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.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the limitations in (i) claim 6 of the sensor module is disposed “higher than the upper surface of the cabinet”; (ii) claim 12 of at least a portion of the front wall is disposed “higher than the upper surface of the cabinet”; (iii) claim 14 of “wherein a distance between the second side frame and the sensor module is less than a distance between the first side frame and the sensor module”; and (iv) claim 18 of the connection wall comprises “an extension portion that extends upwards toward the frame cover; and wherein at least a portion of the sensor module is disposed vertically between the extension portion of the connection wall and the frame cover” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 limitations in (i) claim 6 of the sensor module is disposed “higher than the upper surface of the cabinet”; (ii) claim 12 of at least a portion of the front wall is disposed “higher than the upper surface of the cabinet”; (iii) claim 14 of “wherein a distance between the second side frame and the sensor module is less than a distance between the first side frame and the sensor module”; (iv) claim 15 of the sensor module is disposed “higher than the hinge accommodation portion”; and (v) claim 18 of the connection wall comprises “an extension portion that extends upwards toward the frame cover; and wherein at least a portion of the sensor module is disposed vertically between the extension portion of the connection wall and the frame cover”.
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 2, “are disposed the front wall” should be “are disposed on the front wall”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11988442 to Kwon et al (hereinafter Kwon). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Kwon discloses a refrigerator 1 comprising: a cabinet 10 defining a storage space; a hinge 26 disposed at an upper surface of the cabinet 10; a hinge cover 28 disposed at the upper surface of the cabinet; and a door 21 configured to open and close at least a portion of the storage space based on rotation about the hinge, wherein the door 21 comprises (Figs. 3 & 4): a panel assembly 100 comprising (i) a front panel 110 that covers a portion of the hinge cover 28 and (ii) an insulating panel 123,130 spaced apart from the front panel 110, a door frame 300 connected to the panel assembly, a door liner 200 coupled to the door frame 300, the door liner 200 having a liner opening 201, and an insulator 400 provided in an insulating space 402 that is defined by the panel assembly 100, the door frame 300, and the door liner 200, wherein the door frame 300 comprises: a front wall 311 that faces the front panel 110 and is positioned forward relative to the hinge cover 28, a rear wall 312 spaced apart from the front wall 311, and a connection wall 314 that connects an end portion of the front wall 311 to an end portion of the rear wall 312, wherein the connection wall 314, the front wall 311, and the rear wall 312 define an accommodation space 310a that is partitioned from the insulating space 402, and wherein the door further comprises: a frame cover 320 that covers the accommodation space 310a, and a sensor module 30 disposed within the accommodation space 310a and disposed at a rear surface of the front wall 311.
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
July 3, 2026
/HANH V TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights