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
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 8, 16, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Fairchild (849,111).
Fairchild discloses a picture frame comprising a picture carrier portion (1, Fig. 3 or 14, Fig. 1) and a frame portion (Fig. 1), the frame portion for formation of a frame and comprising frame members with: a side member (10, Fig. 1) hingedly connected via a first hinge connection (8, Fig. 3) to the picture carrier portion, and; a back member (11, Fig. 1) hingedly connected via a second hinge connection (7, Fig. 3) to the side member, wherein in an assembled configuration: the side member forms a side of the frame portion, and; the back member forms a back of the frame portion (the terms “front” and “back” are relative and can be applied to either side of the frame) and is inclined relative to the picture carrier portion (Fig. 1) and extends between the side member (10, Fig. 1) and the picture carrier portion (1, Fig. 3), wherein the frame portion includes a carrier portion connecting member (12, Fig. 1), which is connected to the back member, in the assembled configuration, the carrier portion connecting member to connect the back member to the picture carrier portion, and the carrier portion connecting member configured to extend from the back member away from the side member (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 2, the back member (11, Fig. 1) is inclined relative to the picture carrier portion (1, Fig. 3) with an interior angle which is acute. See Fig. 1.
Regarding claim 3, see Fig. 1.
Regarding claim 8, all members of the frame disclosed by Fairchild are formed from a single blank.
Regarding claim 16, the picture frame disclosed by Fairchild is formed as a blank from sheet material. See Fig. 3.
Regarding claim 17, a picture (postcard) is connected to the frame disclosed by Fairchild by being inserted through slot 15 (Fig. 2).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fairchild (849,111) in view of Wong (2016/0227945).
Fairchild discloses the invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above. However, although Fairchild states that “the folds 12 have their inner face thereof secured to the outer face of the body portion of the blank” (page 1, lines 94-96), Fairchild does not specify how they are secured. Wong teaches using adhesive to secure elements of a paperboard frame. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use adhesive to secure the elements of the frame disclosed by Fairchild, as taught by Wong, as a matter of design choice.
Claims 5, 9, 10, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fairchild (849,111) in view of Morrish (2016/0073797).
Regarding claim 5, Fairchild discloses the invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above. However, Fairchild does not disclose a guide tab. Morrish teaches providing guide tabs (42A, 42B, Fig. 6) that can be holdable by a user or assembly machine. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide guide tabs, as taught by Morrish, in order to assist in assembling the frame.
Regarding claims 9, 10, 13, and 14, Fairchild discloses the invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above. However, Fairchild does not disclose connecting the sides of the frame portion to each other. Morrish teaches interlocking the sides of a frame. See paragraph 0020. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to connect the sides of the frame portion disclosed by Fairchild, as taught by Morrish, in order to improve the rigidity of the frame.
Regarding claim 15, the slot (62, Fig. 5) constitutes a cut-out portion.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fairchild (849,111) in view of Chase (3,517,106).
Fairchild discloses the invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above. However, Fairchild does not disclose indications to facilitate aligning the elements of the frame. Chase teaches providing guide lines (G, Fig. 1) to facilitate aligning elements of a frame. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the frame disclosed by Fairchild with guide lines, as taught by Chase, in order to facilitate aligning elements of the frame.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fairchild (849,111) in view of Morrish (2016/0073797), as applied to claim 10, above, and further in view of Wong (2016/0227945).
Fairchild discloses the invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above. However, the back member connecting member and adjoining back member are attached by slot-and-tab construction, rather than adhesive. Wong teaches using adhesive to secure elements of a paperboard frame. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use adhesive to secure the elements of the frame disclosed by Fairchild, as taught by Wong, as a matter of design choice.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 11, 18, and 20 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 7, Fairchild does not disclose interlocking the adjoining carrier portion connecting members (12, Fig. 1). The prior art of record does not disclose or suggest interlocking such members.
Regarding claim 11, the prior art of record does not disclose or suggest a back member connecting member that is hinged so as to be angled to match the incline of a back member of a folding frame.
Regarding claim 18, the prior art of record does not disclose or suggest a frame of the type recited that includes a closing back member having grooves at corners to permit aligning of peripheral members to an angle that corresponds to the incline of the back members.
Regarding claim 20, the prior art of record does not disclose or suggest a method step of connecting a picture member to a foldable picture frame prior to folding the elements of the frame.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The relevance of each reference is explained below, unless the relevance is deemed to be readily apparent.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GARY C HOGE whose telephone number is (571)272-6645. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday.
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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at (571) 272-8227. 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.
/GARY C HOGE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631