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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because reference numeral “108A” does not lead to “a recess” (see [0033] and figures 1B and 13A). Instead, “108A” points to a downwardly projecting wall of the mounting hole 108. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: (1) in paragraph [0026], line 4, “the curl. 36.” is not understood. (2) in the same paragraph, lines 6 and 8, “projection 208” should be “projection 207”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In claim 1, lines 8 and 11, “a horizontal direction” and “a depth direction” are considered vague and indefinite, without defining the relative positioning (i.e., a reference frame) between the hinge, the door, and the cabinet frame.
In claim 5, it is not clear exactly how the damping assembly is related/linked to other elements of the hinge, such that when the arm link pivots between an open position and a closed position, the damper moves relative to the bottom of the hinge cup.
In claim 9, line 2, “a second aperture” is confusing, without defining “a first aperture” in any intervening claims.
In claim 10, line 1, “the adjustable mounting assembly” lacks proper antecedent basis.
Note that other claims, depending from the rejected claims, are also considered vague and indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 or 103
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.
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.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Chen et al. ‘711 (US 8,650,711 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Chen et al. shows a hinge cup (10); an arm link (14) having a first end and a second end, the first end coupled to the hinge cup (fig. 4) and configured to pivot relative to the hinge cup between an open position and closed position; a bottom plate (fig. 4 and fig. 9) adjustably coupled to the arm link by a first adjustment screw (fig. 4, the screw connecting the second end of the arm link 14 to the bottom plate), whereby rotation of the first adjustment screw causes movement of the bottom plate relative to the arm link in a horizontal direction (fig. 4, it is inherent that the screw shown between the arm link and the bottom plate is used to adjust the relative movement in the horizontal direction); a cover plate (“12”, figs. 4 and 9) adjustably coupled to the bottom plate by a second adjustment screw (e.g., the bottom screw, fig. 4 or fig. 8), whereby rotation of the second adjustment screw causes movement of the cover plate relative to the bottom plate in a depth direction (see vertical elongated slot shown under the second adjustment screw in fig. 8); a lower surface of the cover plate disposed substantially parallel to an upper surface of the bottom plate; a majority of the area of the lower surface of the cover plate directly contacts the upper surface of the bottom plate (see figs. 4 and 9, both the cover plate and the bottom plate are planar and in contact under the pressure of the mounting screw, i.e., the middle screw in the cover plate shown in fig. 4). Thus, Chen et al. meets claim 1.
Alternatively to claim 1, even though Chen et al. dose not specify the first screw being an adjustment screw between the arm link and the bottom plate, the examiner takes Official Notice that it is well known and common in the art to connect the arm link to another section of a hinge arm with an adjustment screw (e.g., eccentric or cam screw engaging with an elongated aperture) to adjust the hinge in a horizontal direction (e.g., US 2022/0349227A1, US 2020/0173216A1, US 2018/0355651A1). 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 connection of Chen et al. between the arm link and the bottom plate with an adjustment screw, to adjust the hinge in a horizontal direction.
Regarding claim 2, Chen et al. does not specify the hinge cup having a depth of no greater than 11.5 mm. However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the hinge cup with a depth of no greater than 11.5 mm, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Further, regarding the opening angle of at least 103 degrees, Chen et al. shows an opening position of the hinge cup but for the specific angle (e.g., fig. 7). However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the opening angle of Chen et al. at least 103 degrees, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
As to claim 3, Chen et al. shows the first end of the arm link being coupled to a rivet (22, fig. 2). However, Chen et al. does not show the rivet being seated no more than 3.7 mm above a bottom surface of the hinge cup. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to place the rivet no more than 3.7 mm above the bottom surface of the hinge cup, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
As to claim 4, Chen et al. has a damper cover (52) disposed within the hinge cup and a damper (50, 48) slidably received by the damper cover.
As to claim 5, the damper cover includes opposing channels (70) disposed substantially parallel to the bottom of the hinge cup, the channels slidably receives opposing guides (60) formed on the damper, wherein when the arm link pivots between an open position and closed position, the bottom surface of the damper moves relative to, but does not contact, the bottom of the hinge cup (the damper slides on the guide channels 70, and the channels keep the bottom surface of the damper off the bottom surface of the hinge cup).
As to claim 6, the damper cover (52) includes at least one protrusion (66, 68) received by aperture (44, 74) formed in the bottom surface of the hinge cup.
As to claim 7, Chen et al. shows an adjustment screw having a post disposed through an opening in the arm link (see discussion of claim 1 above). However, Chen et al. does not specify the arm link opening being sized to permit at least 5.9 mm of movement of the bottom plate relative to the arm link. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to form the opening in the arm link in such size to permit at least 5.9 mm or any desired value of movement to adjust the hinge in the horizontal direction, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
As to claim 8, Chen et al. does not specify the thickness of the adjustable mounting assembly being no greater than 5.7 mm (i.e., the total thickness of the bottom plate and the cover plate). It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to form the thickness of the adjustable mounting assembly with a total thickness of no greater than 5.7 mm, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
As to claim 9, the second adjustment screw of Chen et al. (figs. 4 and 8, the bottom adjustment screw on the cover “12”) includes a post disposed through an opening in the cover plate and received by a second aperture in the bottom plate (fig. 9). Chen et al. does not specify the cover plate opening being size to permit at least 1.9 mm of movement of the bottom plate relative to the cover plate in the depth direction. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to form the opening in the cover plate in such size to permit at least 1.9 mm or any desired value of movement to adjust the hinge in the depth direction, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
As to claim 10, the members of the adjustable mounting assembly of Chen et al. consist only the second adjustment screw, bottom plate, and the cover plate.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892.
Related prior art:
US 2002/0000021 A1 (Domenig et al.) shows an adjustment hinge for a cabinet, including a hinge cup, an arm link pivotally coupled to the hinge cup, a hinge plate adjustably coupled to the arm link by a first adjustment screw for adjusting the hinge in a horizontal direction, a base plate adjustable coupled to the hinge plate by a second adjustment screw for adjusting the hinge in a depth direction, and the hinge plate and the base plate directly contact.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUCK MAH whose telephone number is (571)272-7059. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00-3:00.
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, Jason San can be reached at 571-272-6531. 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.
/CHUCK Y MAH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3677 CM
January 18, 2026