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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
For the IDS dated 23 May 2025, Citation No. 15 under U.S. Patent Application Publications contains a name, but no publication number, document kind code, or publication date. No copy of EP 0167611 A1, Citation No. 4 under Foreign Patent Document, is on file.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 3, the recitation “surface” should be deleted.
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 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 12,320,178. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the overlap in scope between the patented claims and the claims pending in this application render obvious the claims pending in this application.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 15, 17-18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 1,941,126 A (Blackman).
With respect to claim 1: Blackman discloses a cabinet apparatus comprising: a housing (not numbered main body of the cabinet in Figs. 1 and/or 9) defining a storage space (interior space having shelves therein) having a front access opening (Figs. 1 and/or 9), the housing comprising: a rear panel (wall 14); a first panel structure (structure forming right wall of the cabinet) including a first sidewall panel structure (the right wall 12) and a tubular flange (Fig. 4: front portion of wall 12, flange 17, and bead 16) extending lengthwise along the first sidewall panel structure (Figs. 1-2 and 4), the tubular flange including a front wall (Fig. 4: flange 17 and the front leg of bead 16), an outer wall (Fig. 4: outer leg of bead 16), a rear wall (Fig. 4: rear leg of bead 16), and an inner wall (Fig. 4: front portion of wall 12) that collectively define an tubular cavity (cavity in which spacing channel 18 is accommodated in Fig. 4); and a first hinge component (the leaf of hinge 24 attached to bead 16) protruding from the tubular flange (hinge 24 protrudes from and is welded to the front leg of bead 16); and a door (door 23, 37) including a door body (main body of door 23, 37) and a second hinge component (the other leaf of hinge 24 attached to door frame 25) on the door body (welded to frame 25 of door 23), wherein the first and second hinge components are operably coupled to one another (to thereby for hinge 24) to so that the door is pivotably mounted to the housing to be rotatable about a rotational axis between: (1) a closed position in which the door body encloses the front access opening (Figs. 2-4 and/or 10); and (2) an open position in which the storage space is accessible via the front access opening (Figs. 1 and/or 9).
With respect to claim 3: Blackman discloses wherein the first sidewall panel structure forms the inner wall of the tubular flange (Fig. 4: the front portion wall 12 forms the inner wall as claimed).
With respect to claim 4: Blackman discloses wherein the first hinge component protrudes from a front-outside corner of the tubular flange (Fig. 4).
With respect to claim 15: Blackman discloses a cabinet apparatus comprising: a housing (not numbered main body of the cabinet in Figs. 1 and/or 9) defining a storage space (interior space having shelves therein) having a front access opening (Figs. 1 and/or 9), the housing comprising: a rear panel (wall 14); a first panel structure (structure forming right wall of the cabinet) including a first sidewall panel structure (the right wall 12) and a tubular flange (Fig. 4: front portion of wall 12, flange 17, and bead 16) extending lengthwise along the first sidewall panel structure (Figs. 1-2 and 4); and a first hinge component (the leaf of hinge 24 attached to bead 16) protruding from the tubular flange (hinge 24 protrudes from and is welded to the front leg of bead 16); and a door (door 23, 37) including a door body (main body of door 23, 37) and a second hinge component (the other leaf of hinge 24 attached to door frame 25) on the door body (welded to frame 25 of door 23), wherein the first and second hinge components are operably coupled to one another to so that the door is pivotably mounted to the housing (Figs. 1-10).
With respect to claim 17: Blackman discloses wherein the tubular flange includes a front wall (Fig. 4: flange 17 and the front leg of bead 16), an outer wall (Fig. 4: outer leg of bead 16), a rear wall (Fig. 4: rear leg of bead 16), and an inner wall (Fig. 4: front portion of wall 12) that collectively define a tubular cavity.
With respect to claim 18: Blackman discloses wherein the first sidewall panel structure forms the inner wall of the tubular flange (Fig. 4: the front portion wall 12 forms the inner wall as claimed).
With respect to claim 20: Blackman discloses a cover member (bead 15) detachably coupled to the first panel structure.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 1,941,126 A (Blackman) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 5,267,786 A (Aisley).
With respect to claim 5: Blackman does not disclose “wherein the outer wall extends beyond the rear wall to form an abutment lip protruding from an exterior surface of the rear wall, the abutment lip abutting a wall surface when the cabinet apparatus is recess mounted into the wall” as claimed.
Blackman Fig. 2 shows the medicine cabinet is mounted on the surface of a wall. Blackman Fig. 10 shows the medicine cabinet alternatively mounted in a recess in the wall.
Aisley Figs. 8-9 shows a not-numbered “abutment lip” as claimed, extending rearwardly from the hinge support wall 60. Such “abutment lip’ is an extension of the outer wall that protrudes from an exterior of the rear wall. The “abutment lip” abuts a wall surface when the cabinet is recess mounted into the wall (col. 5, lines 10-14). Aisley Fig. 8 shows another lip that extends from the rear wall, as an extension of the wall segment 58.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Blackman’s bead 16 to have Aisley’s “abutment lip” thereon, in order to adapt Blackman’s cabinet for mounting in a recess that is shallower than the one in Blackman Fig. 10.
With respect to claim 6: See Blackman Fig. 10. In the modification, the distal end of the “abutment lip” lies flat against the wall. The claimed “second reference plane” is parallel to and coplanar with the wall.
See Blackman Figs. 3-4. The “front access opening” of the cabinet is between the two flanges 17. Ergo, the claimed “first reference plane” is defined at the flanges 17.
In a fully-open position of the door 23, 37 (Blackman Figs. 1 and 9 and/or rotated beyond the position of Blackman Figs. 1 and 9), no portion of the door 23, 37 intersects either of the “first reference plane” or the “second reference plane” as claimed. Due to the construction of the hinge 24 and the door 23, 37, the door 23, 37 remains in front of the “first reference plane” and the “second reference plane”.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 1,941,126 A (Blackman) in view of US 5,267,786 A (Aisley) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of US 5,197,790 A (Katz ‘790).
With respect to claim 7: Blackman, as modified, does not meet “wherein the abutment lip includes a distal end which abuts the wall surface when the cabinet apparatus is recess mounted in the wall, the distal end having an increased thickness relative to a remainder of the abutment lip” as claimed.
Katz ‘790 Figs. 2-3 show it is known for similar “abutment lips” to have enlarged and/or turned-in distal ends (highlighted by the arrows in the annotated image below).
PNG
media_image1.png
194
268
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Blackman’s bead 16 to have Katz ‘790’s “abutment lips” thereon, as an obvious variant and functional equivalent of Aisley’s “abutment lips”. Either are suitable for abutting a wall when the cabinet is recess mounted therein.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 1,941,126 A (Blackman) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2021/0161293 A1 (Coyle).
With respect to claim 9: Blackman discloses a top panel (wall 13) that forms an upper boundary of the storage space.
Blackman does not disclose “a hanging bracket extending upward from an exterior surface of the top panel” as claimed.
Blackman Fig. 2 shows the cabinet mounted to a wall, and Blackman Fig. 10 shows the cabinet recess mounted within a wall.
Coyle discloses an elongated mounting element 120 extending upward from an exterior surface of the top panel 106 of a cabinet, which facilitates coupling the cabinet to a wall with cam locks 210.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Blackman’s wall 13 to have Coyle’s mounting element 120 on the top side thereof, in order to use Coyle’s cam locks 210 to secure Blackman’s cabinet to a wall.
Claim(s) 10-11 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 1,941,126 A (Blackman) in view of US 5,165,780 A (Katz ‘780).
With respect to claim 10: Blackman discloses a cabinet apparatus comprising: a housing (not numbered main body of the cabinet in Figs. 1 and/or 9) defining a storage space (interior space having shelves therein) having a front access opening (Figs. 1 and/or 9), the housing comprising: a rear panel (wall 14); a first panel structure (structure forming right wall of the cabinet) including a first sidewall panel structure (wall 12) and a tubular flange (Fig. 4: front portion of wall 12, flange 17, and bead 16) extending lengthwise along the first sidewall panel structure (Figs. 1-2 and 4), the tubular flange including a front wall (Fig. 4: flange 17 and the front leg of bead 16), an outer wall (Fig. 4: outer leg of bead 16), a rear wall (Fig. 4: rear leg of bead 16), and an inner wall (Fig. 4: front portion of wall 12) that collectively define a tubular cavity; and a first hinge component (the leaf of hinge 24 attached to bead 16) protruding from the tubular flange (hinge 24 protrudes from and is welded to the front leg of bead 16); and a door (door 23, 37) including a door body (main body of door 23, 37) and a second hinge component (the other leaf of hinge 24 attached to door frame 25) on the door body (welded to frame 25 of door 23), wherein the first and second hinge components are operably coupled to one another to so that the door is pivotably mounted to the housing (Figs. 1-10).
Blackman does not disclose “the outer wall extending beyond the rear wall to form an abutment lip protruding from an exterior surface of the rear wall” as claimed.
Blackman Fig. 2 shows the medicine cabinet is mounted on the surface of a wall. Blackman Fig. 10 shows the medicine cabinet alternatively mounted in a recess in the wall.
PNG
media_image2.png
702
492
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Katz ‘780 shows “abutment lips” that receive a bottom panel 108 when the cabinet is mounted to the front of a wall (Fig. 3), and are configured to abut the wall when recess mounted in the wall (Fig. 6). See the annotated image above for identification of such “abutment lips”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Blackman’s bead 16 to have the “abutment lips” of Katz ‘780 thereon, in order to adapt the cabinet to include cover members (bottom panels 108, etc.) when surface mounted to a wall.
With respect to claim 11: Blackman, as modified, meets a cover member (the side cover analogous to bottom panel 108) detachably coupled to the first panel structure, the cover member abutting the abutment lip.
With respect to claim 13: Blackman discloses wherein the first sidewall panel structure forms the inner wall of the tubular flange (Fig. 4: the front portion wall 12 forms the inner wall as claimed).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 1,941,126 A (Blackman) in view of US 5,165,780 A (Katz ‘780) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of US 2021/0161293 A1 (Coyle).
With respect to claim 14: Blackman discloses a top panel (wall 13) that forms an upper boundary of the storage space.
Blackman does not disclose “a hanging bracket extending upward from an exterior surface of the top panel” as claimed.
Blackman Fig. 2 shows the cabinet mounted to a wall, and Blackman Fig. 10 shows the cabinet recess mounted within a wall.
Coyle discloses an elongated mounting element 120 extending upward from an exterior surface of the top panel 106 of a cabinet, which facilitates coupling the cabinet to a wall with cam locks 210.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Blackman’s wall 13 to have Coyle’s mounting element 120 on the top side thereof, in order to use Coyle’s cam locks 210 to secure Blackman’s cabinet to a wall.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 8, 12, 16, and 19 is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if 1) rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, and 2) a Terminal Disclaimer is filed to overcome the double patenting rejections made in this Office action.
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 ANDREW ROERSMA whose telephone number is (571)270-3185. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:00.
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.
/ANDREW ROERSMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
