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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 11 is unclear please maintain consistency when claiming each element, to avoid confusion. Examiner suggest the following:
Claim 11: line 10 REPLACE “a circulating cable onto the guide rollers (22,23) WITH --- a circulating cable onto two guide rollers (22, 23) --.
Claim 11: line 11 REPLACE “the guide rollers (22, 23) WITH --the two guide rollers--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 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.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
EP 3403529 ("Müller" et al.") in view of DE 102013101358 ("Hornig").
Regarding Claim 11, Müller et al. discloses a drawer runner comprising a carcass rail (3), a central rail (4) and a pull-out rail (5) wherein the pull-out rail (5) is
accommodated such that it can move in the central rail (4), and in turn the latter is
accommodated such that it can move in the carcass rail (3), wherein:
connection of track rollers (15) to a first and a second side wall (9) of the central rail (4),connection of at least two spacers (10) to the first side wall (9) of the central rail (4),winding of a circulating cable (24) onto the guide rollers (21, 22),fitting of the circulating cable (24) with guide rollers (15, 21, 22) onto the spacers (10),assembly of the two side walls (9), and wherein the assembly of the three rails (3, 4, 5 ) contains the steps of: introduction of the central rail (4) into the carcass rail (3), and fixing of the cable (24) to the carcass rail (2), followed by the introduction of the pull-out rail (5) into the central rail (4) and the fixing of the cable (24) to the pull-out rail (4), or introduction of the pull-out rail (5) into the central rail (4), and fixing of the cable (24) to the pull-out rail (5), followed by the introduction of the pull-out rail and central rail (3) into the carcass rail (3), and the fixing of the cable (24) to the carcass rail (3).
Müller et al. discloses the claimed invention but does not disclose the spacer with a cable around the guide rollers.
Hornig demonstrates it is known in the art to provide a drawer runner (10, 20, 30), wherein the drawer runner further has a synchronization means (21) , which in turn has two guide rollers (22) and a cable (23) circulating around the latter, wherein the cable (23) is designed to be connected to the carcass rail (10) and the pull-out rail (30)., the rollers are positioned on supports or a spacer mounted the side wall of the central rail
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the drawer runner taught by Müller et al. could be improved with a damping unit to dampen the movement of the drawer rails in both the closing and opening movements, and to provide a synchronization means to synchronize the movement of the pull- out rail and the central rail with one another as taught by Hornig.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention that of the invention to use and install the drawer runner according to method steps set forth above, since the combination discloses the invention of claim 11 such method steps would occur during the ordinary course using the drawer runner , see MPEP 2112.02
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIMBERLEY S WRIGHT whose telephone number is (571)270-3328. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 12:30-6:30.
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 on 5712703742. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KIMBERLEY S WRIGHT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights