Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
This is a first office action on the merits of application SN 18/963,629 and filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 1-20 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.
Claims 1, 9, and 17 recites that the detector sends a signal which renders the claim indefinite since unclear how to weigh “sends” since the term is a method step recited within the apparatus claim.
Claims 8, 16, and 20 recites that the trigger triggers the signal which renders the claim indefinite since unclear how to weigh “triggers” since the term is a method step recited within the apparatus claim.
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)(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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent 7,192,105 to Jung.
Jung teaches
1. A structure configured for detecting positions of a door panel on a server, the structure comprising: a base board (105); a moving piece (104) movable along a line between a first position and a second position on the base board (as best seen in figures 2 and 3); a bracket (106) rotatable around an axis between a first angle and a second angle on the base board (as best seen in figures 2 and 3), the axis substantially perpendicular to the line, and the bracket configured for supporting a door panel; a link rod (107) connected to the bracket and the moving piece; and a detector (200) positioned on the base board, wherein when the door panel is rotated, the bracket rotates with the door panel and moves the moving piece by the link rod, when the door panel is closed, the bracket is rotated to the first angle, the moving piece is moved to the first position, and the detector sends a first signal (as best understood due the 112 rejection above, the detector provide rotating resistance to the door when the detector is located in a valley 10a, 10b, 10c, and 10d; the rotating resistance is considered to be a feedback signal to a user); when the door panel is opened, the bracket is rotated to the second angle, the moving piece is moved to the second position, and the detector sends a second signal (the valleys define different positions that each provide a signal).
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.
Claim(s) 9 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Publication 2015/0282349 to Mann in view of US Patent 7,192,105 to Jung.
Mann teaches
A computing system comprising: a rack (100); and a plurality of servers (104) placed in the rack, each of the plurality of servers comprising: a chassis defining an opening (figure 2 and 6); a door panel (122) rotatable relative to the chassis and the door panel configured for covering or uncovering the opening;
Mann does not expressly disclose a structure configured for detecting positions of a door panel.
Jung teaches
A structure configured for detecting positions of a door panel on a server, the structure comprising: a base board (105); a moving piece (104) movable along a line between a first position and a second position on the base board (as best seen in figures 2 and 3); a bracket (106) rotatable around an axis between a first angle and a second angle on the base board (as best seen in figures 2 and 3), the axis substantially perpendicular to the line, and the bracket configured for supporting a door panel; a link rod (107) connected to the bracket and the moving piece; and a detector (200) positioned on the base board, wherein when the door panel is rotated, the bracket rotates with the door panel and moves the moving piece by the link rod, when the door panel is closed, the bracket is rotated to the first angle, the moving piece is moved to the first position, and the detector sends a first signal (as best understood due the 112 rejection above, the detector provide rotating resistance to the door when the detector is located in a valley 10a, 10b, 10c, and 10d; the rotating resistance is considered to be a feedback signal to a user); when the door panel is opened, the bracket is rotated to the second angle, the moving piece is moved to the second position, and the detector sends a second signal (the valleys define different positions that each provide a signal).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Mann by adding a structure to the door as taught by Jung to help control the position of the door.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-8, 10-16, and 18-20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY MICHAEL AYRES whose telephone number is (571)272-8299. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 11:30-8.
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.
/TIMOTHY M AYRES/ Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights