Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Priority date of 10/29/2010 based on 61/408346 is acknowledged (note fig. 8).
Double Patenting:
This instant application: 19/021,609
Patent US12,514,349
1. A luggage piece, comprising:
a base;
a lid pivotally joined to the base to pivot between at least
a first position where the base and the lid define
a substantially enclosed space and
a second position to allow access to the substantially enclosed space; the lid and the base together defining
an area recessed relative to outermost surfaces of the lid and the base when the lid and base are configured in the first position; and
an assembly
for maintaining the lid and the base in the first position, the assembly joined to the lid and the base at least within the recessed area.
2. The luggage piece of claim 1, wherein the assembly comprises a zipper.
3. The luggage piece of claim 2, wherein the zipper includes a zipper track
recessed relative to the outermost surfaces of the sides of the luggage piece
along the length of the zipper track.
4. The luggage piece of claim 3, wherein the lid and base are each formed of a hard material joined by a piano-type hinge.
1. A luggage piece comprising:
a base;
a lid pivotally joined to the base to pivot between at least
a first position where the base and the lid define
a substantially enclosed space and
a second position to allow access to the substantially enclosed space; the lid and the base together defining
an area recessed relative to outermost surfaces of the lid and the base when the lid and base are configured in the first position; and
a zipper
for maintaining the lid and the base in the first position, the zipper joined to the lid and the base at least within the recessed area
such that the zipper is recessed relative to the outermost surfaces of the lid and the base within the recessed area; wherein: the zipper includes a zipper track and a zipper slider and a zipper tab; the luggage piece further comprises a front side, a rear side, a left side, a right side, a top side and a bottom side, the lid being defined by the front side and portions of the right, left, top and bottom sides, the base being defined by the rear side and remaining portions of the right, left, top and bottom sides, and the right side being formed to define a pair of recessed area sidewalls that extend from the outermost surfaces of the right side toward the enclosed space; a recessed area flange extends from each of the recessed area sidewalls proximate an inner recessed area sidewall end portion of its respective recessed area sidewall generally transversely from its respective recessed area sidewall towards the other recessed area sidewall, wherein each recessed area flange ends proximate the recessed area flange extending from the other recessed area sidewall; and the zipper track is joined to the recessed area flanges such that the zipper is aligned with the outermost surfaces.
2. The luggage piece of claim 1, wherein: the zipper track is
recessed relative to the outermost surfaces of the front side, rear side, left side, right side, top side and bottom side of the luggage piece
along the length of the zipper track.
3. The luggage piece of claim 1, wherein the free ends of the recessed area flanges abut each other.
4. The luggage piece of claim 1, wherein each recessed area sidewall is spaced apart from the other recessed area sidewall at least a sufficient distance along the lengths of the recessed area sidewalls to accommodate a width of the zipper track.
5. The luggage piece of claim 1 wherein an outer facing surface of each recessed area sidewall is generally parallel to an outer facing surface of the other recessed area sidewall along the lengths of the recessed area sidewalls.
6. The luggage piece of claim 1 wherein the lid and the base are formed of a hard material joined by a piano-type hinge.
7. The luggage piece of claim 6 wherein the lid and the base are formed to define the recessed area.
8. The luggage piece of claim 1, wherein the zipper track is joined to the recessed area flanges, and a location of the recessed area flanges relative to the outermost surface of the right side of the luggage piece defines the depth that the zipper track is recessed relative to the outermost surface of the right side of the luggage piece.
9. The luggage piece of claim 8, wherein said depth that the zipper track is recessed relative to the outermost surface of the right side of the luggage piece is selected such that no portion of the zipper slider extends beyond the outermost surface of the right side of the luggage piece.
10. The luggage piece of claim 8, wherein said depth that the zipper track is recessed relative to the outermost surface of the right side as it transitions to the top side of the luggage piece is selected such that at least a portion of the zipper extends beyond the outermost surface of the right side of the luggage piece.
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-4 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of U.S. Patent No. 12,514,349. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because: the claims of the U.S. Patent No. 12,514,349 encompasses all claimed limitations in claims 1-4, as set forth supra. Also, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to eliminate limitations to broaden the claim and/or when they are not needed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 –
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Kish, Jr (3158238).
PNG
media_image1.png
712
1195
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
547
508
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 1 and 2, Kish teaches a luggage piece comprising: a base (20/21), a lid (21/20) pivotally joined to the base to pivot between at least a first position where the base and the lid define a substantially enclosed space and a second position to allow access to the substantially enclosed space; the lid and the base together defining an area recessed (see examiner’s picture ) relative to outermost surfaces (at top surface at 45, fig. 9) of the lid and the base when the lid and base are configured in the first position; and an assembly being the zipper (40) for maintaining the lid and the base in the first position, the zipper joined to the lid and the base at least within the recessed area.
Regarding claim 3, note the zipper track is recessed relative to the outermost surfaces of the sides of the luggage piece along the length of the zipper track in figs 2 and 4.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kish Jr. in view of Younessian (5755311). Kish teaches the material:
For example, the luggage piece100 shown in Figs. 1-15 depicts a hybrid construction that includes components of a relatively rigid, semi-rigid, hard, or semi-hard material (collectively "harder material") and a relatively soft or non-rigid material (collectively "softer material").
Kish meets all claimed limitations except for the piano-type hinge. Younessian teaches that it is known in the art to provide a piano-hinge type.
The pivotable connection preferably is by a pair or more of hinges 71,71', or a single length of piano hinge, or the like. Accordingly, the lid shell 40 may by swung upward from base shell 80 to expose the interior storage space of the case, or may be lowered to completely enclose and define the interior space.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide piano-type hinge as taught by Younessian to provide added rigidity and security.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRI M MAI whose telephone number is (571)272-4541. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-5pm (Mon-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, Nathan Jenness can be reached on (571) 270-5055. 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.
TRI M. MAI
Examiner
Art Unit 3733
/TRI M MAI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733