Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/690,846

BIFOLD DOOR FOR MOVEABLE WALL SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 09, 2022
Examiner
SHABLACK, JOHNNIE A
Art Unit
3634
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Hni Technologies Inc.
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% of resolved cases
65%
Career Allow Rate
648 granted / 1000 resolved
+12.8% vs TC avg
Strong +35% interview lift
Without
With
+34.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
1029
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
40.4%
+0.4% vs TC avg
§102
24.1%
-15.9% vs TC avg
§112
27.4%
-12.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1000 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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submissions filed on January 7, 2026 and February 9, 2026 have been entered. Claims 1 and 15 have been amended. Claim 33 has been added. Claims 1-3, 5-9, 11, 13-20, 22, 24-33 are pending and addressed below. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. New grounds of rejection have been made in view of newly cited references to address the amended claims. Claim Objections Claim 15 is objected to for minor informalities: Claim 15 has a typo “a plurality of second leaf portion” should read --a plurality of second leaf portions--. Claim 15 recites “a first plurality of hinges spaced apart vertically along the second side portion coupling the second leaf and the second side of the door frame” which should read --a first plurality of hinges spaced apart vertically along the second side portion coupling the first leaf and the second side of the door frame” to maintain consistency with the understanding of the invention. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claims 1-3, 5-9, 11, 26, 27, and 30-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D’Ercole (US 3,494,408) in view of Adderton (US 2011/0079762). Regarding claim 1, D’Ercole discloses a bifold door for a modular wall panel system, the bifold door comprising: a door frame having a first side (12), a second side (11), and a top (10) (Fig 1); a first side portion (left side of 14 shown in Fig 1 adjacent 12) configured to strike the first side (12) of the door frame when the bifold door is in a closed configuration (Fig 1), a second side portion (right side of 13 shown in Fig 1 adjacent 11), a first leaf (13) rotating about a first axis of rotation (axis of 16), a second leaf (14), a top portion (top of 13 and 14) extending between the first side portion and the second side portion (Fig 1); a sliding door hardware (Fig 4) coupled to the top portion and the top of the door frame such that the bifold door is supported from the top of the door frame (Fig 1), the sliding door hardware being configured to translate the bifold door within the door frame such that in the closed configuration the bifold door extends between and engages the first and second sides of the door frame (Figs 5-6), the sliding door hardware including a roller hardware (29) rotating about an axis; a first plurality of hinges (16) spaced apart vertically along the second side portion coupling the second leaf and the second side of the door frame; and a second plurality of hinges (15) spaced apart vertically between the first leaf and the second leaf operably coupling a first end of the first leaf to a first end of the second leaf, the second plurality of hinges (15) configured to rotate the first leaf and the second leaf apart (Fig 6) between an open configuration and the closed configuration (Figs 1, 5, and 6), each of the second plurality of hinges (15) have a first leaf portion and a second leaf portion in the form of a pair of flat plates connected to the first end of the first and second leaves, respectively (D’Ercole discloses that the hinges are butt hinges, col 3, lines 17-18). D’Ercole fails to disclose the sliding door hardware including a roller hardware (29) rotating about a second axis of rotation, wherein the first axis of rotation and the second axis of rotation are angularly offset. However, Adderton teaches that it is known for a bifold door having sliding door hardware to include a roller hardware (62) rotating about a second axis of rotation (62’) that is angularly offset from a first axis of rotation (41’). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify D’Ercole such that the roller hardware is oriented at an angle, as taught by Adderton, since it is a known arrangement for equivalently guiding a bifold door. The claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art. Regarding claim 2, modified D’Ercole discloses wherein the second plurality of hinges are configured to lessen a gap between the first leaf and the second leaf when the bifold door is in the closed configuration (Figs 5 and 6)). Regarding claim 3, modified D’Ercole discloses wherein the second plurality of hinges are configured to lessen acoustic transmission through the bifold door by lessening a gap between the first leaf and the second leaf (by lessening a gap the leaves are closer together and reduce noise/acoustic transmission). Regarding claim 5, modified D’Ercole discloses wherein the second plurality of hinges are arranged between the first leaf and the second leaf when the bifold door is in the closed configuration (Fig 1). Regarding claim 6, modified D’Ercole discloses wherein the second plurality of hinges are hidden between the first leaf and the second leaf when viewed from at least one side of the bifold door in the closed configuration (Fig 5). Regarding claim 7, modified D’Ercole discloses wherein the first plurality of hinges and the second plurality of hinges are configured to increase rigidity of the bifold door by stabilizing the bifold door (the hinges are rigid and support the door and therefore stabilize the door). Regarding claim 8, modified D’Ercole discloses wherein the first plurality of hinges and the second plurality of hinges are configured to lessen acoustic transmission through the bifold door by creating contact between the first leaf and the door frame (Fig 1). Regarding claim 9, modified D’Ercole discloses wherein the sliding door hardware is coupled to the top portion adjacent to the first side portion (Fig 1). Regarding claim 11, modified D’Ercole discloses wherein the sliding door hardware translates within a channel on the door frame and the channel includes a stop such that the sliding door hardware does not translate out of the channel (Figs 1, 2, 5 and 6). Regarding claim 26, modified D’Ercole in view of Adderton teaches wherein the first axis of rotation and the second axis of rotation are substantially orthogonal (Fig 3 of Adderton). Regarding claim 27, modified D’Ercole in view of Adderton teaches wherein the roller hardware is mounted on a horizontal axis (62’ shown in Fig 3 of Adderton). Regarding claim 30, modified D’Ercole discloses wherein the first plurality of hinges (16) is spaced from a top and bottom side portion (Fig 1). Regarding claim 31, modified D’Ercole discloses wherein the sliding door hardware is configured to translate the bifold door within the door frame from the closed configuration having a fully expanded position (Fig 1) to an open configuration having a fully folded position (Fig 5). Regarding claim 32, modified D’Ercole discloses wherein the roller hardware, as modified with the roller hardware of Adderton discussed above, translates along an axis of translation along the top portion and between the side portions, and wherein the first leaf and second leaf are angularly offset with the axis of translation when the bifold door is in the fully folded position (Fig 5 of D’Ercole). Regarding claim 33, modified D’Ercole discloses wherein in the closed configuration, the second plurality of hinges are arranged between the first end of the first leaf and the first end of the second leaf and are hidden between the first and second leaves (Figs 1, 5, and 6). Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D’Ercole and Adderton as applied in claim 1 above, in further view of Long (EP 3 122 979). Regarding claims 13 and 14, D’Ercole fails to disclose a rounded edge and a gasket. However, Long teaches that it is known for a first side portion of a door leaf to have a rounded edge (Figs 5- 5A) for engaging a frame and a gasket between the frame and door leaf. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify D’Ercole such that the first side portion has a rounded edge, since it is a known technique, as taught by Long, for providing an engaging edge and seal between a door and frame. D’Ercole would be provided with a rounded edge at the first side portion in order to provide an improved seal in the manner taught by Long. As modified, Long teaches the rounded edge of the first side portion is configured to contact and rotate about a curved gasket arranged with the door frame. Claims 15-21, 24, 25, 28, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D’Ercole in view of Adderton and Long. Regarding claims 15, 24, and 25, D’Ercole discloses a modular wall panel system comprising: a door frame for use with the modular wall panel system, the door frame having a first side (12), a second side (11), and a top (10) (Fig 1); a bifold door including a first side portion (left side of 14) configured to strike the first side of the door frame when the bifold door is in a closed configuration (Fig 1), a second side portion (right side of 13) configured to engage the second side of the door frame (Fig 1), a first leaf (13) rotating about a first axis of rotation (about axis of 16), a second leaf (14), a top portion extending between the first side portion and the second side portion (top of leaves); a sliding door hardware (Fig 4) coupled to the top portion of the panel and the top of the door frame, the sliding door hardware being configured to translate the bifold door within the door frame such that in the closed configuration the bifold door engages the first and second side of the door frame (Fig 1), the sliding door hardware including a roller hardware (Fig 4) rotating about a second axis of rotation, a first plurality of hinges (16) spaced apart vertically along the second side portion (right side of 13) coupling the first leaf (13) and the second side (11) of the door frame, and configured to facilitate contact between the second side portion and the second side (11) of the door frame; and a second plurality of hinges (15) spaced apart vertically between the first leaf (13) and the second leaf (14) operably coupling a first end the first leaf and a first end of the second leaf and configured to lessen a gap between the first leaf and the second leaf in the closed configuration and rotate the first leaf and the second leaf apart in transitioning between an open configuration and the closed configuration (Figs 1, 5, and 6), the second plurality of hinges (15) having a plurality of first leaf portions and a plurality of second leaf portions, wherein the plurality of first and second leaf portions are flat plates (butt hinges) connected to the first end of the first and second leaves, respectively. D'Ercole fails to disclose wherein the first axis of rotation and the second axis of rotation are angularly offset. However, Adderton teaches that it is known for a bifold door having sliding door hardware to include a roller hardware (62) rotating about a second axis of rotation (62’) that is angularly offset from a first axis of rotation (41’). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify D’Ercole such that the roller hardware is oriented at an angle, as taught by Adderton, since it is a known arrangement for equivalently guiding a bifold door. The claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art. D’Ercole fails to disclose a gasket arranged with the first side of the door frame configured to contact the first side portion of the bifold door in the closed configuration. However, Long teaches that it is known for a first side portion of a door leaf to have a rounded edge (Figs 5- 5A) for engaging a frame and a gasket between the frame and door leaf. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify D’Ercole such that the first side portion has a rounded edge, since it is a known technique, as taught by Long, for providing an engaging edge and seal between a door and frame. D’Ercole would be provided with a rounded edge at the first side portion in order to provide an improved seal in the manner taught by Long. As modified, D’Ercole is provided with teaches a gasket in the manner taught by Long arranged with the first side of the door frame configured to contact the first side portion of the bifold door in the closed configuration and the rounded edge of the first side portion is configured to contact and rotate about a curved gasket arranged with the door frame. Regarding claim 16, modified D’Ercole discloses wherein the second plurality of hinges (15) are arranged to be hidden between the first leaf and the second leaf when viewed from at least one side of the bifold door in the closed configuration (Figs 1, 5, and 6). Regarding claim 17, modified D’Ercole discloses wherein the second plurality of hinges (15) are configured to lessen acoustic transmission through the bifold door by lessening the gap between the first leaf and the second leaf (by lessening a gap the leaves are closer together and reduce noise/acoustic transmission). Regarding claim 18, modified D’Ercole discloses wherein the first plurality of hinges and the second plurality of hinges are configured to increase rigidity of the bifold door by stabilizing the bifold door (the hinges are rigid and support the door and therefore stabilize the door). Regarding claim 19, modified D’Ercole discloses wherein the first plurality of hinges and the second plurality of hinges are configured to lessen acoustic transmission through the bifold door by creating contact between the first leaf and the door frame (Fig 1). Regarding claim 20, modified D’Ercole discloses wherein the sliding door hardware is coupled to the top portion adjacent to the first side portion (Fig 4). Regarding claim 21, modified D’Ercole discloses wherein the sliding door hardware translates within a channel on the door frame, and the channel includes a stop such that the sliding door hardware does not translate out of the channel (Figs 1-4). Regarding claim 28, modified D’Ercole in view of Adderton teaches wherein the first axis of rotation and the second axis of rotation are substantially orthogonal (Fig 3 of Adderton). Regarding claim 29, modified D’Ercole in view of Adderton teaches wherein the roller hardware is mounted on a horizontal axis (62’ shown in Fig 3 of Adderton). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Johnnie A. Shablack whose telephone number is (571)270-5344. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 6am-3pm EST, alternate Friday. 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. /Johnnie A. Shablack/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 09, 2022
Application Filed
Oct 07, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 09, 2025
Response Filed
Apr 21, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jun 05, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jun 05, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jul 11, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 15, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 21, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 05, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 07, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 09, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 01, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12584350
Light-adjustable shade
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12571252
VALANCE ASSEMBLY AND RELATED COVERINGS FOR AN ARCHITECTURAL STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12571253
WIRING STRUCTURE OF TENSION MEMBER IN SCREEN APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12571248
Segmented Closure System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12565745
ARTICULATING EXPANDABLE BARRIER
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
65%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+34.7%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1000 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