UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`15/900,569
`
`02/20/2018
`
`YOShihil‘O TAKAHASHI
`
`092122-0058
`
`1036
`
`10/02/2018
`759°
`20277
`MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP
`
`The MeDermott Building
`500 North Capitol Street, NW.
`WASHINGTON Dc 20001
`
`ROHRHOFF' DANIEL J
`
`3637
`
`PAPERNUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`10/02/2018
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`
`following e—mail address(es):
`
`ipdoeketmwe @ mwe. com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`Off/09 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`15/900,569
`Examiner
`DANIEL J ROHRHOFF
`
`Applicant(s)
`TAKAHASHI et al.
`Art Unit
`AIA Status
`3637
`Yes
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`|f NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 2/20/18.
`[:1 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a)D This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)
`
`This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)[:] Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Expat/7e Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`E] Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are rejected.
`
`[:1 Claim(s) _ is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[j Claim(s)
`9
`* If any claims have been determined aflowabte. you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`10)[:] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11). The drawing(s) filed on 2/20/18 is/are: a). accepted or b)[:j objected to by the Examiner.
`
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12). Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a). All
`
`b)D Some”
`
`C)D None of the:
`
`1..
`
`Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.[:]
`
`Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3:] Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date_
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) C] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) D Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20180927
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/900,569
`Art Unit: 3637
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice ofPre-AIA 0r AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the
`
`first inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 US C § 112
`
`2.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
`(b) CONCLUSION.7The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing
`out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the
`invention.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre—AIA), second paragraph:
`The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly
`claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
`
`3.
`
`Claims 1—5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre—AIA), second
`
`paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject
`
`matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre—AIA the applicant regards as the
`
`invention.
`
`4.
`
`Claim 1 recites the limitation "the front face side of the insulated case" in line 6. There is
`
`insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
`
`5.
`
`Claim 1 recites the limitation "both side faces" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent
`
`basis for this limitation in the claim.
`
`6.
`
`Regarding claim 4, the limitation “the front face has a thickness equal to or greater than
`
`1/4” is indefinite because the examiner is not sure what the thickness of the front face is being
`
`compared to. For examination purposes the examiner will interpreted the claim as if the front
`
`face has a thickness equal to or greater than 1/4 of the thickness of the back face. Appropriate
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/900,569
`Art Unit: 3637
`
`correction is required.
`
`Page 3
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 US C § 103
`
`7.
`
`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.
`
`8.
`
`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.
`
`9.
`
`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.
`
`10.
`
`The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere C0., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459
`
`(1966), that are applied 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.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/900,569
`Art Unit: 3637
`
`Page 4
`
`3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
`
`4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or
`
`nonobviousness.
`
`11.
`
`Claim 1—5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takasugi (US
`
`patent 8,826,686) in view of Yuzawa et al. (US patent 7,624,586) (hereinafter Yuzawa).
`
`12.
`
`Regarding claim 1, Takasugi discloses an ultra—low temperature freezer comprising: an
`
`insulated case (7) defining a storage compartment (4) having an opening in an upper face (Col. 8:
`
`14); and an insulated door (13) configured to be able to open and close the opening so that the
`
`storage compartment can be seen from the front face side of the insulated case (Fig. 1), the front
`
`face (6A) of the insulated case having a thickness smaller than a thickness of a side face of the
`
`insulated case (Fig. 3).
`
`13.
`
`Takasugi does not disclose the front face of the insulated case having a thickness smaller
`
`than thicknesses of both side faces and a back face of the insulated case.
`
`14.
`
`Yuzawa teaches a freezer wherein a front face (left side in Fig. 2) of an insulated case has
`
`a thickness smaller than a thickness of a back face (right side in Fig. 2) of an insulated case.
`
`15.
`
`As such, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of
`
`the filing to modify Takasugi wherein the front face of the insulated case having a thickness
`
`smaller than thicknesses of both side faces and a back face of the insulated case, since it has been
`
`held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re J apikse, 86
`
`USPQ 70.
`
`16.
`
`Regarding claim 2, Takasugi, as modified, teaches a freezer wherein the insulated case
`
`includes an inner case (7) whose upper face is configured to be opened, an outer case (6) that
`
`surrounds the inner case, an insulating material (9) filled between the inner case and the outer
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/900,569
`Art Unit: 3637
`
`Page 5
`
`case, and a vacuum insulated panel (12 mounted on 6A, as shown in Fig. 3) mounted between
`
`the inner case and the outer case (Fig. 3), the vacuum insulated panel being mounted only to the
`
`front face of the insulated case (Fig. 3 & Col. 8: 27—36).
`
`17.
`
`Regarding claim 3, Takasugi, as modified, teaches a freezer wherein the vacuum
`
`insulated panel is mounted to the front face of the insulated case such that the insulating material
`
`is interposed between the inner case and the vacuum insulated panel (Fig. 3 & Col. 8: 27—36).
`
`18.
`
`Regarding claim 4, Takasugi, as modified, teaches a freezer wherein the front face has a
`
`thickness (Fig. 3).
`
`19.
`
`Takasugi, as modified, does not teach wherein the front face has a thickness equal to or
`
`greater than 1/4 of the thickness of the back face and equal to or smaller than 2/3 of the thickness
`
`of the back face.
`
`20.
`
`It would have been obvious matter of design choice to modify Takasugi, as modified,
`
`wherein the front face has a thickness equal to or greater than 1/4 of the thickness of the back
`
`face and equal to or smaller than 2/3 of the thickness of the back face, since such a modification
`
`would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change is size is generally
`
`recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237,
`
`(CCPA 1955).
`
`21.
`
`Regarding claim 5, Takasugi, as modified, teaches a freezer wherein the front face has a
`
`thickness (Fig. 3).
`
`22.
`
`Takasugi, as modified, does not teach wherein the front face has a thickness equal to or
`
`smaller than a half of the thickness of the back face.
`
`23.
`
`It would have been obvious matter of design choice to modify Takasugi, as modified,
`
`wherein the front face has a thickness equal to or smaller than a half of the thickness of the back
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/900,569
`Art Unit: 3637
`
`Page 6
`
`face, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component.
`
`A change is size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In
`
`re Rose, 105 USPQ 237, (CCPA 1955).
`
`Conclusion
`
`24.
`
`The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
`
`disclosure because it gives a general state of the art.
`
`25.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to DANIEL J ROHRHOFF whose telephone number is (571)270—
`
`7624. The examiner can normally be reached on M—F 7:30—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, Dan Troy can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent
`
`Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications
`
`may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished
`
`applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR
`
`system, see http://pair—direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR
`
`system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866—217—9197 (toll—free). If you would
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/900,569
`Art Unit: 3637
`
`Page 7
`
`like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated
`
`information system, call 800—786—9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571—272—1000.
`
`/DANIEL J ROHRHOFF/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
`
`