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 .
This is the First Office action on the Merits from the examiner in charge of this application.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-18 are objected to because of the following informalities: (i) claim 2, line 3, “close at least of the storage space” should be “close at least a portion of the storage space”; (ii) claim 2, line 4, a panel detachably that is mounted” should be “a panel that is detachably mounted”; (iii) claim 3, line 3, “close at least of the” should be “close at least a portion of the”; (iv) claim 3, line 4, “close at least of the” should be “close at least a portion of the”; (v) claim 9, line 3, “a plurality of the restriction rib” should be “a plurality of the restriction ribs”; (vi) claim 11, line 1, “covers at least of the” should be “covers at least a portion of the”; (vii) claim 11, line 2, “covers at least of the” should be “covers at least a portion of the”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 3-7 are 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 3, line 6, the recitation “wherein the panel defines each of the upper door and the lower door” renders the claim indefinite for failing to clearly define how it is possible for a single panel to define two doors. Clarification or correction is required.
Claims 4-7 are rejected as being dependent on, and failing to cure the deficiencies of, a rejected claim.
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.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 2-4, 8, and 10-18, having an effective filing date of 6/17/2020, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by USP 11674743 to Kang et al (hereinafter Kang), having an effective filing date of 5/28/2020.
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
Kang discloses (Claim 2). A refrigerator 10 comprising: a cabinet 11 having a storage space; and a door 14,15 configured to open and close at least a portion of the storage space, the door comprising a door body 100 and a panel 200 that is detachably mounted on the door body 100 and defines a front surface of the door, wherein the panel 200 is made of metal (col. 8, line 60) and includes a first bent portion 214 (Fig. 12) and a second bent portion 216 (Fig. 15) that are bent rearward from ends of the panel, and wherein the door body 100 comprises (Fig. 4): a door liner 130 that defines a rear surface of the door, a front plate 110 spaced apart from the door liner 130 and disposed forward relative to the door liner, a first cap deco 140 that defines a first surface of the door, the first cap deco 140 comprising (i) a handle recessed from the first surface and (ii) a first support end 146 (Fig. 12) protruding forward from an end of the handle relative to the front plate 110 to support the first bent portion 214, and a second cap deco 160 that defines a second surface of the door and comprises a second support end 162 protruding forward relative to the front plate 110 to support the second bent portion 216, and an insulator provided inside a space that is defined by coupling the door liner 130, the front plate 110, the first cap deco 140, and the second cap deco 160, wherein the first bent portion 214 defines a bent portion opening 214b (Fig. 12), wherein the first cap deco 140 comprises a restriction rib 147 that protrudes from the first support end 146 and is configured to be inserted into the bent portion opening 214b to fix a first end of the panel, and wherein the refrigerator further comprises a coupling member S that is coupled to the door and that passes through a coupling hole 165 defined at the second support end 162 to fix a second end of the panel; (Claim 3). The refrigerator of claim 2, wherein the storage space comprises (Figs. 1 & 2) an upper storage space and a lower storage space, and wherein the door is one of an upper door configured to open and close at least a portion of the upper storage space or a lower door configured to open and close at least a portion of the lower storage space, and wherein the panel defines each of the upper door and the lower door; (Claim 4). The refrigerator of claim 3, wherein the first cap deco 140 defines an upper surface of the lower door, and wherein the second cap deco 160 defines a lower surface of the lower door; (Claim 8). The refrigerator of claim 2, wherein the first cap deco 140 includes a front surface configured to couple to the front plate 110, and wherein the restriction rib 147 is disposed apart from the front surface of the first cap deco 140; (Claim 10). The refrigerator of claim 2, wherein the first support end 146 extends between a front end of the first bent portion 214 and a rear end of the first bent portion 214, and wherein the second support end 162 extends between a front end of the second bent portion 216 and a rear end of the second bent portion 216; (Claim 11). The refrigerator of claim 10, wherein the first support end 146 covers at least of the first bent portion 214 (Fig. 12), and the second support end 162 covers at least of the second bent portion 216; (Claim 12). The refrigerator of claim 2, wherein the restriction rib 147 extends in a same direction as a recessed direction of the handle; (Claim 13). The refrigerator of claim 12, wherein the restriction rib 147 is disposed away from the front surface of the handle; (Claim 14). The refrigerator of claim 12, wherein the restriction rib 147 is disposed between an end of the first support end 146 and the front surface of the handle; (Claim 15). The refrigerator of claim 2, wherein the bent portion opening 214b penetrates the first bent portion 214, and wherein the restriction rib 147 passes though the bent portion opening 214b (Fig. 12); (Claim 16). The refrigerator of claim 2, further comprising (Fig. 15) a panel bracket 240 disposed on a back surface of the panel, and wherein the panel bracket 240 defines a hole (Fig. 15) coupled to the coupling member S; (Claim 17). The refrigerator of claim 16, wherein the panel bracket 240 is in contact with a surface of the second bent portion 216 that is opposite to a surface of the second bent portion 216 in contact with the second support end 162; (Claim 18). The refrigerator of claim 17, wherein, when the panel mounted on the door body 100, the coupling hole is aligned with the hole 165.
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.
Claims 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Kang in view of USP 11402147 to Lee et al (hereinafter Lee).
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
Kang discloses all the elements as discussed above except for the limitations in claims 5-7.
However, Lee discloses a refrigerator comprising (Figs. 1 & 19-20): a cabinet having a storage space; and a door configured to open and close at least a portion of the storage space, the door comprising a door body and a panel 310 that is detachably mounted on the door body and defines a front surface of the door, wherein the panel 310 is made of metal and includes a first bent portion that are bent rearward from end of the panel, and wherein the door body comprises: a door liner 350 that defines a rear surface of the door, a front plate spaced apart from the door liner 350 and disposed forward relative to the door liner, a first cap deco 330 that defines a first surface of the door, the first cap deco 330 comprising (Figs. 19-20) (i) a handle 104 recessed from the first surface and (ii) a first support end protruding forward from an end of the handle 104 relative to the front plate to support the first bent portion; wherein the handle 104 is recessed between the first support end and a top surface of the first cap deco (Fig. 20); wherein the first support end is disposed between the top surface of the first cap deco 330 and a lower end of the recessed handle 104; wherein a height of the first support end is lower than the top surface.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of Lee, to modify Kang to include the limitations in Claim 5 of wherein the handle is recessed between the first support end and a top surface of the first cap deco; Claim 6 of wherein the first support end is disposed between the top surface of the first cap deco and a lower end of the recessed handle; Claim 7 of wherein a height of the first support end is lower than the top surface with a reasonable expectation of success in order to increase the overall versatility of the refrigerator.
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Claim 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Kang in view of USP 11280542 to Park et al (hereinafter Park).
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
Kang discloses all the elements as discussed above except for the limitations in claim 9.
However, Park discloses a refrigerator comprising (Figs. 1 & 19-20): a cabinet having a storage space; and a door 400 configured to open and close at least a portion of the storage space, the door 400 comprising a door body and a panel 410 that is detachably mounted on the door body and defines a front surface of the door, wherein the panel 410 is made of metal and includes a first bent portion that are bent rearward from end of the panel, and wherein the door body comprises: a door liner that defines a rear surface of the door, a front plate 42 spaced apart from the door liner and disposed forward relative to the door liner, a first cap deco 70 that defines a first surface of the door, the first cap deco 70 comprising (Figs. 19-20) a first support end protruding forward relative to the front plate 42, wherein the first cap deco 70 comprises a plurality of restriction ribs 160 that are provided along the first support end.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of Park, to modify Kang to include the limitations in Claim 9 of wherein the first support end extends along one end of the panel, and wherein the restriction rib is one of a plurality of the restriction ribs that are provided along the first support end with a reasonable expectation of success in order to increase the overall versatility of the refrigerator.
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, and all show structures similar to various elements of applicant’s disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HANH VAN TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-6868. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:30.
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 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.
HVT
June 8, 2026
/HANH V TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights