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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Affidavit or Declaration Under 37 CFR 1.130
The Declaration under 37 CFR 1.130 filed on September 19, 2025 is sufficient to disqualify the cited Amazon.com, Inc. “Optish” reference by Zhang Jia Gang Feng Niao Dian Zi Shang Wu You Xian Gong Si.
Objection to the Specification
For accuracy and clarity, the reproduction 1.1 and 1.2 descriptions should be amended to read:
--1.1 : Front perspective
: Back perspective--
For clarity, the broken line statement should be amended to read:
--The broken lines shown represent portions of the coat hook rack that form no part of the claimed design.--
Claim Rejection – 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) Rejection
The claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Non-Patent Literature reference to Amazon.com, Inc. because 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.
In the images below, the examiner has shown the various elements of the claimed design with reference alphabets for proper comparison of those specific elements of the claimed design with the Amazon.com, Inc. reference.
The Amazon.com, Inc. reference discloses a hanger rack that has design characteristics which are basically the same as those of the claimed design, showing:
Two identical over-the-door hooks “A”.
Identical mounting bars “B”.
Identical hooks “C”.
PNG
media_image1.png
529
1462
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The appearance of the Amazon.com, Inc. hanger rack is substantially the same as that of the claimed design. See e.g., International Seaway Trading Corp. v. Walgreens Corp., 589 F.3d 1233, 1237-38, 1240, 93 USPQ2d 1001 (Fed. Cir. 2009) and MPEP § 1504.02.
Claim Rejection – 35 U.S.C. 103 Single Reference
The claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chinese Application No. 202130830365.8 to Li. Although the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1), if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a designer having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains, the invention is not patentable.
In the images below, the examiner has shown the various elements of the claimed design with reference alphabets for proper comparison of those specific elements of the claimed design with the applied prior art references.
The Li reference discloses a door rear hook that has design characteristics which are basically the same as those of the claimed design, showing:
Two identical over-the-door hooks “A”.
Identical mounting bars “B”.
Identical hooks “C”.
PNG
media_image2.png
516
1378
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan in the hanger rack art to adjust the position of the over-the-door hooks “A” to appear at the ends of the mounting bar “B”—as shown in the claim—from the position of the hooks “A” shown in the cited reference.
It is well settled that it is unobviousness in the overall appearance of the claimed design, when compared with the prior art, rather than minute details or small variations in design as appears to be the case here, that constitutes the test of design patentability. See In re Frick, 275 F.2d 741, 125 USPQ 191 (CCPA 1960) and In re Lamb, 286 F.2d 610, 128 USPQ 539 (CCPA 1961).
Conclusion
Accordingly, the claim stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 103, as outlined above.
The references cited, but not applied, are considered cumulative art related to the claimed design.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to L. Calve whose telephone number is (571) 272-7939, and whose work schedule is Monday-Friday 10am-7pm. 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, Wendy Arminio, can be reached at (571) 270-0221. As of 7/15/05 the Right FAX number for this group is (571) 273-8300 for both Official faxes and After Finals.
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.
/LAUREN R CALVE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2923
Prosecution Insights