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) 1-5, 8, 11-15 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Haas US 20170250648.
PNG
media_image1.png
382
678
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
328
548
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Haas US 20170250648 discloses a bracket (400 in Fig. 5) comprising:
a base (405 in Fig. 5),
a first support part (410 in Fig. 5) having a shape protruding upwardly with respect to the base (405); and
a support coupling part (410s in annotated Fig. 6b and 11a) wherein one end is in contact with the base (405) and the other end is in contact with the first support part (410),
wherein the base (405) comprises a first hole (hole between 415 in Fig. 5) penetrating from an upper surface (upper surface of 405 in Fig. 5) to a bottom surface (bottom surface of 405 in Fig. 5) thereof, and the first support part (410) is connected to an inner perimeter of the first hole (hole between 415 as depicted in Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 2, Haas discloses the bracket of claim 1, wherein a cross-sectional shape (shape of 410) of the first support part (410) corresponds to a cross-sectional shape (shape of the hole between 415) of the first hole (hole between 415).
Regarding claim 3, Haas discloses the bracket of claim 1, wherein the base (405) and the first support part (410) are formed as one body (as depicted in Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 4, Haas discloses the bracket of claim 1, wherein the first support part (410) includes a first side surface (surface of 410 having recess in Fig. 5) facing the first hole (hole between 415) and a second side surface (surface of 410 facing away from 415 in Fig. 5) opposite to the first side surface (as depicted in Fig. 5 and 6b).
Regarding claim 5, Haas discloses the bracket of claim 1, wherein the base (405) includes a second hole (hole at recess of 410) in which an inner perimeter is connected to one end of the support coupling part (410s), and a cross-sectional shape of the second hole (hole at recess of 410) corresponds to a cross-sectional shape of the support coupling part (410s).
Regarding claim 8, Haas discloses the bracket of claim 11, wherein the support coupling part (410s) is provided in multiple numbers (as depicted in Fig. 5), and the base (405) is formed with a plurality of holes (hole at recess of 410) each having a shape corresponding to a cross-sectional shape of the multiple support coupling parts (410s as depicted in Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 11, Haas US 20170250648 discloses an electronic device comprising:
a bracket (400 in Fig. 5);
a first module (PVM shown in Fig. 10c; not shown at A in Fig. 6b hereinafter referred to as PMV at A) disposed on one surface of the bracket; and
a second module (PVM at B in Fig. 6b) disposed on the other surface of the bracket (400),
wherein the bracket (400) includes:
a base (405 in Fig. 5) disposed between the first module (PMV at A) and the second module (PMV at B as depicted in Fig. 10c);
a first support part (410 in Fig. 5) having a shape that protrudes upward with respect to the base (405) and supporting a side of the second module (PMV at B); and
a support coupling part (410s in annotated Fig. 6b and 11a) wherein one end is in contact with the base (405) and the other end is in contact with the first support part (410 as depicted in annotated Fig. 6b and 11a),
wherein the base (405) includes a first hole (hole between 415 in Fig. 5) penetrating a lower surface (bottom surface of 405 in Fig. 5) from an upper surface (upper surface of 405 in Fig. 5), and the first support part (410) is connected to an inner perimeter of the first hole (hole between 415 as depicted in Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 12, Haas discloses the electronic device of claim 11, wherein a cross-sectional shape (shape of 410) of the first support part (410) corresponds to a cross-sectional shape (shape of the hole between 415) of the first hole (hole between 415).
Regarding claim 13, Haas discloses the electronic device of claim 11, wherein the base (405) and the first support part (410) are formed as one body (as depicted in Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 14, Haas discloses the electronic device of claim 11, wherein the first support part (410) includes a first side surface (surface of 410 having recess in Fig. 5) facing the first hole (hole between 415) and a second side surface (surface of 410 facing away from 415 in Fig. 5) opposite to the first side surface (as depicted in Fig. 5 and 6b).
Regarding claim 15, Haas discloses the electronic device of claim 11, wherein the base (405) includes a second hole (hole at recess of 410) in which an inner perimeter is connected to one end of the support coupling part (410s), and a cross-sectional shape of the second hole (hole at recess of 410) corresponds to a cross-sectional shape of the support coupling part (410s).
Regarding claim 18, Haas discloses the electronic device of claim 11, wherein the support coupling part (410s) is provided in multiple numbers (as depicted in Fig. 5), and the base (405) is formed with a plurality of holes (hole at recess of 410) each having a shape corresponding to a cross-sectional shape of the multiple support coupling parts (410s as depicted in Fig. 5).
Claim(s) 1 and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Haas US 20170250648.
Regarding claim 1, Yin US 20130100593 discloses a bracket (20 in Fig. 2) comprising:
a base (22 in Fig. 2),
a first support part (223 in Fig. 2) having a shape protruding upwardly with respect to the base (22); and
a support coupling part (50 Fig. 3) wherein one end is in contact with the base (22) and the other end is in contact with the first support part (223 as depicted in Fig. 4),
wherein the base (22) comprises a first hole (hole at 223 in Fig. 2) penetrating from an upper surface (upper surface of 22 in Fig. 2) to a bottom surface (bottom surface of 22 in Fig. 2) thereof, and the first support part (223) is connected to an inner perimeter of the first hole (hole at 223 as depicted in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 9, Yin discloses the bracket of claim 1, wherein the support coupling part (52) is bent at least once (as depicted in Fig. 3) and include multiple regions that are disposed perpendicularly to each other (as depicted in Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 10, Yin discloses the bracket of claim 1, comprising second and third support parts (224/225 in Fig. 2) protruding from the base (22), wherein heights of the first to third support parts (223-225) protruding from the base (22) are different from each other (as depicted in 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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mammoser in view of Truckner.
Regarding claim 1, Mammoser US 6442030 discloses a bracket (99 in Fig. 8) comprising:
a base (107 in Fig. 8),
a first support part (109 in Fig. 8) having a shape protruding upwardly with respect to the base (107);
wherein the base (107) comprises a first hole (108 in Fig. 8) penetrating from an upper surface (upper surface of 107 in Fig. 8 and 12) to a bottom surface (bottom surface of 107 in Fig. 8 and 12) thereof, and the first support part (109) is connected to an inner perimeter of the first hole (108 as depicted in Fig. 8 and 12).
Mammoser does not explicitly disclose a support coupling part wherein one end is in contact with the base and the other end is in contact with the first support part.
However, Truckner US 20150082735 discloses (in Fig. 2) a support coupling part (212 in Fig. 2) wherein one end (bottom end of 212) is in contact with a base (base of 21) and the other end (top end of 212) is in contact with a first support part (211).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have a support coupling part wherein one end is in contact with the base of Mammoser and the other end is in contact with the first support part, as taught by Truckner, in order to improve rigidity of the first support part (see Truckner [0028]).
Regarding claim 2, Mammoser in view of Truckner discloses the bracket of claim 1, wherein a cross-sectional shape (shape of 109 of Mammoser) of the first support part (109 of Mammoser) corresponds to a cross-sectional shape (shape of 108 of Mammoser) of the first hole (108 of Mammoser).
Regarding claim 3, Mammoser in view of Truckner discloses the bracket of claim 1, wherein the base (107 of Mammoser) and the first support part (109 of Mammoser) are formed as one body (as depicted in Fig. 8 and 12 of Mammoser).
Regarding claim 4, Mammoser in view of Truckner discloses the bracket of claim 1, wherein the first support part (109 of Mammoser) includes a first side surface (surface having 110 in Fig. 12 of Mammoser) facing the first hole (108 of Mammoser) and a second side surface (surface of 109 facing 111 in Fig. 8 of Mammoser) opposite to the first side surface (as depicted in Fig. 8 of Mammoser).
Regarding claim 5, Mammoser in view of Truckner discloses the bracket of claim 1, wherein the base (107 of Mammoseras modified by Truckner) includes a second hole (139 of Truckner) in which an inner perimeter is connected to one end of the support coupling part (137 of Truckner), and a cross-sectional shape of the second hole (139 of Truckner) corresponds to a cross-sectional shape of the support coupling part (137 of Truckner).
Regarding claim 8, Mammoser in view of Truckner discloses the bracket of claim 1,wherein the support coupling part (137 of Truckner) is provided in multiple numbers (as depicted in Fig. 2d of Truckner), and the base (107 of Mammoseras modified by Truckner) is formed with a plurality of holes (139 in Fig. 2c of Truckner) each having a shape corresponding to a cross-sectional shape of the multiple support coupling parts (137 of Truckner).
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mammoser in view of Truckner as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cunningham US 11034307.
Regarding claim 6, Mammoser in view of Truckner discloses the bracket of claim 1.
Mammoser in view of Truckner do not explicitly disclose that the support coupling part is welded to one side of the first support part.
However, Cunningham US 11034307 discloses (in Fig. 5) a support coupling part (36) welded to one side of a first support part (34 see Col. 7, ln. 9-11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the support coupling part of Mammoser in view of Truckner welded to one side of the first support part, as taught by Cunningham, in order to secure the coupling part to the first support part as this would be combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 7, Mammoser in view of Truckner discloses the bracket of claim 1.
Mammoser in view of Truckner do not explicitly disclose that the support coupling part is welded to the upper surface of the base.
However, Cunningham US 11034307 discloses (in Fig. 5) a support coupling part (36) welded to an upper surface of a base (32 see Col. 7, ln. 9-11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the support coupling part of Mammoser in view of Truckner welded to the upper surface of the base, as taught by Cunningham, in order to secure the coupling part to the upper surface of the base as this would be combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Claim(s) 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haas as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Cunningham US 11034307.
Regarding claim 16, Haas discloses the electronic device of claim 11.
Haas does not explicitly disclose that the support coupling part is welded to one side of the first support part.
However, Cunningham US 11034307 discloses (in Fig. 5) a support coupling part (36) welded to one side of a first support part (34 see Col. 7, ln. 9-11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the support coupling part of Haas welded to one side of the first support part, as taught by Cunningham, in order to secure the coupling part to the first support part as this would be combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 17, Haas discloses the electronic device of claim 11.
Haas does not explicitly disclose that the support coupling part is welded to the upper surface of the base.
However, Cunningham US 11034307 discloses (in Fig. 5) a support coupling part (36) welded to an upper surface of a base (32 see Col. 7, ln. 9-11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the support coupling part of Haas welded to the upper surface of the base, as taught by Cunningham, in order to secure the coupling part to the upper surface of the base as this would be combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19-20 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 19, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or fairly suggest, in combining with other limitations recited in claim 11, a combination of limitations that “wherein the support coupling part is bent at least once and include multiple regions that are disposed perpendicularly to each other”.
None of the reference art of record discloses or renders obvious such a combination.
Regarding claim 20, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or fairly suggest, in combining with other limitations recited in claim 11, a combination of limitations that “comprising second and third support parts protruding from the base, wherein heights of the first to third support parts protruding from the base are different from each other”.
None of the reference art of record discloses or renders obvious such a combination.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Dean US 20050051672 Fig. 1-3a anticipates at least claim 1.
Lu US 8837158 Fig. 2a-2b; Yang US 20170153675 Fig. 1 discloses a bracket with a support coupling part wherein one end is in contact with a base and the other end is in contact with a first support part.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER L AUGUSTIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7659. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 3 pm.
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, Allen L Parker can be reached at 303-297-4722. 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.
/ALLEN L PARKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2841
/CHRISTOPHER L AUGUSTIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights