DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on January 29, 2025 was in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
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 1-9 & 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 10-1221454. KR`454 teaches of a domestic appliance (a washing machine in this instance) comprising: a cabinet (10) defining a receiving space (fig. 1); and at least one counterweight (50) secured to the cabinet, the at least one counterweight comprising: a body (fig. 2) extending between a front side (front) and a rear side (rear), the body further extending between a top side (top) and a bottom side (bottom), the front side being interfaced with the cabinet (in this instance, the front side can be the side facing the attaching point along the cabinet), the body defining a uniform profile between the top side and the bottom side (uniform in its shape – fig. 2), the body being formed from a first material (such as concrete), and an insert body (42) embedded within the body (once coupled together – in a manner similar to applicant’s assembly), the insert body being formed from a second material (such as metal by virtue of the cross-hatch identification) different than the first material, wherein the body is secured to the cabinet via the insert body (note fig. 3). KR`454 teaches applicant’s basic inventive claimed appliance as outlined {mapped} above, but does not describe the body as being “extruded” (KR`454 utilizes a “mold” technique). However, the position is taken that the method of forming a component of a device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself within a product claim; therefore, the limitation has been given limited patentable weight. Furthermore, the criticality of the cited “extruded” operation is not readily explained as to its importance within the disclosure. The extruded body appears to be arbitrary, a matter of personal design and lacking a problem to be solved. In this instance, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have good reasons to pursue various manufacturing techniques (such as extruding, molding etc.,) for the formation of the body. Accordingly, providing a body that is extruded is likely not the product of innovation, but of ordinary skill in the art and common sense as the desired outcome would yield a predictable result, i.e., a hardened final product in a shape as desired. Regarding Claim 2, as modified, the insert body comprises a connection portion (viewed as the elongated and distal portion – fig. 3) and a support portion (viewed as the portion attached to base of (40) for instance) wherein the connection portion is embedded within the extruded body (fig. 3), and wherein the support portion is disposed outside of the extruded body (fig. 3). Regarding Claim 3, as modified, the insert body further comprises one or more ribs (viewed as the longitudinal surface variations as shown when examining fig. 2 in detail), and wherein the ribs are extended outward from an outer surface of the connection portion (i.e., radially). Regarding Claim 4, as modified, the insert body comprises a fastener interface (such as the rear surface with entry openings – fig. 2) positioned at the rear side of the extruded body, wherein the fastener interface defines a fastener hole (52) therethrough, and wherein the fastener hole is configured for receipt of a mechanical fastener (such as (70)). Regarding Claim 5, as modified, the fastener hole defined by the fastener interface is formed as a counterbore hole (note fig. 3). Regarding Claim 6, as modified, the first material comprises a concrete material (disclosed). Regarding Claim 7, as modified, the second material comprises a metal material; but does not disclose a plastic material. However, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a varying array of known materials for the manufacture of the insert body, with a reasonable expectation of success, depending upon the personal preferences of the designer and/or the designated environment for the finished product since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945); and In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960). Regarding Claim 8, as modified, the second material comprises a metal material (shown). Regarding Claim 9, as modified, the insert body is a first insert body, and wherein the domestic appliance further comprises one or more second insert bodies (multiple insert bodies (42) as shown) embedded within the extruded body. Regarding Claims 11-20, the position is taken that the similarly claimed features have adequately been mapped within the above rejections and therefore a redundant mapping of the features is superfluous.
Claims 1-3, 6-13 & 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Detterbeck [US 3,713,719]. Detterbeck teaches of a domestic appliance (a stove in this instance) comprising: a cabinet (3) defining a receiving space (fig. 1); and at least one counterweight (8) secured to the cabinet, the at least one counterweight comprising: a body (fig. 2) extending between a front side (front) and a rear side (rear), the body further extending between a top side (top) and a bottom side (bottom), the front side being interfaced with the cabinet (in this instance, the front side can be the side facing the attaching point along the cabinet), the body defining a uniform profile between the top side and the bottom side (uniform in its shape – fig. 2), the body being formed from a first material (such as sand or water), and an insert body (viewed as the bolt / screw extending into the body and attaching the counterweight to the cabinet – fig. 2) embedded within the body (once coupled together – in a manner similar to applicant’s assembly), the insert body being formed from a second material (such as metal for instance) different than the first material, wherein the body is secured to the cabinet via the insert body (note fig. 2). Detterbeck teaches applicant’s basic inventive claimed appliance as outlined {mapped} above, but does not describe the body as being “extruded” (Detterbeck appears to use a solid form such as concrete – note the cross-hatching in fig. 2, but does not describe a particular forming technique). However, the position is taken that the method of forming a component of a device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself within a product claim; therefore, the limitation has been given limited patentable weight. Furthermore, the criticality of the cited “extruded” operation is not readily explained as to its importance within the disclosure. The extruded body appears to be arbitrary, a matter of personal design and lacking a problem to be solved. In this instance, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have good reasons to pursue various manufacturing techniques (such as extruding, molding etc.,) for the formation of the body. Accordingly, providing a body that is extruded is likely not the product of innovation, but of ordinary skill in the art and common sense as the desired outcome would yield a predictable result, i.e., a hardened final product in a shape as desired. Regarding Claim 2, as modified, the insert body comprises a connection portion (viewed as the inherent elongated and distal portion of a mechanical fastener) and a support portion (viewed as the inherent flared head portion of a mechanical fastener) wherein the connection portion is embedded within the extruded body (fig. 2), and wherein the support portion is disposed outside of the extruded body (fig. 2). Regarding Claim 3, as modified, the insert body further comprises one or more ribs (viewed as the radially extending threads along the elongated distal portion), and wherein the ribs are extended outward from an outer surface of the connection portion (i.e., radially). Regarding Claims 6 & 7, as modified, the first material appears to be a concrete material, while the second material appears to be a metal material; but Detterbeck does not expressly disclose concrete and plastic materials for the first and second materials respectively. However, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a varying array of known materials for the manufacture of the extruded body and insert body, with a reasonable expectation of success, depending upon the personal preferences of the designer and/or the designated environment for the finished product since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945); and In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960). Regarding Claim 8, as modified, the second material comprises a metal material (metal fasteners). Regarding Claim 9, as modified, the insert body is a first insert body, and wherein the domestic appliance further comprises one or more second insert bodies (multiple insert bodies (mechanical fasteners) as shown) embedded within the extruded body. Regarding Claim 10, as modified, the cabinet extends between a front and a rear, and the counterweight is secured proximal to the rear of the cabinet (note fig. 1). Regarding Claims 11-13 & 16-20, the position is taken that the similarly claimed features have adequately been mapped within the above rejections and therefore a redundant mapping of the features is superfluous.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure – see the attached Form PTO-892 showing various appliances with counterbalancing means and/or ballast weights for use in anti-tipping applications.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES O HANSEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6866. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8 am - 4:30 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, 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.
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.
JOH
July 30, 2026
/James O Hansen/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights