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 .
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 "pin piece 45" as recited in claims 4 and 9 must be clearly 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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 1-2 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent 0569514 (“PALMER”).
Regarding Claims 1-2 and 6-7, PALMER discloses CLAIM 1-a table convenient to store and fold, comprising a tabletop (A, A) and table legs (D) rotatably connected to the tabletop, wherein the tabletop comprises two table plates (A, A) rotatably connected to each other, each of the two table plates (A, A) is rotatably connected to two table legs (D), and a first locking mechanism (C) for limiting a free rotation of the two table plates (A, A)is arranged at a junction of the two table plates; a guide piece (G) fixedly arranged in a length direction of the tabletop is arranged in a middle of each of the two table plates, and each of the table legs (D) is connected to the guide piece through a linkage rod (F); a first end of the linkage rod (F) is slidably connected to the guide piece (G), and a second end of the linkage rod is rotatably connected to each of the table legs (D); and in a storage process of the table legs (D), the table legs (D) rotate the first end of the linkage rod from a vertical direction to a transverse direction to act on the first locking mechanism © in a sliding process of the guide piece, and the first locking mechanism (C) limiting a rotation of the two table plates is switched to the first locking mechanism releasing the limitation on the rotation of the two table plates; CLAIM 2-wherein when the table legs are stored, a space for accommodating the table legs (D) is formed between two tabletops, a height of the space is greater than or equal to an overlapping height of the two table legs, and two ends of each of the table legs are covered by each of the two table plates; CLAIM 6- wherein each of the two table plates (A, A)comprises a plate piece and a surrounding edge arranged at a periphery of the plate piece, wherein the surrounding edge protrudes from a lower side of the plate piece, the table legs are located in the surrounding edge, and all or part of a space is formed in the surrounding edge (as seen in Fig. 3); CLAIM 7-wherein the two table plates (A, A) are connected by a hinge, and the hinge is mounted on the surrounding edge.
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 (221) 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 1-3, 6-7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 202858218 (“LENG”) in view of US 20180279768 (“LENG’ 768”)
Regarding Claim 1, LENG discloses a table (10) convenient to store and fold, comprising a tabletop (11) and table legs (12) rotatably connected to the tabletop (11), wherein the tabletop (11) comprises two table plates (11) rotatably connected to each other, each of the two table plates (11) is rotatably connected to two table legs (12), and
a first locking mechanism (211, 221) for limiting a free rotation of the two table plates (11) is arranged at a junction of the two table plates (11);
a guide piece (21) fixedly arranged in a length direction of the tabletop (11) is arranged in a middle of each of the two table plates (11), and each of the table legs (12) is connected to the guide piece (21) through a linkage rod (25); a first end of the linkage rod (25) is slidably connected to the guide piece (21), and a second end of the linkage rod (25) is rotatably connected to each of the table legs (12); and
in a storage process of the table legs (12), the table legs (12) rotate the first end of the linkage rod (25) from a vertical direction to a transverse direction to act on the first locking mechanism (211, 221) in a sliding process of the guide piece (21), and the first locking mechanism (211, 221) limiting a rotation of the two table plates (11) is switched to the first locking mechanism (211, 221) releasing the limitation on the rotation of the two table plates (11).
LENG discloses a locking mechanism but does not disclose a locking mechanism at the junction of the two table plate.
LENG ’768 teaches a similar foldable table with a first locking mechanism (20) for limiting a free rotation of the two table plates (10) is arranged at a junction of the two table plates (10). It would have been obvious to one having skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention that the table taught by LENG could be improved by position the first locking mechanism at the junction as demonstrated by LENG ‘768 so that the tables cannot rotate relatively, when unfolded and used, to improve overall reliability and stability.
Regarding Claim 2, as modified LENG discloses wherein when the table legs (12) are stored, a space for accommodating the table legs (12) is formed between two tabletops (11, as seen in Fig. 3), a height of the space is greater than or equal to an overlapping height of the two table legs (12), and two ends of each of the table legs (12) are covered by each of the two table plates (11).
Regarding Claim 3, as modified LENG discloses wherein the two table legs (12) are arranged on a same table plate (11), and the two table legs (12) are fixedly connected by a connecting rod (as seen in Figs. 1-3).
Regarding Claim 6, as modified LENG discloses wherein each of the two table plates (11)comprises a plate piece and a surrounding edge arranged at a periphery of the plate piece, wherein the surrounding edge protrudes from a lower side of the plate piece, the table legs (12) are located in the surrounding edge, and all or part of a space is formed in the surrounding edge.
Regarding Claim 7, as modified LENG discloses wherein the two table plates (11) are connected by a hinge, and the hinge is mounted on the surrounding edge.
Regarding Claim 9, as modified LENG discloses wherein the first locking mechanism (211, 221) comprises a pin piece (211), the two table plates (11) are respectively provided with two open holes (221, as seen in Fig. 5) for the pin piece (211) to insert, and the two table plates (11) are locked when the pin piece (211) is inserted into the two open holes (221) at a same time; and in the storage process of the table legs (12), the pin piece (211) is driven by the linkage rod (25) to be separated from one of the two open holes (221), and the two table plates (11) are rotatably stored.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LENG and LENG ’768 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20070215011 (“Khan”).
The combination discloses the claimed invention but does expressly discloses the table having telescopic legs.
Khan demonstrates it is well known in the art to provide a folding table with telescopic leg. 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 legs of LENG to telescope as demonstrated by Khan, such a modification would allow the folding table to be adapted for use by individuals of various heights.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 5 and 10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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 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 at 5712703742. 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.
/KIMBERLEY S WRIGHT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights