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 .
General Information
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of foreign priority received on 07/27/2025 as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Applicant's response with remarks received on 02/12/2026 has been carefully considered, but are not persuasive that the rejection of the claim under 35 U.S.C. § 103 should be withdrawn. Therefore the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection dated on 11/17/2025 has been withdrawn, and a new rejection has been issued below.
EXAMINER’S COMMENTS TO APPLICANT’S REMARKS
Applicant argues that,
“Applicant respectfully submits that in the rejection, the Examiner compares only the front view of the claimed design to the references. However, Applicant's claim is directed to ornamental features beyond just the front view. Applicant submits that the ajmadison.com publication does not show a top view. However, the claimed design includes a top view. More specifically, Reproduction 1.5 shows many claimed features on the top of the microwave oven.”
Applicant further argues that,
“The ajmadison.com publication does not show at least a top view, and therefore the ajmadison.com publication does not show the many claimed rectangular features of the top view. In addition, the shortcomings of the ajmadison.com publication are not overcome by the brandsmartusa.com publication, which also fails to show and teach the claimed top features.”
After careful consideration, the Examiner disagrees that the ajmadison.com (hereafter LG Design) publication disqualifies as a reference since it is not disclosed in full with a top view. The Examiner also disagrees that the brandsmartusa.com (hereafter GE Design) fails to show and teach the claimed top features. After consideration of these remarks and further searching, a comparison of the Claimed Design to the same LG Design model and GE Design model are now shown in addition publication links in the 103 Rejection below.
Claim Rejection - 35 U.S.C. §103
The claim is finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the LG design in view of the GE design.
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 claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LG 30 Inch Over-the-Range Smart Microwave (hereinafter LG) in view of the prior art as demonstrated by GE Profile 2.2 Cu Ft 1100 Watt Built-In Microwave (hereinafter GE).
PNG
media_image1.png
630
1432
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The top views of the exact same models of the LG Design and GE Design are found in publication links:
LG Design: https://www.rtings.com/microwave/reviews/lg/mvem1825f
GE Design: https://www.bestbuy.com/product/ge-profile-2-2-cu-ft-built-in-microwave-with-sensor-cooking-and-glass-touch-controls-black-on-black/J7645SJ48H/sku/5958622/reviews?pageSize=20
PNG
media_image2.png
959
1431
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Although the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in 35 U.S.C. 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 designer having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains, the invention is not patentable.
LG has an overall appearance with design characteristics that are visually similar to those of the claimed design, in showing the smooth handle portion, flat, continuous surface that extends to the panel like portion of the microwave and the change in surface of the front bottom area. In addition, the shape of the handle portion and the top features are visually similar to the claimed design.
PNG
media_image3.png
600
1430
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
628
1431
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The claimed design differs from LG in that it has a flat, continuous surface and there is no change in surface at the top of the front area. In addition, the claimed design has an extra vent-like feature in the top view.
PNG
media_image5.png
602
1428
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
783
1430
media_image6.png
Greyscale
GE shows the continuation in the front surface to the top of the microwave and the panel-like portion.
PNG
media_image7.png
621
1428
media_image7.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a designer of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed design to modify LG by adding an extra vent like feature to the top view and removing the front, top change in surface on the front area of GE since the LG Design demonstrates vented features in the top area and the GE Design demonstrates a continuous surface throughout, which are commonplace in the field of designing microwaves and would therefore have been an obvious design choice.
Conclusion
The claim stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 for the reasons set forth above.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Reproductions
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are suggested 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. All replacement sheets should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures.
When preparing new drawings in compliance with the requirement thereof, care must be exercised to avoid introduction of anything which could be construed to be new matter prohibited by U.S.C 132 and 37 CFR 1.121(f).
Refusal Reply
Applicant is reminded that any reply to this Refusal must be signed either by a patent practitioner (i.e., a patent attorney or agent registered to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office) or by the applicant. If the applicant is a juristic entity, the reply must be signed by a patent practitioner. See 37 CFR 1.33(b).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COURTNEY CLARK-RASHEED whose telephone number is (571)272-9150. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5:00 EST.
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, JAE LIANG can be reached at 571-270-0229. 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.
/C.J.C./
Examiner, Art Unit 2921
/JAE LIANG/
Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2921
Prosecution Insights