DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office Action is in response to the claims filed on 11/17/2025.
Status of Claims: Claims 1-8 and 12-25 are currently pending and have been examined below. Claim 7 has been withdrawn. Claims 9-11 and 26-27 have been canceled.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following feature(s) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Claims 1 and 6 - claim 1 recites “a second link of the plurality of links having an end pivotably coupled to the door bracket and at least one secondary link of the plurality of links having an end pivotably coupled to the vehicle body bracket”. According to figures 96-100, the underlined limitations above make the at least one secondary link as 1156 as it is the link coupled to the vehicle body bracket 1153 - thus the second link is 1157. This objection is set forth because claim 6 recites “wherein said at least one secondary link includes a pair of secondary links coupling the second link to the vehicle body bracket” and only 1157 shows a pair of links (see figure 99) which would make the secondary link as 1157 therefore contradicting claim 1. Also, links 1157 does not couple the second link 1156 to the vehicle bracket as required in claim 6. Note that this issue is also present in claims 14 and 16.
Note the despite this objection, examiner notes that the scope of the claims are clear since all links are generally coupled to one another in order for the mechanism to work.
Claim 17 - “the first linkage…comprises a second link having an end pivotably coupled to the first link” and “another of the plurality of links including at least one secondary link having an opposite end pivotably coupled to the single first link”. See notes on 112(b) below.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required 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. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In lines 5-6 of claim 14, “the door” seems that it is referring to the first door. If this interpretation is correct, please amend to --the first door--. Note that claim 14 recites two doors, however the scope of the claim is clear when read as a whole.
Appropriate correction is required. Above provides non-limiting examples, the applicant(s) must find and correct all issues similar to those discussed above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The 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.
Claims 17-20 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 17
Recitations such as “the first linkage…comprises a second link having an end pivotably coupled to the first link” on lines 19-22 render the claims indefinite. In light of the drawings (figures 96-100), this is unclear because the second link is connecting the front portion of the first door and the first link is connecting the rear portion of the first door such that the first link and second link are parallel to each other therefore the two links are not pivotably coupled to one another.
This rejection is also set forth to provide clarity whether applicant meant to recite --a second link having an end pivotably coupled to the first door-- similar to the other independent claims or is applicant attempting to set forth a broader interpretation of ‘pivotably coupled’ such that all the links are generally pivotably coupled to one another by way of other elements in between. For the rejection below, this was interpreted such that all links were pivotably coupled to one another via elements in between.
Recitations such as “another of the plurality of links including at least one secondary link having an opposite end pivotably coupled to the single first link” on lines 22-24 render the claims indefinite for similar reasons set forth above.
All claims depending from a rejected claim are rejected for including the 112 issues of the claim from which it depends. Above provides non-limiting examples, the applicant(s) must find and correct all issues similar to those discussed above.
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 1-6, 14-22, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lang et al. (US 6382705) (hereinafter “Lang”) in view of Schmidhuber (US 6030024).
Claim 1
(Lang discloses) A B-pillarless door linkage system (linkage device shown in figures 1-7; the system is designed for a B-pillarless vehicle; lines 45-48 of col. 4) for guiding a first door (44), having a forward portion (76) extending to a first forward edge (46) of the first door, of a motor vehicle (10) between an open position and a closed position relative to a vehicle body (12) and a second door (32) having a second rear edge (38), the door linkage system comprising:
a multi bar linkage (linkage shown in figure 7) connecting the first door to the vehicle body (figures 3-5F), the multi bar linkage being configured to move the first forward edge of the first door from the closed position initially in a lengthwise direction along the motor vehicle at a first distance (movement distance of 46 along the lengthwise direction shown in the initial phase of movement in figures 5A-5C) and simultaneously in a cross-vehicle direction away from the second rear edge of the second door at a second distance (movement distance of 46 away from the second rear edge 38 shown in figures 5A-5C; see simultaneous movement in figures 5A-5C), wherein the first distance is greater than the second distance (see lengthwise movement of 46 being greater than its cross-vehicle movement in figures 5A-5C; Annotated figure 5C below), and a rearward portion (48) of the first door initially in the substantially cross-vehicle direction away from the vehicle body at a third distance (movement distance of 48 away from the vehicle body 12 shown in figures 5A-5C), wherein the third distance is greater than the second distance (see 48 moved further away than 46 from the body 12; figures 5A-5C), and then during an intermediate stage of movement (figures 5C-5E), move the forward portion in the cross-vehicle direction away from the vehicle body and in the lengthwise direction and move the rearward portion substantially in the lengthwise direction toward the open position (figures 5C-5E), wherein the multi bar linkage has a vehicle body bracket (66) fixed to the vehicle body and a door bracket (68) fixed to the first door;
wherein the multi bar linkage includes a rear link assembly (Annotated figure 5C below) coupled between the rearward portion of the first door and the vehicle body and a front link assembly (Annotated figure 5C below) coupled between the forward portion of the first door and the vehicle body, wherein the rear link assembly comprises a first link (64) having an end pivotably coupled to the door bracket and an opposite end pivotably coupled to the vehicle body bracket (Annotated figure 5C below).
Lang does disclose the front link assembly comprises a second link (62) but fails to disclose the front link assembly comprises a plurality of links, with at least one secondary link of the plurality of links having an end pivotably coupled to the vehicle body bracket and an opposite end pivotably coupled to the second link of the plurality of links.
(However, Schmidhuber teaches) a front link assembly (8 and 9; Schmidhuber figures 1-2) comprises a plurality of links, with a second link (9) of the plurality of links having an end pivotably coupled to a door bracket (33) and at least one secondary link (8) of the plurality of links having an end pivotably coupled to a vehicle body bracket (7) and an opposite end pivotably coupled to the second link of the plurality of links (Schmidhuber figures 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the front link assembly of Lang with an additional link of Schmidhuber, with a reasonable expectation of success, to provide additional articulation for the front link assembly thus improving the rotatability of the door as it moves between the opened and closed positions. Furthermore, the additional articulation reduces any grinding, squeezing, or friction of the seals located between the first door and door frame thus reducing wear when the first door is moving between the opened and closed positions.
PNG
media_image1.png
426
678
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 5C
Claim 2
(Lang, as modified above, discloses) The B-pillarless door linkage system of Claim 1, wherein a final stage of movement of the first door to the open position (figures 5E-5F) includes moving at least one of the forward portion and the rearward portion in the cross-vehicle direction toward the vehicle body (see 48 moving towards the vehicle body in figures 5E-5F).
Claim 3
(Lang, as modified above, discloses) The B-pillarless door linkage system of Claim 1, wherein said first link is arranged for pivotal movement in substantially coplanar relation with said second link (figures 5A-5F).
Claim 4
(Lang, as modified above, discloses) The B-pillarless door linkage system of Claim 3.
Lang fails to disclose wherein the first link is generally L-shaped.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art is expected to routinely experiment with parameters so as to ascertain the optimum or workable ranges for a particular use. Accordingly, it would have been no more than an obvious matter of engineering design choice, as determined through routine experimentation and optimization, for one of ordinary skill to modify the shape of the first link such that it is generally L-shape, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the advantages of having the angle provided by the L-shape which optimizes the movement of the first link.
Claim 5
(Lang, as modified above, discloses) The B-pillarless door linkage system of Claim 4, wherein the second link is generally straight (figure 5A).
Claim 6
(Lang, as modified above, discloses) The B-pillarless door linkage system of Claim 3, wherein said at least one secondary link includes a pair of secondary links (the additional link 8 from Schmidhuber and link 102; note that this was interpreted such that the ‘pair of secondary links’ include the at least one secondary link) coupling the second link to the vehicle body bracket.
Claim 14
(Lang discloses) A B-pillarless door linkage system (linkage device shown in figures 1-7; the system is designed for a B-pillarless vehicle; lines 45-48 of col. 4) for guiding a first door (44) of a motor vehicle (10) between an open position and a closed position relative to a second door (32) and a vehicle body (12), the door linkage system comprising:
at least two linkages (62 and 64; figures 5A-5F) connecting the first door to the vehicle body (figures 5A-5F), the at least two linkages being configured to swing differently from one another while the door is moving during a final closing stage substantially in a longitudinal vehicle direction towards the closed position (5A-5F), and wherein the at least two linkages move a first edge (46) of a forward portion (76) of the first door from the closed position initially in a lengthwise direction away from the second door along the motor vehicle at a first distance (movement distance of 46 along the lengthwise direction shown in the initial phase of movement in figures 5A-5C and Annotated figure 5C above) and in simultaneously in a cross-vehicle direction at a second distance (movement distance of 46 away from the vehicle body 12 shown in figures 5A-5C and Annotated figure 5C above; see simultaneous movement in figures 5A-5C), wherein the first distance is greater than the second distance (see lengthwise movement of 46 being greater than its cross-vehicle movement in figures 5A-5C), and a rearward portion (48) of the first door initially in a substantially cross-vehicle direction away from the vehicle body at a distance (movement distance of 48 away from the vehicle body 12 shown in figures 5A-5C) greater than the second distance (see 48 moved further away than 46 from the body 12; figures 5A-5C), wherein the at least two linkages are pivotably fixed to the vehicle body and wherein the at least two linkages are pivotably fixed to the first door (figures 5A-5C); and
wherein the at least two linkages includes a rear link assembly (Annotated figure 5C above) coupled between the rearward portion of the first door and the vehicle body and a front link assembly (Annotated figure 5C above) coupled between the forward portion of the first door and the vehicle body, wherein the rear link assembly comprises a first link (64) having one end pivotably coupled to the first door and an opposite end pivotably coupled to the vehicle body (figures 5A-5F).
Lang does teach a second link (62) for the front link assembly but fails to disclose the front link assembly comprises a plurality of links, with a first of the plurality of links having an end pivotably coupled to the first door and another of the plurality of the links having an end pivotably coupled to the vehicle body and an opposite end pivotably coupled to the first of the plurality of links.
(However, Schmidhuber teaches) a front link assembly (8 and 9; Schmidhuber figures 1-2) comprises a plurality of links including a second link (9) having an end pivotably coupled to a first door (3) and at least one secondary link (8) having an end pivotably coupled to a vehicle body (1) and an opposite end pivotably coupled to the second link (Schmidhuber figures 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the front link assembly of Lang with an additional link of Schmidhuber, with a reasonable expectation of success, to provide additional articulation for the front link assembly thus improving the rotatability of the door as it moves between the opened and closed positions. Furthermore, the additional articulation reduces any grinding, squeezing, or friction of the seals located between the first door and door frame thus reducing wear when the first door is moving between the opened and closed positions.
Claim 15
(Lang, as modified above, discloses) The B-pillarless door linkage system of Claim 14, wherein the front link assembly and the rear link assembly are configured to move similarly to each other in generally coplanar relation during an intermediate closing stage prior to the final closing stage (figures 5C-5E).
Claim 16
(Lang, as modified above, discloses) The B-pillarless door linkage system of Claim 14, wherein the at least one secondary link includes two secondary links (the additional link 8 from Schmidhuber and link 102; note that this was interpreted such that the ‘two secondary links’ include the at least one secondary link) disposed on opposite sides of the second link from one another (note that the additional link 8 is disposed closer to the vehicle body and the link 102 is disposed closer to the first door thus they are opposite sides of the second link from one another).
Claim 17
(Lang discloses) A B-pillarless door linkage system (linkage device shown in figures 1-7; the system is designed for a B-pillarless vehicle; lines 45-48 of col. 4) for guiding a first door (44) of a motor vehicle (10) between an open position and a closed position relative to a second door (32) and a vehicle body (12), the door linkage system comprising:
a first linkage (62) connecting a front portion (76; figure 4) of the first door to the vehicle body and for controlling a motion of the front portion of the first door (figures 5A-5F);
a second linkage (64) connecting a rear portion (48) of the first door to the vehicle body and for controlling a motion of the rear portion of the first door (figures 5A-5F),
wherein the first linkage moves a front edge (46) of the front portion of the first door from the closed position initially in a lengthwise direction along the motor vehicle away from a rear edge (38) of the second door at a first distance (movement distance of 46 along the lengthwise direction shown in the initial phase of movement in figures 5A-5C; Annotated figure 5C above) and simultaneously in a cross-vehicle direction at a second distance (movement distance of 46 away from the vehicle body 12 shown in figures 5A-5C; simultaneous movement shown in Annotated figure 5C above), wherein the first distance is greater than the second distance (see lengthwise movement of 46 being greater than its cross-vehicle movement in figures 5A-5C), and the second linkage moves the rear portion of the first door initially in the substantially cross-vehicle direction away from the vehicle body at a distance (movement distance of 48 away from the vehicle body 12 shown in figures 5A-5C) greater than the second distance (see 48 moved further away than 46 from the body 12; figures 5A-5C), such that the first door is oriented in non-parallel relation with the vehicle body (figure 5C), wherein the first linkage and the second linkage are fixed for pivotal movement relative to the vehicle body and wherein the first linkage and the second linkage are fixed for pivotal movement relative to the first door (figures 5A-5F); and
wherein the second linkage comprises a single first link (64).
Lang does teach at least one link (62) for the first linkage but fails to disclose the first linkage comprises a plurality of links each arranged for pivotal movement, with one of the plurality of links including a second link having an end pivotably coupled to the first link and another of the plurality of links including at least one secondary link having an end pivotably coupled to the first door and an opposite end pivotably coupled to the single first link.
(However, Schmidhuber teaches) a first linkage (8 and 9; Schmidhuber figures 1-2) comprises a plurality of links (8 and 9) each arranged for pivotal movement (Schmidhuber figures 1-2), with one of the including a second link (9) having an end pivotably coupled to a first link (5; by way of other elements in between; note that this was interpreted as best understood by the examiner) and another of the plurality of links including at least one secondary link (8) having an end pivotably coupled to a first door (3; Schmidhuber figures 1-2) and an opposite end pivotably coupled to the single first link (5; by way of other elements in between).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the front link assembly of Lang with an additional link of Schmidhuber, with a reasonable expectation of success, to provide additional articulation for the front link assembly thus improving the rotatability of the door as it moves between the opened and closed positions. Furthermore, the additional articulation reduces any grinding, squeezing, or friction of the seals located between the first door and door frame thus reducing wear when the first door is moving between the opened and closed positions.
Claim 18
(Lang, as modified above, discloses) The B-pillarless door linkage of Claim 17, wherein as the first door moves between the closed position and the open position, the first linkage controls the motion of the front portion of the first door along a first path (path of 62) and the second linkage controls the motion of the rear portion of the first door along a second path (path of 64), wherein the first path is different from the second path (since 62 and 64 have different shape and length, thus they have different paths; figures 5A-5F).
Claim 19
(Lang, as modified above, discloses) The B-pillarless door linkage of Claim 18, wherein during a portion of the movement of the first door between the closed position and the open position (figures 5A-5C), the first path moves the front portion of the first door generally along the lengthwise direction of the vehicle while the second path concurrently moves the rear portion of the first door generally along the cross-vehicle direction of the vehicle (figures 5A-5C).
Claim 20
(Lang, as modified above, discloses) The B-pillarless door linkage of Claim 17, wherein the at least one secondary link includes a pair of secondary links (the additional link 8 from Schmidhuber and link 102; note that this was interpreted such that the ‘pair of secondary links’ include the at least one secondary link), with one secondary link (additional link 8) of the pair of secondary links pivotably coupled to one side of the second link (at the end of second link closer to the vehicle body) and the other secondary link (102) of the pair of secondary links pivotably coupled to an opposite side of the second link (at the end of second link closer to the first door; figure 7), wherein the single first link of the first linkage and the second link of the second linkage are configured to pivot in substantially coplanar relation with one another as the first door moves between the closed position and the open position (figures 5A-5F).
Claim 21
(Lang, as modified above, discloses) The B-pillarless door linkage system of Claim 1, wherein during the intermediate stage of movement (for this claim, the intermediate stage includes the movement of the first door shown in figures 5C-5F), the forward portion moves in the cross-vehicle direction away from the vehicle body at a distance greater than the second distance (figures 5A-5E) and the rearward portion moves in the cross-vehicle direction at a distance less than the second distance (in figures 5E-5F, rearward portion 48 is moving towards the body 12 which would be a negative movement distance thus it is less than the second distance which is interpreted as the positive movement distance).
Claim 22
(Lang, as modified above, discloses) The B-pillarless door linkage system of Claim 1, wherein during the multi bar linkage moving the first door initially in the lengthwise direction (figures 5A-5C), the one of the vehicle body and first door is in engagement with a seal (83; figure 5A).
Claim 24
(Lang, as modified above, discloses) The B-pillarless door linkage system of Claim 14, wherein during the at least two linkages moving the first door initially in the lengthwise direction (figures 5A-5C), the one of the vehicle body and first door is in engagement with a seal (83; figure 5A).
Claims 8 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lang in view of Schmidhuber, as applied to claims 1-6, 14-22, and 24 above, in view of Taylor et al. (US 10876341) (hereinafter “Taylor”).
Claim 8
(Lang, as modified above, discloses) The B-pillarless door linkage system of Claim 3.
Modified Lang fails to disclose further including an actuator assembly coupled to the first link to drive the first link between a closed position corresponding to the closed position of the first door and an open position corresponding to the open position of the first door.
(However, Taylor teaches) an actuator assembly (22; Taylor figures 1-4D) coupled to a first link (82) to drive the first link between a closed position corresponding to the closed position of a first door (14) and an open position corresponding to the open position of the first door (lines 63-67 of col. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the linkage system of modified Lang with the actuator assembly of Taylor, with a reasonable expectation of success, for automating the opening and closing of the door which assists the passengers by eliminating the need to manually open or close the door. Furthermore, it has been held that “providing an automatic means or mechanical means to replace a manual activity which accomplishes the same result” would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. (see MPEP 2144.04 III).
Claim 12
(Lang, as modified above, discloses) The B-pillarless door linkage system of Claim 1.
Modified Lang is silent regarding an obstacle detection system configured to prevent the first door from contacting an obstacle while moving between the closed and open positions.
(However, Taylor teaches) an obstacle detection system (148) configured to prevent a first door (14; Taylor figure 1) from contacting an obstacle while moving between a closed and open positions (par. 56).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to provide the door linkage system of modified Lang with the obstacle detection system of Taylor, with a reasonable expectation of success, to prevent accidents such as hitting an obstacle or a person thus preventing damages to the door or hurting the person.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lang in view of Schmidhuber in view of Taylor, as applied in claims 1-6, 14-22, and 24 above, in further view of Sesselmann (US 7061150).
Claim 13
(Lang, as modified above, discloses) The B-pillarless door linkage system of Claim 12.
Modified Lang fails to disclose wherein the obstacle detection system is configured to straighten a wheel prior to moving the first door between the open and closed positions.
(However, Sesselman teaches) a system that is configured to control a wheel (lines 14-22 of col. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to configure the obstacle detection system of modified Lang such that it has the capability to adjust the wheel based on predetermined parameters as taught by Sesselman, with a reasonable expectation of success, to control the orientation of the tires via the wheel such that they are straightened therefore significantly reducing the chances of them getting hit or punctured.
(Lang, as modified above, discloses) wherein the obstacle detection system is configured to straighten a wheel prior to moving the first door between the open and closed positions (this is taught via the modification above).
Claims 23 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lang in view of Schmidhuber, as applied to claims 1-6, 14-22, and 24 above, in view of Heuel et al. (US 7765740) (hereinafter “Heuel”).
Claim 23
(Lang, as modified above, discloses) The B-pillarless door linkage system of Claim 1.
Modified Lang fails to disclose during the multi bar linkage initially moving the first door, the first door is engaged with a latching arrangement.
(However, Heuel teaches) during a multi bar linkage (7 and 11) initially moving a first door (35), the first door is engaged with a latching arrangement (15 and 16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the vehicle of modified Lang with the latching arrangement such that the first door is engaged with the latching arrangement as taught by Heuel, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the obvious and predictable benefit of securing the first door when it is in the closed position.
Claim 25
(Lang, as modified above, discloses) The B-pillarless door linkage system of Claim 14.
Modified Lang wherein during the at least two linkages initially moving the first door, the first door is engaged with a latching arrangement.
(However, Heuel teaches) during at least two linkages (7 and 11) initially moving a first door (35), the first door is engaged with a latching arrangement (15 and 16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the vehicle of modified Lang with the latching arrangement such that the first door is engaged with the latching arrangement as taught by Heuel, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the obvious and predictable benefit of securing the first door when it is in the closed position.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments directed to the drawing objections have been considered and the objections were withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed on 11/17/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to “Further, Schmidhuber teaches a complex linkage mechanism…Accordingly, a person possessing ordinary skill in the art (POSA) would not look from the complex linkage mechanism of Schmidhuber, which merely teaches a complex linkage mechanism including 4 interlinked levers to modify the simplistic linkage of Lang including first and second links 62, 64 to arrive at Applicant's claimed multi bar linkage” (page 5 of the Remarks section), examiner notes that ‘complex’ is a relative standard to one of the ordinary skill in the art and also relative to one’s knowledge. Examiner notes that merely adding additional links for the sake improving the rotatability and articulation of the links and the first door does not make a mechanism complex.
Examiner also notes that applicant's own linkage mechanism includes 4 interlinked levers (1153, 1156, and a pair of 1157) hence applicant’s notion of a complex linkage mechanism including 4 interlinked levers does not hold true since it is much more common that applicant believes.
Regarding “To suggest otherwise would require nothing short of impermissible hindsight in direct view of Applicant's disclosure”, in response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 PATRICK B PONCIANO whose telephone number is (571)272-9910. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30-4:00.
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, 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.
/PATRICK B. PONCIANO/Examiner, Art Unit 3634
/DANIEL P CAHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634