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)(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) 1-2, 6, 10-11, & 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Heckenberger (DE102009032475).
PNG
media_image1.png
343
413
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 1 & 10, Heckenberger teaches a refrigerator appliance, comprising: a cabinet (par. 18 & 29); a liner (1) disposed within the cabinet, the liner defining at least one food storage chamber within the cabinet (Fig. 1); insulation (2) extending between the liner and the cabinet; and a cable housing (5), the cable housing comprising: a plurality of external walls (F in Fig. 3 Annotated) defining an internal volume of the cable housing (Figs. 1 & 3); an internal wall (15) extending within the internal volume of the cable housing; a first cable retention slot (14) defined in one of the plurality of external walls; and a second cable retention slot (i.e., spaces between 15) defined in the internal wall, wherein the first cable retention slot and the second cable retention slot are each configured to selectively retain one or more wire harnesses of the refrigerator appliance (Fig. 3).
Regarding claims 2 & 11, Heckenberger teaches a cable housing (5) that further comprises a flange (G) extending around a perimeter of the internal volume (Fig. 3).
Regarding claims 6 & 15, Heckenberger teaches a first cable retention slot (14) that increases in width from an entrance (H) of the first cable retention slot towards a distal end (J) of the first cable retention slot.
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.
Claims 1-2, 6-8, 10-11, & 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueyama (20160123055) in view of Park (KR20150024504).
Regarding claims 1 & 10, Ueyama teaches the structure substantially as claimed, including a refrigerator appliance (1), comprising: a cabinet (3); a liner disposed within the cabinet (par. 29), the liner defining at least one food storage chamber (5, 6) within the cabinet (Fig. 1b & par. 27); insulation (4) extending between the liner and the cabinet (par. 29); and a cable housing (18), the cable housing comprising: a plurality of external walls (A in Fig. 6 Annotated) defining an internal volume (21) of the cable housing. Ueyama fail(s) to teach an internal wall & cable retention slots.
PNG
media_image2.png
385
584
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However, Park teaches an internal wall (34) extending within the internal volume of a cable housing (30); a first cable retention slot (22) defined in one of a plurality of external walls; and a second cable retention slot (B in Fig. 4 Annotated) defined in the internal wall, wherein the first cable retention slot and the second cable retention slot are each configured to selectively retain one or more wire harnesses of the refrigerator appliance (Fig. 4). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add an internal wall and cable slots, as taught by Park, to the cable housing of Ueyama, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to retain cables in an organized manner, thereby allowing the housing to accommodate devices besides cables (as suggested by Park).
PNG
media_image3.png
435
486
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 2 & 11, Ueyama teaches a cable housing (18) that further comprises a flange (C) extending around a perimeter of the internal volume (21).
Regarding claims 6 & 15, Park teaches a first cable retention slot (22) that increases in width from an entrance (D) of the first cable retention slot towards a distal end of the first cable retention slot (Fig. 4).
Regarding claims 7 & 16, Ueyama as modified teaches an internal wall (3 of Park) of the cable housing (18 of Ueyama) that adjoins (as in Fig. 4 of Park) the one of the plurality of external walls (A of Ueyama) in which the first cable retention slot (22 of Park) is defined.
Regarding claims 8 & 17, Ueyama as modified teaches a first cable retention slot (22 of Park) that is contiguous with a first opening (D of Park) in the one of the plurality of external walls (A of Ueyama), whereby the first cable retention slot is accessible via the first opening (as in Fig. 4 of Park), wherein the second cable retention slot (B of Park) is contiguous with a second opening (E of Park) in the internal wall, whereby the second cable retention slot is accessible via the second opening (as in Fig. 4 of Park), and wherein the first opening and the second opening are separate and apart from each other (as in Fig. 4 of Park).
Claims 3-5 & 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueyama (20160123055) & Park (KR20150024504) in view of Lee (20080290775).
Regarding claims 3 & 12, Ueyama as modified teaches the structure substantially as claimed, including a cable housing (18 of Ueyama) comprising a flange (C of Ueyama); but fail(s) to teach a gasket. However, Lee teaches the inclusion, on a cable housing (400), of a gasket (500) mounted on a flange (420), the gasket sealingly engaged (par. 26) with a cabinet (120). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add a gasket, as taught by Lee, to the cable housing of Ueyama as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to leakage of insulation or moisture from the cabinet (as suggested by par. 26 of Lee).
Regarding claims 4 & 13, Ueyama as modified teaches a plurality of external walls (A of Ueyama) that extend through an opening (19 of Ueyama) of the cabinet (3 of Ueyama), and wherein the gasket (500 of Lee) is sealingly engaged with the cabinet around the opening (as in par. 26 of Lee).
Regarding claims 5 & 14, Ueyama as modified teaches a cable housing (18 of Ueyama) retained in an opening (19 of Ueyama) of a cabinet (3 of Ueyama) by unspecified retaining means. Additionally, Lee further teaches the inclusion, on a cable housing (400), of a snap (442) formed on a plurality of external walls (440), the snap engaged with a cabinet (120) to retain the cable housing within an opening (Figs. 1-2 & par. 27). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to substitute snaps, as taught by Lee, for the unspecified retaining means of Ueyama as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to retain the cable housing in the opening, and because such an outcome would have been a predictable result of such a substitution of one known retaining means for another.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 & 18 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW ING whose telephone number is (571)272-6536. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 a.m. - 5 p.m.. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Daniel 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.
/MATTHEW W ING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights