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.
(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) 1-6, 8, 12-14, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dalton.
Regarding claim 1, Dalton discloses a display assembly (12) with improved viewing through and beyond the same, said display assembly comprising:
a framework (Figure 3 – including at least 20, 26, 30 and 14) comprising a first upward extending member (Figure 3) and a second upward extending member (Figure 3), spaced apart from the first upward extending member (Figure 3), wherein said framework, including the first and second upward extending members (Figure 3) thereof, is fixed (the display is fixed when the display is positioned/placed along the variable/adjustable height of the assembly);
an electronic display subassembly (Figure 3) connected to said framework at a fixed elevated position (Figure 2) between the first and second upward extending members such that said first and second upward extending members each extend along a respective side of the electronic display subassembly (Figure 3) and a lower portion of the framework extends below the electronic display subassembly; and
an open, see-through (Figure 3) area located below said electronic display subassembly and defined, at least in part, by interior facing surfaces of the lower portion of said framework.
PNG
media_image1.png
464
448
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
630
424
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Dalton discloses the display assembly of claim 1 wherein: a bottom surface of the electronic display subassembly and the interior facing surfaces of the lower portion of the framework define the open, see-through area.
PNG
media_image3.png
418
340
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Dalton discloses the display assembly of claim 2 wherein: the lower portion of the framework comprises a lower portion of the (30) first upward extending member, and a lower portion of the (30) second upward extending member, and further comprises a base (14) extending between the interior facing surfaces of a lower portion of said first upward extending member and of the second upward extending member, wherein the base is spaced apart from the bottom surface of the electronic display subassembly; and the open, see-through area is further defined, at least in part, by an upper surface of the base, the interior facing surface the lower portion of the first upward extending member, and the interior facing surface of the lower portion of the second upward extending member.
Regarding claim 4, Dalton discloses the display assembly of claim 3 wherein: the open, see-through area is free of obstructions (Figure 2).
Regarding claim 5, Dalton discloses the display assembly of claim 4 wherein: the open, see-through area is defined entirely by the upper surface of the base, the interior facing surface of the lower portion of the first upward extending member, and the lower portion of the interior facing surface of the second upward extending member (Figure 2).
Regarding claim 6, Dalton discloses the display assembly of claim 3 further comprising: electronic equipment (24) for operating said display assembly located within the base of the framework; and wiring (38) extending within said framework from said electronic equipment to said electronic display subassembly.
Regarding claim 8, Dalton discloses the display assembly of claim 1 further comprising: electronic equipment (22) for operating said display assembly located within the framework; and wiring extending (38) within at least a portion of said framework from said electronic equipment to said electronic display subassembly.
Regarding claim 12, Dalton discloses the display assembly of claim 1 further comprising: a second electronic display (16)(18) subassembly connected to a second side of said framework (Figure 3) at the elevated position, wherein said electronic display subassembly is connected to a first side of said framework.
Regarding claim 13, Dalton discloses the display assembly of claim 1 wherein: at least a portion of said electronic display subassembly is configured for movement relative to said framework between a closed position where said electronic display subassembly is located against or adjacent to said framework and an open position where at least a one edge of at least said portion of said electronic display subassembly is moved away from said framework. (Column 1, Lines 29 – 30: It is another object of the present invention to provide an electronic sign which includes a display that is easily removed.)
PNG
media_image4.png
650
419
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 14, Dalton discloses the display assembly of claim 1 wherein: said electronic display subassembly comprises a backlight and a liquid crystal layer. (Column 1, Lines 62-67)
Regarding claim 20, Dalton discloses the display assembly of claim 1 wherein: each of the first and second upward extending members extend along an entire length of the respective side of the electronic display subassembly (Figure 3).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dalton (US6977627) in view of Dunn (US20200163235).
Regarding claim 7, Dalton discloses the display assembly of claim 6.
Dalton does not expressly disclose said electronic equipment comprises at least one power module.
Dunn discloses wherein said electronic equipment comprises at least one power module.
Dunn discloses electronic equipment comprises at least on power module (Paragraph 0048 – … cavity 115 which may be sized to receive additional equipment 116, such as but not limited to, antennas, power over ethernet equipment, cellular radio, wireless routers and connectivity equipment, and other network communication devices as well as environmental sensors, air quality monitors, cameras, microphones, computing devices, proximity sensors, speakers, and the like…)
It would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate a power module of Dunn into the electronic equipment of Dalton.
One having ordinary skill on the art would have been motivated to do this to provide electricity to the display assembly
Claim(s) 11 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dalton (US6977627) in view of Bowers et al. (hereinafter Bowers) (US9703320).
Regarding claim 11, Dalton discloses the display assembly of claim 1 further comprising.
Dalton does not expressly disclose a communications cabinet located above said electronic display subassembly; wireless communications equipment located within said communications cabinet; and wiring extends extending within at least a portion of said framework from said electronic display subassembly to said wireless communications equipment.
Bowers discloses a communications cabinet located above said electronic display subassembly; wireless communications equipment located within said communications cabinet; and wiring (122) extends extending within at least a portion of said framework from said electronic display subassembly to said wireless communications equipment. (Column 16, Lines 66-67 – Column 17, Lines 1-6)
It would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the communication cabinet of Bowers to the display apparatus of Bowers
One having ordinary skill on the art would have been motivated to do this as a redundancy for the assembly and make it easier for maintenance needed for the equipment.
Regarding claim 15, Dalton discloses the display assembly of claim 1.
Dalton does not expressly disclose further comprising: an airflow pathway extending within or along at least a portion of the electronic display subassembly; and at least one fan located along the airflow pathway.
Bowers discloses an airflow pathway (160) extending within or alone at least a portion of the electronic display subassembly; and at least one fan located along the airflow pathway (Column 11, Lines 55-67)
It would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the airflow pathway and fan of Bowers into the display assembly of Dalton.
One having ordinary skill on the art would have been motivated to do this to cool the equipment within the display assembly.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 17 and their respective dependent claims 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 independent claim 9, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or suggest the interconnection and interrelationship of support members, each extending between one of the interior facing surfaces of said framework and said electronic display assembly such that said electronic display subassembly is connected to the framework, at least in part, by way of the support members and said electronic display subassembly is spaced apart from the interior facing surfaces of the framework support members, as claimed with the remaining limitations independent claim 1.
Regarding independent claim 17, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or suggest the interconnection and interrelationship of a closed airflow pathway for circulating gas extending within or along at least a portion of the electronic display subassembly, as claimed with the remaining limitations of dependent claim 15 and independent claim 1.
Claims 19 and 22 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding independent claim 19, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or suggest the interconnection and interrelationship of a closed airflow pathway for circulating gas extending within or along at least a portion of the electronic display subassembly, as claimed with the remaining limitations independent claim 19.
Regarding independent claim 22, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or suggest the interconnection and interrelationship of a closed airflow pathway for circulating gas extending within or along at least a portion of the electronic display subassembly, as claimed with the remaining limitations of independent claim 22.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 19 March 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the remarks on at least page 11: “Notably, claim 1 essentially requires that the electronic display assembly be provided at a fixed elevation at the framework, thereby necessarily also fixing a size of the open, see-through area. This stands in sharp contrast to Dalton's variable/adjustable height legs 26, and thereby variable arguendo electronic display assembly position and corresponding open, see-through area size. E.g., col. 2 II. 13-18. Notably, modifying Dalton to meet the claimed invention would destroy Dalton's intended purpose and principal of operation.
In view of the foregoing, Applicant respectfully submits that the claim 1 is allowable along with the various claims depending therefrom,”
The examiner does not agree. In the Dalton reference, once the varying positioning parameters have been met, the apparatus is fixed in said position. The examiner maintains the rejection of independent claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Xanthia C Cunningham whose telephone number is (571)270-1963. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday -Friday 9 am - 5 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, Imani Hayman can be reached on 571-270-5528. 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.
/XANTHIA C RELFORD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
17 April 2026
17
Prosecution Insights