Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 19/070,891

REFRIGERATOR

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Mar 05, 2025
Priority
Mar 26, 2018 — RE 10-2018-0034297 +2 more
Examiner
WRIGHT, KIMBERLEY S
Art Unit
3637
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
8m
Est. Remaining
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allowance Rate
615 granted / 878 resolved
+18.0% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+18.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
911
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
25.7%
-14.3% vs TC avg
§102
49.7%
+9.7% vs TC avg
§112
17.4%
-22.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 878 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
Below find an action replacing the Office action mailed June 30, 2026. The shortened statutory period for response is set to expire three months from the mail date of this Office action. 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 . Specification The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: the first shaft, the second shaft, and the second shaft coaxially connected to the first shaft. 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 1-20 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 1 recites the limitation "wherein the elevation device includes a second shaft extending in the front-rear direction at a position corresponding to the first shaft and coaxially connected to the first shaft." It is unclear what Applicant is seeking to claim because the first shaft (77) rotates on an axis parallel to the second shaft (841), they do not share the same axis. Appropriate correction or an explanation is required Claims 2-20 are rejected based on their respective dependencies. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of U.S. Patent No. US 109455524, 10598426 and US 11243025 .Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the current application are fully encompassed within the claims of US Patent No.: 109455524, 10598426 and 11243025.Specifically, a refrigerator with a drawer door, a driving device , elevation device , a fixing shaft, rotating shaft and levers configured to elevate the elevation device. Claims 1-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of copending Application No. 19070998 and claims 19071103. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Specifically, a refrigerator with a drawer door, a driving device, elevation device , a screw and a pair of levers configured to elevate the elevation device. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. 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 of this title, 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, 4-13 and 17-20, as best understood are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over US Pub No.: 20140265797 (“Scheuring et al.”) in view of US 20080203041 (“Lim et al.”) Regarding Claims 1, 2 and 10, Scheuring et al. discloses CLAIM 1-a refrigerator comprising: a cabinet (12, 14) having one or more storage spaces; a drawer door including: a door part (20) that opens and closes the storage space, and a drawer part (18) spaced apart from a rear surface of the door part (20) and configured to be insertable and extractable in the storage space, forming an accommodation space for items; a driving device (32) including a motor (42) provided on the door part (20); an elevation device (66) spaced apart from the rear surface of the door part (20) and configured to elevate the drawer part (18); and a first shaft disposed on the door part (20), extending in a front-rear direction of the drawer door, and rotating at a fixed position to transmit power generated by the motor (42) to the elevation device (66), wherein the elevation device (66) includes a second shaft extending in the front-rear direction at a position corresponding to the first shaft and coaxially connected to the first shaft; CLAIM 2-a lever (50, 60) that receives rotational force from the motor (42) and elevates the elevation device (66), wherein the lever (50, 60) includes: a first end portion rotatably coupled to the first shaft; and a second end portion connected to the driving device (32) and rotating around the first shaft;CLAIM 10-: a connecting assembly connecting the driving device (32) and the elevation device (66) to transmit power generated by the driving device (32) to the elevation device (66), wherein the connecting assembly includes a connecting member that connects the first shaft of the door part (20) and the second shaft of the drawer part (18) on a central axis of the first shaft to transmit power from the driving device (32) to the elevation device (66). Scheuring et al. discloses a plurality of shaft on the door part connected to the lever (53, 56 and via 46, [0039]), but does not disclose the first shaft and coaxially connected to the first shaft and the connecting assembly. Lim et al. dis closes a similar invention with a connecting member supporting a first shaft (71) and second shaft (72) that are coaxially connected on a connecting member. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have adapted the door with a connecting to provide an improved simplified lift device for moving the drawer part, similar to the device taught by Lim et al. with a connecting member that provide holes to improve air circulation. Regarding CLAIMS 4-9, 11-13 and 17-20 , the combination discloses (Scheuring et al.); CLAIM 4- a drawer opening is formed on a front of the drawer part (18), and the second shaft is exposed through the drawer opening; Claim 5- wherein: the first end portion includes a first lever (50, 60) hole positioned on a central axis of the first shaft, and the first shaft is coupled to the first lever (50, 60) hole; CLAIM 6- a first extension part extending from the first end portion; a second extension part extending from the second end portion and connected to the driving device (32); and an intermediate part connecting the first extension part and the second extension part and formed at an incline; CLAIM 7- wherein the intermediate part is inclined such that the second extension part is closer to the drawer part (18) than the first extension part; CLAIM 8-the first end portion includes a first lever (50, 60) hole positioned on a central axis of the first shaft, a lever (50, 60) fixing member coupled to the first shaft is inserted into the first lever (50, 60) hole, and a second lever (50, 60) hole is formed in the second extension part, into which a holder protrusion of a screw holder connected to the motor (42) is inserted; CLAIM 9- wherein: the first lever (50, 60) hole is formed in a polygonal shape corresponding to one side of the lever (50, 60) fixing member so that the lever (50, 60) fixing member and the first shaft rotate together when the lever (50, 60) rotates, and the second lever (50, 60) hole is formed in an elongated hole shape; CLAIM 10-: a connecting assembly connecting the driving device (32) and the elevation device (66) to transmit power generated by the driving device (32) to the elevation device (66), wherein the connecting assembly includes a connecting member that connects the first shaft of the door part (20) and the second shaft of the drawer part (18) on a central axis of the first shaft to transmit power from the driving device (32) to the elevation device (66); CLAIM 12- wherein the connecting assembly further includes a connecting case in which the connecting member is installed, and wherein the connecting member moves in the front-rear direction within a space of the connecting case; CLAIM 13-wherein the second shaft rotates based on the power transmitted through the rotation of the first shaft, causing the elevation device (66) to elevate; CLAIM 17- wherein the connecting assembly selectively connects the driving device (32) and the elevation device (66) between the door part (20) and the drawer part (18); CLAIM 18-wherein the connecting assembly includes: an elastic member supporting the connecting member inside the connecting case; a cover shielding an opening of the connecting case; and a push member exposed through an opening in the cover and operable by a user; CLAIM 19-, wherein the push member is coupled to the connecting member so that when the push member is operated, it moves together with the connecting member to be selectively separated from the elevation device (66); Claim 20-wherein: the connecting member has a hollow formed inside, through which a rotation axis of the elevation device (66) is inserted, and the connecting member maintains a coupled state with the rotation axis by a pressure of the elastic member. Allowable Subject Matter Notwithstanding the need for a TD, Claims 3, 11,14, 15, 16 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. 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 11:30-5:30. 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 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 05, 2025
Application Filed
Jul 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103, §112
Jul 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12677940
METHOD FOR CONVERTING CABINETS INTO WHEELCHAIR ACCESSIBLE SPACES WITH RETRACTABLE SHELVING SYSTEM
2y 4m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12677947
SLIDE RAIL ASSEMBLY
2y 1m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12667189
SLIDE RAIL ASSEMBLY
2y 0m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12663200
DOOR OPENING DEVICE AND REFRIGERATOR HAVING THE SAME
2y 11m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12663205
REFRIGERATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+18.8%)
2y 0m (~8m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 878 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month