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 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 1-15 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.
Regarding Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8-11, and 13-14, the phrase “preferably” renders the claims indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are required as part of the claimed invention.
Claims 2-15 are rejected for depending upon a rejected claim.
Claims 1 and 8 recite the limitation “via which the electric motor is mounted in and/or on the housing”. The specification (Page 5, line 1) discloses “an electric motor 4 is arranged in the housing 3” as shown in Fig. 9, which appears to show that the motor 4 is mounted both in and on a two-part housing 3 via bearing part 14. It is not disclosed how the motor would be mounted in but not on the housing or how the motor would be mounted on but not in the housing, therefore the claim is indefinite.
Claims 2-15 are rejected for depending upon a rejected claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “wherein at least one transmission device is provided, with which the gear is connected to the actuator, preferably…” however the gear as recited in claim 1 (“wherein at least one coupling device is provided, via which the electric motor, preferably a shaft of the electric motor or a gear connected there to, is connected…” is not required, rendering the claim indefinite. For purposes of examination, the claim will be read as “wherein at least one transmission device is provided, with which the electric motor is connected to the actuator, preferably…” since claim 1 only requires the electric motor.
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.
Claims 1, 5, 8, 10-12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mattle (U.S. Pub. No. 20100026153).
With respect to claim 1, Mattle discloses a furniture drive (Figs. 6-11, second embodiment of flap drive system 1) for driving a movable furniture part (Fig. 12, flap 4), comprising: at least one housing (Fig. 7, housing 32), at least one electric motor (electric motor 31), at least one bearing device (weights 36) via which the electric motor (31) is mounted in and/or on the housing (32), wherein the at least one bearing device (36) comprises at least one damping element made of a sound-absorbing material (Paragraph 0016-0017 “The acoustic properties of the electric drive may be further improved if provision is made for additional weights to be connected to the at least one electric motor… the electric motor can be mounted in a floating manner with the aid of foam pads"; foam material absorbs sound), at least one actuator (Fig. 6, actuating arm 21), preferably movable back and forth between two end positions for exerting force on the furniture part to be driven (Paragraph 0009, “the flap is driven via the electric motor, the interface and the actuating arm” from a closed position as described in Paragraph 0023 to the open position of Fig. 12b) and a transmission (Figs. 7-9, gear mechanism 33) connected between the electric motor (31) and the actuator (21), wherein at least one coupling device (Fig. 7, claw coupling 35) is provided, via which the electric motor (31), preferably a shaft (Fig. 7, pin 312) of the electric motor (31) or a gear connected thereto, is connected to the transmission (gear mechanism 33).
The claim recitations “preferably movable back and forth between two end positions” and “preferably a shaft of the electric motor or a gear connecter thereto” are not required.
In the present embodiment, Mattle is silent to the coupling device consisting at least in regions of a sound-absorbing material.
In an alternate embodiment, Mattle discloses wherein a coupling device (Fig. 4a, coupling 34) consists at least in regions of a sound-absorbing material (Paragraph 0039, “mechanically flexible hose coupling”; Paragraph 0016, “A mechanically flexible embodiment of this type of the coupling helps to reduce transmission of the drive noise of the electric motor to the gear mechanism”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the claw coupling of the first embodiment with a flexible hose coupling, such as taught in the alternate embodiment, with a reasonable expectation of success in order to reduce transmission of the drive noise of the electric motor to the gear mechanism (Paragraph 0016).
With respect to claim 5, Mattle further discloses wherein the at least one bearing device (weights 36) has at least one bearing part connected to the electric motor (curved surfaces of weights 36 are connected to electric motor 31), preferably wherein the bearing part is designed as a steel axle, rivet or pin.
The claim recitation “preferably wherein the bearing part is designed as a steel axle, rivet or pin” is not required.
With respect to claim 8, Mattle further discloses wherein more than one, preferably three, bearing devices are provided (weights 36 includes two weights), via which the electric motor is mounted in and/or on the housing (Figs. 6-9 show electric motor 31 is mounted in housing 32).
The claim recitation “preferably three” is not required.
With respect to claim 10, Mattle further discloses wherein at least one transmission device (see annotated Fig. 9 below, transmission device) is provided, with which the electric motor (electric motor 31) is connected to the actuator (actuating arm 21), preferably wherein the transmission device comprises at least one lever (see annotated Fig. 9 below, the transmission device includes a lever).
PNG
media_image1.png
504
556
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 9
The claim recitation “preferably wherein the transmission device comprises at least one lever” is not required.
With respect to claim 11, Mattle further discloses wherein the electric motor (Fig. 7, electric motor 31) and the transmission (gear mechanism 33) are arranged in a first housing (housing 32) and the actuator (actuating arm 21) is arranged on a second housing (Fig. 6, casing of mechanical actuating unit 2) which is structurally separate from the first housing (housing 32), preferably wherein the two housings are arranged in a coupled state substantially in a common plane one above the other (Fig. 9 shows housing 32 is coupled to and arranged above the casing of mechanical actuating unit 2. Figs. 10 and 11 show portions of housing 32 and the casing of mechanical actuating unit 2 are arranged along common planes).
The claim recitation “preferably wherein the two housing are arranged in a coupled state substantially in a common plane one above the other” is not required.
With respect to claim 12, Mattle further discloses wherein: at least one lever arrangement (Fig. 6, arm 61) is provided, via which the actuator (actuating arm 21) is pivotally connected to the housing (Fig. 6, bolt 61 and recess 63 pivotally connect actuating arm 21 to housing 32), and/or at least one mechanical energy accumulator is provided, with which a force for compensating the weight force of the furniture part to be driven, can be exerted on the actuator, and/or the actuator is arranged substantially completely in the housing in a first end position (Note that the use of “and/or” requires only one of the three limitations recited in the claim).
With respect to claim 14, Mattle further discloses an item of furniture (Fig. 12b, cabinet body 5), preferably an upper cabinet, comprising: at least one movable furniture part (flap 4), preferably in the form of a flap that can be opened upwards, and the furniture drive according to claim 1 (drive system 1 as described in the claim 1 rejection above), wherein the furniture part (flap 4) is movably mounted on the furniture (cabinet body 5) via the at least one furniture drive (Paragraph 0052, “FIG. 12b shows the body 5 of a piece of furniture with a flap 4 mounted thereon in a movable manner and a flap drive system 1 according to FIG. 6 to 11”).
The claim recitation “preferably in the form of a flap that can be opened upwards” is not required.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mattle (U.S. Pub. No. 20100026153) in view of Delbos (U.S. Pat. No. 9677316).
With respect to claim 4, Mattle discloses the limitation set forth above. Mattle is silent to the at least one electric motor being designed as an external rotor motor or as a disc rotor motor.
Delbos discloses a motor (Fig. 4, motor 4) is designed as an external rotor motor or as a disc rotor motor (Col. 4, lines 42-45, “The motor 4 can be… a brushless motor with external rotor”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have designed the electric motor of Mattle as a brushless motor with eternal rotor, such as taught by Delbos, with a reasonable expectation of success since external rotor motors are known in the art to provide high torque-to-inertia ratio, high levels of efficiency, and low-noise operation therefore providing a more durable and reliable drive system.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mattle (U.S. Pub. No. 20100026153) in view of Hashemi (U.S. Pat. No. 9801468).
With respect to claim 13, Mattle discloses the limitation set forth above.
Mattle is silent to the housing having a maximum width of less than 18mm, preferably less than 16 mm.
Hashemi discloses a furniture drive for driving a moveable furniture part (Fig. 4, open-assist mechanism 406) having a motor housing (base 408 houses motor 424) has a maximum width of less than 18mm, preferably less than 16mm (Col. 7, lines 30-32, “The housing is in some embodiments thin, for example, approximately 1/2 inch”; ½ inch equals 12.7 mm).
The claim recitation “preferably less than 16mm” is not required.
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 flap drive system of Mattle such that the housing is approximately half an inch in thickness, such as taught by Hashemi, in order to maximize the storage capacity inside the furniture body by having the flap drive system protrude minimally into the storage space.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mattle (U.S. Pub. No. 20100026153) in view of Andschus (DE102019102057).
With respect to claim 15, Mattle discloses the limitation set forth above. Mattle further discloses at least one wall (Fig. 12b, left or right side wall of furniture body 5).
Mattle fails to disclose wherein the housing of the at least one furniture drive is substantially completely inserted into a recess in the wall.
Andschus discloses wherein the housing of at least one furniture drive (Figs. 1-5, housing 8 of furniture fitting 2) is substantially completely inserted into a recess in a wall (Fig. 2 shows housing 8 of furniture fitting 2 is completely inserted into receiving space 3d of a wall of furniture component 1).
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 flap drive system of Mattle such that it is inside a recess of a wall of the furniture body, such as taught by Andschus, with a reasonable expectation of success in order to hide the flap drive system, improving the appearance of the furniture body, and to further maximize the storage capacity inside the furniture body by not having the flap drive system therein.
Claims 1, 2, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahlfeld (U.S. Pat. No. 20110241509) in view of Mattle (U.S. Pub. No. 20100026153).
With respect to claim 1, Ahlfeld discloses a furniture drive (Fig. 1, pushing-out mechanism 1) for driving a movable furniture part, comprising: at least one housing (housing 4), at least one electric motor (electric motor 5), at least one bearing device via which the electric motor is mounted in and/or on the housing (Paragraph 0037, “a belt-tensioning device 14 with spring-loaded mounting for the electric motor 5 is provided”), at least one actuator (pushing-out lever 2), preferably movable back and forth between two end positions (Paragraph 0029 describes pushing-out lever 2 having a pivoted-in position and a pushed-out position), for exerting force on the furniture part to be driven (Paragraph 0030, “pushing-out lever 2 is directed toward a rear side of a movable furniture part which is to be pushed out”), and a transmission (transmission members 8, 9, 10) connected between the electric motor (electric motor 5) and the actuator (pushing-out lever 2), wherein at least one coupling device (toothed belts 11, 12 with transmission member 7) is provided, via which the electric motor (5), preferably a shaft of the electric motor or a gear connected thereto (Fig. 2, transmission member 6), is connected to the transmission (transmission members 8, 9, 10), wherein the coupling device (toothed belts 11, 12 with transmission member 7) consists at least in regions of a sound-absorbing material (Paragraph 0039, “toothed belts 11 and 12 may likewise be formed from a suitable plastic material which is not particularly compliant, and these belts are therefore subject to negligibly low levels of expansion and/or wear”. Note that a suitable plastic material capable of encircling two gears and maintaining high belt tension (paragraph 0037) would absorb sound).
Ahlfeld fails to disclose wherein the at least one bearing device comprises at least one damping element made of a sound-absorbing material.
Mattle discloses at least one bearing device (weights 36) via which the electric motor (electric motor 31) is mounted in and/or on the housing (housing 32), wherein the at least one bearing device (36) comprises at least one damping element made of a sound-absorbing material (Paragraph 0016-0017 “The acoustic properties of the electric drive may be further improved if provision is made for additional weights to be connected to the at least one electric motor… the electric motor can be mounted in a floating manner with the aid of foam pads").
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the spring-loaded mounting of Ahlfeld such that it further includes foam pads for mounting the motor, such as taught by Mattle, with a reasonable expectation of success in order to reduce vibrations between the housing and the motor (Paragraph 0016).
With respect to claim 2, Ahlfeld in view of Mattle discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination (Ahlfeld) further discloses wherein the at least one coupling device (toothed belts 11, 12 with transmission member 7) comprises a belt, preferably a toothed belt (toothed belts 11, 12).
The claim recitation “preferably a toothed belt” is not required.
With respect to claim 9, Ahlfeld in view of Mattle discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination further discloses wherein the sound-damping material of the damping element (Mattle, foam pads) of the bearing device and/or the coupling device (Ahlfeld, toothed belts 11, 12) is a rubber, a caoutchouc, a plastic (Ahlfeld, Paragraph 0039, “toothed belts 11 and 12… formed from a suitable plastic material”), or an open-cell or closed-cell material, preferably a polyurethane elastomer (Mattle, foam pads are foam and therefore are open or closed cell materials), caoutchouc, silicone, EVA or PE foam.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahlfeld (U.S. Pat. No. 20110241509) in view of Mattle (U.S. Pub. No. 20100026153) in further view of Friesenecker (U.S. Pub. No. 20160242542).
With respect to claim 3, Ahlfeld in view of Mattle discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination (Ahlfeld) further discloses wherein the at least one coupling device (toothed belts 11, 12 with transmission member 7) comprises a gear (transmission member 7).
The combination fails to disclose the gear, into which a sound-damping material, preferably in the form of an insert, is embedded.
Friesenecker discloses a gear (Figs. 1-6, tooth arrangement 15), into which a sound-damping material, preferably in the form of an insert, is embedded (Paragraph 0017, “For reducing the production of noise, the tooth arrangement and/or a counterpart tooth arrangement cooperating with the tooth arrangement can be at least region-wise provided with a sound-damping coating” therefore the sound-damping coating within the teeth is embedded in the overall tooth arrangement structure).
The claim recitation “preferably in the form of an insert” is not required.
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 transmission member of Ahlfeld in view of Mattle such that it is provided with sound-damping coating, such as taught by Friesenecker, with a reasonable expectation of success in order to reduce noise caused by the contact between the transmission member and any engaging components.
Claims 1 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AT ‘823 (AT11823) in view of McCarty (U.S. Pat. No. 3941339) in further view of Friesenecker (U.S. Pub. No. 20160242542).
With respect to claim 1, AT ‘823 discloses A furniture drive (Figs. 1-6, electric drive 3) for driving a movable furniture part (furniture flap 2), comprising: at least one housing (Fig. 5, housing parts 16a-16c), at least one electric motor (motor 11), at least one bearing device via which the electric motor is mounted in and/or on the housing (see annotated Fig. 8 below, motor 11 is mounted within the housing parts 16a-16c via a mounting bracket), at least one actuator (lever 4), preferably movable back and forth between two end positions (Abstract, lever 4 is a “motor-pivotable lever”), for exerting force on the furniture part to be driven (lever pivots and slides along guide 5 to open and close the furniture flap 2), and a transmission (gears 18a-18e) connected between the electric motor (11) and the actuator (4), wherein at least one coupling device (reduction gear 21) is provided, via which the electric motor (11), preferably a shaft of the electric motor or a gear connected thereto (worm gear 20), is connected to the transmission (18a-18e).
PNG
media_image2.png
339
371
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 8
The claim recitations “preferably movable back and forth between two end positions” and “preferably a shaft of the electric motor or a gear connecter thereto” are not required.
AT ‘823 fails to disclose wherein the at least one bearing device comprises at least one damping element made of a sound-absorbing material.
McCarty discloses a bearing device (Fig. 2, motor mounting arrangement 9) comprises at least one damping element (resilient members 26) made of a sound-absorbing material (Col. 4, lines 18-19, “the resilient members 26 have a durometer that is sufficient to absorb the motor torque vibrations”’ therefore the material of 26 absorbs sound vibrations).
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 electric drive of AT ‘823 such that the motor is mounted to the mounting bracket via a motor mounting arrangement including resilient members, such as taught by McCarty, with a reasonable expectation of success in order to reduce noise and vibration between the motor and the mounting bracket (McCarty, Col. 4, lines 28-32).
AT ‘823 in view of McCarty fails to disclose wherein the coupling device consists at least in regions of a sound-absorbing material.
Friesenecker discloses a furniture drive (Fig. 1, furniture drive 4) having a coupling device (Figs, 2a-5d tooth arrangement 15, 16) which consists at least in regions of a sound-absorbing material (Paragraph 0017, “For reducing the production of noise, the tooth arrangement and/or a counterpart tooth arrangement cooperating with the tooth arrangement can be at least region-wise provided with a sound-damping coating”).
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 electric drive of AT ‘823 in view of McCarty such that the reduction gear 21 includes sound-damping coating, such as taught by Friesenecker, with a reasonable expectation of success in order to reduce noise caused by the contact between the reduction gear and any engaging components.
With respect to claim 5, AT ‘823 in view of McCarty in further view of Friesenecker discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination further discloses wherein the at least one bearing device (mounting bracket of AT ‘823 as modified by Friesenecker) has at least one bearing part (Friesenecker, stud 32) connected to the electric motor (AT ‘823, motor 11), preferably wherein the bearing part is designed as a steel axle, rivet, or pin.
The claim recitation “preferably wherein the bearing part is designed as a steel axle, rivet, or pin” is not required.
With respect to claim 6, AT ‘823 in view of McCarty in further view of Friesenecker discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination further discloses wherein at least one first damping element (McCarty, resilient member 26) and at least one second damping element (McCarty, retainer 22) are arranged on the bearing part (McCarty, stud 32), wherein the first damping element (McCarty, resilient member 26) is arranged in such a way that it reduces sound propagation between the electric motor (AT ‘823, motor 11) and the housing (AT ‘823, housing parts 16a-16c) in a first spatial direction (Col. 4, lines 3-8, “Means are therefore provided that are effective in allowing relative movement between the motor 14 and the wall 12 through the resilient member 26 in absorbing the motor torque vibrations and transferring them to rotational movement or vibrations about the rotational axis of the shaft 14”), and the second damping element (McCarty, retainer 22) is arranged in such a way that sound propagation between the electric motor (AT ‘823, motor 11) and the housing (AT ‘823, housing parts 16a-16c) is reduced in a second spatial direction transverse to the first spatial direction (Col. 3, lines 46-18, “that longitudinal movement of motor 10 relative to barrier 12 is prevented by the member 22”, the longitudinal direction being normal to the rotational movement about shaft 14), preferably wherein the first and/or the second damping element are designed as a damping disk or damping sleeve (resilient members 26 are disk shaped sleeves).
The claim recitation “preferably wherein the first and/or the second damping element are designed as a damping disk or damping sleeve” is not required.
With respect to claim 7, AT ‘823 in view of McCarty in further view of Friesenecker discloses the limitation set forth above. The combination further discloses wherein the bearing device (mounting bracket of AT ‘823 as modified by Friesenecker) has at least one free end (McCarty, Fig. 5, free end of studs 32) which is arranged in a recess of the housing (AT ‘823, Fig. 5 shows that the free ends of the studs 32 as included on the mounting bracket would be arranged in the recessed portion of housing part 16a).
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 ELIZABETH IRENE ARTALEJO whose telephone number is (571)272-4292. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-6.
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.
/E.I.A./ Examiner, Art Unit 3637 /DANIEL J TROY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights