasteners (i.e. screws), as is well known in the art.
Regarding claim 15, Mazur teaches the mounting plate, where the at least one hole is threaded (as seen in Fig. 11 below).
Regarding claim 16, Mazur teaches the mounting plate, where the two U- shaped cutouts 18,19 are spaced apart, and the at least one hole is capable of being disposed in the middle of the flat portion of the body 15, between the two U-shaped cutouts 18,19.
Regarding claim 22, Mazur teaches the mounting plate, where the at least one hole in the body 64 is two holes in the body 64, where an edge of both of the two holes are raised (as seen in Fig. 11 below.
Regarding claim 23, Mazur teaches the mounting plate, where both of the two holes in the body 64 are threaded.
PNG
media_image2.png
455
656
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. In addition to the reference to Fieger, Mimlitch, III et al., and Mazur et al., the Examiner submits the Notice of References Cited (PTO-892). The cited references disclose mounting devices comprising brackets for securing conduit.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL D MCDUFFIE whose telephone number is (571)272-3832. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8AM-4:30PM.
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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.
/Michael McDuffie/Examiner, Art Unit 3632 6-Feb-26
/TERRELL L MCKINNON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3632