Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/585,671

DOOR ASSEMBLY

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jan 27, 2022
Examiner
HANES JR., JOHN
Art Unit
3634
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Clark Door Limited
OA Round
4 (Final)
47%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 47% of resolved cases
47%
Career Allow Rate
51 granted / 108 resolved
-4.8% vs TC avg
Strong +39% interview lift
Without
With
+38.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
150
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
48.1%
+8.1% vs TC avg
§102
26.1%
-13.9% vs TC avg
§112
23.6%
-16.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 108 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Response to Amendment Applicant’s submission dated 10/23/2025 has been entered. 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. Claim(s) 26-35 and 37-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat. 3,734,161 – Pierce in view of US Pat. 7,918,263 – Kraeutler. Regarding claim 26. Pierce discloses a door assembly (1, fig 1) for an opening (2, fig 1) in a building (4, fig 1), wherein the door assembly is installable to the opening (See fig 1), the door assembly comprising: a rolling shutter door (See at 1, fig 1) comprising a plurality of laths (15, fig 1), the door moveable between a closed position wherein the opening is occluded by the rolling shutter door (as in fig 1), and an open position wherein the opening is at least partially clear of occlusion by the rolling shutter door (as in fig 13); and a sealing assembly (See fig 3) for sealing a gap between the rolling shutter door (1, fig 3), the opening (2, fig 3), and a surface of the building (4, fig 3) proximal the opening (See fig 3), the seal comprising: a resiliently deformable member (82, fig 3); and a sealing member extending across substantially the entire width of the rolling shutter door (portion of lintel contacted by 80 in fig 3); wherein the resiliently deformable member and sealing member are each mutually positioned such that the resiliently deformable member co-operates with the sealing member when the rolling shutter door is in the closed position to seal the gap (See fig 3); and wherein the laths (15, fig 3) of the rolling shutter door are in an arcuate configuration when the door is in the open position (See fig 13) and are in a planar configuration when the door is in the closed position (See fig 3), and the circumference of a portion of the rolling shutter door in the arcuate configuration is greater than the length of the portion of the rolling shutter door when in a planar configuration (Compare figs 3 and 13); and wherein an upper edge of the resiliently deformable member (82, fig 3) is affixed to a first lath (at 90, fig 3) of the rolling shutter door at an upper edge of the resiliently deformable member (See fig 3) and a lower edge of the resiliently deformable member is affixed to a second lath (at 86, fig 3) of the resiliently deformable member such that a central portion of the resiliently deformable member is not affixed to the rolling shutter door (See fig 3), and such that when the rolling shutter door is in a closed position (See fig 3) the distance between the upper edge and the lower edge decreases and the central portion is urged to protrude away from the rolling shutter door (Column 5, lines 30-33; spaces 16 between panels 15 close causing straps 82 to spring outwardly carrying connector 92 and the central portion of baffle 80 outwardly from the surface of door 1 into engagement with the edge of wall 4.). Pierce does not disclose a resiliently deformable member extending substantially across the entire width of the rolling shutter door; wherein the sealing member is resiliently deformable, and wherein when the resiliently deformable member cooperates with the sealing member, the resiliently deformable member causes the sealing member to deform; and wherein an upper edge of the resiliently deformable member is affixed substantially continuously across the width of the resiliently deformable member, and a lower edge of the resiliently deformable member is affixed substantially continuously across the width of the resiliently deformable member and the resiliently deformable member induces the sealing member to adopt a complementary mating configuration to form a seal. However, Kraeutler teaches a resiliently deformable member (20, fig 5) extending substantially across the entire width of the rolling shutter door (Column 5, lines 9-12; To enhance the sealing, provision may be made for an additional thickness 20 to be positioned on one or both faces 7a, 7b of the curtain 7, this additional thickness pressing against the skirt 18 or against the roll.); wherein the sealing member (18, fig 5) is resiliently deformable (Column 5, lines 3-4; this profile strip 19 supporting a skirt 18 of flexible material, or possibly a flexible roll containing a cellular foam), and wherein when the resiliently deformable member cooperates with the sealing member (20, fig 5), the resiliently deformable member causes the sealing member to deform (See fig 5). and wherein an edge of the resiliently deformable member is affixed substantially continuously across the width of the resiliently deformable member (Column 5, lines 16-18; In practice, the additional thickness 20 may comprise a sheath filled with foam which is, for example, adhesively bonded or ultrasonically welded to one face of the curtain 7.), and the resiliently deformable member induces the sealing member to adopt a complementary mating configuration to form a seal (Column 5, lines 9-12; To enhance the sealing, provision may be made for an additional thickness 20 to be positioned on one or both faces 7a, 7b of the curtain 7, this additional thickness pressing against the skirt 18 or against the roll.). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, with a reasonable expectation of success, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the assembly of Pierce with the continuous and continuously attached resiliently deformable member and resiliently deformable sealing member of Kraeutler. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to yield the predictable result of improving the sealing characteristics of the assembly. Regarding claim 27. The combination of Pierce and Kraeutler teaches all limitations of claim 26. Pierce further discloses the resiliently deformable member (82, fig 3) comprises a resiliently deformable sheet (Strap 82 is deformable, and resilience is provided by baffle 80; Column 5, lines 9-10; Wind baffle 80 comprises an elongated resilient member), and wherein the resiliently deformable member is positioned on a surface of the rolling shutter door (See fig 3). Regarding claim 28. The combination of Pierce and Kraeutler teaches all limitations of claim 27. Pierce further discloses the surface of the rolling shutter door faces the exterior of the building when in a closed position (See figs 1 and 3), and wherein the resiliently deformable member (82, fig 3) is positioned on an upper portion of the surface of the rolling shutter door (See fig 3). Regarding claim 29. The combination of Pierce and Kraeutler teaches all limitations of claim 26. Pierce further discloses the sealing member (portion of lintel contacted by 82 in fig 3) is positioned on an interior wall of the building, proximal the opening therein (See fig 3), wherein the resiliently deformable member (82, fig 3) has a sealing configuration when the rolling shutter door is in the closed position (as in fig 3), and a non-sealing configuration when the rolling shutter door is in the open position (as in fig 13). Regarding claim 30. The combination of Pierce and Kraeutler teaches all limitations of claim 29. Pierce further discloses the sealing member (portion of lintel contacted by 82 in fig 3) is positioned above the opening (See fig 3), and wherein the resiliently deformable member (82, fig 3) protrudes from the surface of the rolling shutter door in the sealing configuration (See fig 3). Regarding claim 31. The combination of Pierce and Kraeutler teaches all limitations of claim 29. Pierce further discloses in the non-sealing configuration (See fig 13) of the resiliently deformable member (82, fig 13) is complementary to an arcuate conformation of the rolling shutter door when the rolling shutter door is in the open position (See fig 13). Regarding claim 32. The combination of Pierce and Kraeutler teaches all limitations of claim 26. Pierce further discloses the sealing member (portion of lintel contacted by 82 in fig 3) has a mating configuration (as in fig 3) when the rolling shutter door is in the closed position (as in fig 3), and a resting configuration (as in fig 13) when the rolling shutter door is in the open position (as in fig 13), and wherein the mating configuration (as in fig 3) of the sealing member is complementary to the sealing configuration of the resiliently deformable member (See fig 3). Regarding claim 33. The combination of Pierce and Kraeutler teaches all limitations of claim 32. Pierce further discloses the resiliently deformable member is a resiliently deformable sheet. Pierce does not disclose the sealing member protrudes towards the interior of the building when the sealing member is in the resting configuration. However, Kraeutler teaches the sealing member (18, fig 5) protrudes towards the interior of the building when the sealing member is in the resting configuration (although shown in fig 5 in the mating configuration, it can be seen that the sealing member 18 protrudes towards the interior of the building on element 19. This will remain when the sealing member is in the resting configuration). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, with a reasonable expectation of success, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the assembly of Pierce with the protruding sealing member of Kraeutler. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to yield the predictable result of improving the sealing characteristics of the assembly. Regarding claim 34. The combination of Pierce and Kraeutler teaches all limitations of claim 26. Pierce does not disclose the sealing member comprises a cavity. However, Kraeutler teaches the sealing member comprises a cavity (Column 2, lines 58-63; It may be envisioned for the skirt to be formed of a strip of flexible material folded over on itself. It may also be envisioned for the first sealing means to consist of a roll which extends the protection means and comes into contact with the curtain when the curtain is in the closed position.). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, with a reasonable expectation of success, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the assembly of Pierce with the sealing member comprising a cavity of Kraeutler. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to yield the predictable result of improving the sealing characteristics of the assembly. Regarding claim 35. The combination of Pierce and Kraeutler teaches all limitations of claim 34. Pierce does not disclose the cavity is at least partially filled with an insulating material selected from an acoustically insulating material, a thermally insulating material, a fire-retardant material, and combinations thereof. However, Kraeutler teaches the cavity is at least partially filled with an insulating material selected from an acoustically insulating material, a thermally insulating material, a fire-retardant material, and combinations thereof (Column 2, lines 64-65; To enhance the sealing, the roll may be filled with a cellular foam.). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, with a reasonable expectation of success, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the assembly of Pierce with the insulating material of Kraeutler. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to yield the predictable result of improving the sealing characteristics of the assembly. Regarding claim 37. The combination of Pierce and Kraeutler teaches all limitations of claim 26. Pierce further discloses: a first guide member (8, fig 1) and a second guide member (10, fig 1) for guiding the rolling shutter door between the open position and the closed position; and a barrel (6, fig 3) positioned between the guides for supporting the rolling shutter door, the barrel being configured to rotate and receive more of the rolling shutter door when said door is rolled to the open position (See fig 13). Regarding claim 38. The combination of Pierce and Kraeutler teaches all limitations of claim 37. Pierce further discloses the opening (2, fig 1) is defined by two opposing side walls, a top wall and an opposing bottom wall, and wherein the first guide member (8, fig 1) and the second guide member (10, fig 1) are positioned: (i) relative to the opposing side walls (See fig 1); or (ii) relative to the opposing top and bottom walls (See fig 1); to guide the rolling shutter door. Regarding claim 39. The combination of Pierce and Kraeutler teaches all limitations of claim 37. Pierce further discloses at least one of the first guide member (8, fig 1 and 12) and the second guide member (10, fig 1 and 10) comprises one or more guide sealing members (102 and 104, figs 10 and 12), wherein the one or more guide sealing members contact the rolling shutter door when in the closed position (See fig 3), and, wherein at least one of the first guide member and the second guide member comprises a reversibly attachable bracket (96, fig 12). Regarding claim 40. The combination of Pierce and Kraeutler teaches all limitations of claim 37. Pierce further discloses at least one of the first guide member (8, fig 1) and the second guide member (10, fig 1) comprises a cavity (inside of C-channel, see figs 10-12), and wherein the cavity is at least partially filled with an insulating material and/or an acoustically insulating material (102 and 104, figs 10 and 12; Column 6, lines 17-20; It should be noted that suitable sound deadening material such as wood strips 102 and 104 are secured to inner walls of flanges of channel 94 to engage surfaces of door 1.). Claim(s) 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Pierce and Kraeutler as applied to claim 26 above, and further in view of PG Pub. US 2021/0087874 A1 – Dawdy. Regarding claim 36. The combination of Pierce and Kraeutler teaches all limitations of claim 26. Pierce further discloses the rolling shutter door comprises a plurality of laths (15, fig 1), wherein one or more of the laths comprises a cavity (See cavity in back side of laths, fig 3). The combination does not teach the cavity is at least partially filled with an acoustically insulating material. However, Dawdy teaches the cavity is at least partially filled with an acoustically insulating material (64, fig 2; although Dawdy is primarily concerned with thermal insulation, thermally insulating materials will inherently have a degree of sound attenuating properties.). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Pierce and Kraeutler with the insulation of Dawdy. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to better insulate the sheet of the door. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 10/23/2025 have been considered but are moot in light of the new grounds of rejection, based on a reinterpretation of the previously applied art. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN W HANES JR whose telephone number is (571)272-8840. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at 571-270-5616. 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. /J.W.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3634 /DANIEL P CAHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 27, 2022
Application Filed
Aug 09, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 13, 2024
Response Filed
Apr 01, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jun 06, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 08, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 14, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 23, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 30, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594443
Safety System with Digital Tracking and Reporting and Method of Use
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590463
PRIVACY SHADE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12577832
A DOOR OPERATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571254
DOOR ASSEMBLY HAVING A SOFT BOTTOMED DOOR PANEL AND SYSTEM AND METHOD OF DRIVING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12565807
RESISTANCE REGULATING DEVICE FOR ROPE-FREE CURTAIN
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
47%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+38.9%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 108 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month