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 03/30/2026.
Status of Claims: Claims 1-6, 8, and 10 are currently pending and have been examined below. Claims 7 and 9 have been cancelled.
Claim Interpretation
In lines 1-2 of claim 5, “wherein the door seal connecting means has a first lever arm” questions the clarity of the claim since claim 4, to which claim 5 depends from, recites the door seal connecting means is already configured in the shape of an arm. Therefore the recitation in claim 5 could be referring to a new lever arm or to the same arm as the pivot arm of claim 4. Examiner takes the position that, when claims 4 and 5 are read as a whole, the first lever arm was interpreted as the same arm as the pivot arm. Similar interpretation was applied for the ‘second lever arm’ in claim 5.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-6, 8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1
Recitations such as “wherein the door seal moves in total, relative to the door leaf, in the vehicle transverse direction, without swiveling” on lines 23-25 of claim 1 discloses new matter. The current specification does not explicitly disclose the limitations above therefore examiner relies on the drawings and the broadest reasonable interpretation of the limitations. Per the definition of ‘swivel’ (see below), the door seal rotates or swivels via the rotary column and the door seal connecting means 6. Additionally, the original disclosure discloses the connecting means 6, to which the door seal is connected, is ‘configured in the form of pivot arms’ such that the door seal movement is performed via the swiveling of the rotary column 7 and door seal connecting means 6 (Page 8 of applicant’s disclosure below). Therefore, with the reasons above, examiner finds the limitation lacks sufficient support and they disclose new matter.
PNG
media_image1.png
208
730
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Source: https://www.thefreedictionary.com/swivel
PNG
media_image2.png
163
619
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Page 8 of applicant’s disclosure
Recitations such as “the door seal only moves in the vehicle transverse direction” on line 27 of claim 1 discloses new matter. This is rejected under 112(a) because this requires the door seal to ONLY move in the transverse direction Q. However, this is not true because the door seal also slides via the rollers 9 which moves the door seal in a direction NOT the vehicle transverse direction.
Examiner notes that the recitation "a door seal movement and is moved relative to the door leaf only in the vehicle transverse direction" on lines 11-12 of claim 1 is not rejected with new matter issues because the 'only in the vehicle transverse direction' was interpreted to apply to the recitation "relative to the door leaf" which has a narrower scope than the rejection limitations above.
Examiner importantly points out lines 23-24 of claim 1 as they recite “wherein the door seal moves in total, relative to the door leaf” which the rejected limitations could also be referring to similar to the not rejected limitations on lines 11-12 above. If the rejected limitations do refer to the movement of the door seal relative to the door leaf (e.g., the door seal only moves in the vehicle transverse direction relative to the door leaf), this should be clearly recited in the claim and this rejection will be withdrawn.
All claims depending from a rejected claim are rejected for including the 112 issues of the claim from which it depends.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) 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.
Claims 1-6, 8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Teufl et al. (DE 202016101709) (hereinafter “Teufl”).
Claim 1
(Teufl discloses) A door system (figures 1-6), in particular a pivot sliding door system (see pivoting mechanism in figures 5-6), for a public transport vehicle (the invention is directed to a transport vehicle, see in the “state of the art” section on page 2), comprising:
a door leaf (1; figures 1-4), configured to be moved from a closed position (figures 1-2) towards an opened position (figures 3-4) and from the opened position to the closed position while carrying out a door leaf movement (door leaf movement shown in figures 1 and 3), wherein the door leaf, when carrying out the door leaf movement, is moved in a vehicle transverse direction (horizontal transverse direction; see door leaf moved in the horizontal transverse direction in figures 1 and 3); and
a door seal (11), which is disposed underneath a lower edge (10) of the door leaf delimiting the door leaf towards a bottom (figures 1 and 3), and extends along the lower edge (see figures 2 and 4 showing the seal along the lower edge), wherein the door seal is actively movable (see door seal actively moving in figures 1-4) and movably supported on a sliding fit member (17), and is arranged such that the door seal, when the door leaf movement is carried out, undergoes a door seal movement (see the rotating movement of the door seal at axis 13 shown in figures 1 and 3) and is moved relative to the door leaf only in the vehicle transverse direction (figures 1 and 3 showing the relative movement of the door seal from the door leaf in the horizontal transverse direction);
wherein the door leaf and the door seal are arranged such that in the closed position of the door leaf (figure 1), the door leaf and the door seal are both arranged at an external shell (2; figure 1) of the vehicle and the door leaf and the door seal are arranged such that a distance the door seal moves in the vehicle transverse direction is less than a distance the door leaf moves in the vehicle transverse direction (Annotated figure 3 below; as a note, both distances in Annotated figure 3 below were respectively measured from the lowest points of the door leaf and door seal), such that in the opened position of the door leaf, a distance between the lower edge (10) of the door leaf and an upper edge of the door seal is increased in the vehicle transverse direction (Partial Annotated figures 1 and 3 below),
wherein the door seal moves relative to the door leaf (figures 1 and 3; since the door seal rotates at axis 13 while the door leaf does not, Teufl discloses a movement of the door seal relative to the door leaf), the door seal is extended a first distance from the external shell and the door leaf is extended a second distance from the external shell (Annotated figure 3 below; both first distance and second distance were measured from the external shell 2), whereby the first distance is less than the second distance when both the door leaf and the door seal are fully extended (Annotated figure 3 below),
wherein the door seal moves in total, relative to the door leaf, in the vehicle transverse direction (as noted above, the rotation of the door seal at axis 13 discloses a movement of the door seal relative to the door leaf), without swiveling or moving in the vertical direction (see movement of the door seal towards the vertical direction via the pivoting movement at axis 13 in Partial Annotated figures 1 and 3 below; this was interpreted as an “or” clause such that only one of the two options were required to be taught by the prior art), such that the door seal is decoupled from the door leaf movement in the vehicle transverse direction (Annotated figure 3 below; note that “decoupled” was defined as -- To separate or detach -- such that the rotation of the door seal leads to its separation from the farther movement of the door leaf in the vehicle transverse direction) and the door seal only moves in the vehicle transverse direction (due to the new matter issue above, this was interpreted as best understood by the examiner as one of the many steps of opening door seal and in the step shown in figures 3-4, the door seal are only moved in the vehicle transverse direction).
PNG
media_image3.png
520
866
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 3
PNG
media_image4.png
522
881
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Partial Annotated figures 1 and 3
PNG
media_image5.png
137
750
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Source: American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. Copyright © 2016 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.
Claim 2
(Teufl discloses) The door system according to claim 1, wherein the door seal comprises a sealing lip (figure 3).
Claim 3
(Teufl discloses) The door system according to claim 1, wherein the door leaf is connected via a door leaf connecting means (Annotated figure 3 (II) below) with a rotary device (4), and the door seal is connected via a door seal connecting means (Annotated figure 3 (II) below) with the rotary device (4), wherein the rotary device is associated with the door system (figures 1-6).
PNG
media_image6.png
439
678
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 3 (II)
Claim 4
(Teufl discloses) The door system according to claim 3, wherein the door leaf connecting means and the door seal connecting means are configured in the shape of pivot arms (Annotated figure 3 (II) above), wherein a first pivot arm end of each respective connecting means is connected to the rotary device (Annotated figure 3 (II) above), and wherein at least one guide means (14 and 16) is guided in a guiding profile (15 and 18; figures 1 and 3) respectively disposed on the door leaf and the door seal (Annotated figure 3 (II) above; both door leaf and door seal have their own respective guide means and guiding profiles similar to applicant’s invention), is disposed on a second pivot arm end opposite the first pivot arm end (see 14 and 16 disposed on the second pivot arm end of both respective connecting means in Annotated figure 3 (II) above).
Claim 5
(Teufl discloses) The door system according to claim 4, wherein the door seal connecting means has a first lever arm (Annotated figure 3 (II) above showing the connecting means of the door seal as a lever arm), and that the door leaf connecting means has a second lever arm (6), wherein the first lever arm is smaller than the second lever arm (Annotated figure 3 (II) above and figure 2).
Claim 6
(Teufl discloses) The door system according to claim 1, wherein the door leaf is connected through a door leaf connecting means (15) with a first rotary device (14), and the door seal is connected through a door seal connecting means (18) with a second rotary device (16), wherein separate drive units (4 and 23, respectively; note that “drive unit” are extremely broad and they are interpreted as parts that provides movement) are assigned to the respective first and second rotary devices.
Claim 8
(Teufl discloses) The door system according to claim 1, wherein the door leaf is connected via a door leaf connecting component (15) with a first rotary device (14) corresponding to a first drive unit (4), and the door seal is connected via a door seal connecting component (18) with a second rotary device (16) corresponding to a second drive unit (23), the second drive unit being different from the first drive unit (4 and 23).
Claim 10
(Teufl discloses) The door system according to claim 1, wherein the door leaf is connected via a door leaf connecting means (Annotated figure 3 (II) above) with a rotary device (4) associated with the door system, and the door leaf connecting means has a first lever arm (arm 6), wherein the door seal is connected via a door seal connecting means (Annotated figure 3 (II) above) with the rotary device and the door seal connecting means has a second lever arm (arm of the door seal connecting means in Annotated figure 3 (II) above), wherein the second lever arm is smaller than the first lever arm (Annotated figure 3 (II) above).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments to the claim objections were considered.
Applicant's arguments filed on 03/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The response below are directed to applicant’s arguments set forth on pages 5-10 of the Remarks section.
Regarding the 112(a) arguments, note the claims recite "the door seal only moves in the vehicle transverse direction" and the spec defines the transverse direction as the direction along the Q direction (see page 10 and shown in figures 5-6).
Although it is true that door seal moves in the transverse direction, it is not the only movement direction of the door seal. The new matter issue is set forth because the door seal also moves along a perpendicular direction (from Q) via the rollers 9 therefore the recitation "the door seal only moves in the vehicle transverse direction" in claim 1 is not true. See note in the 112(a) rejection above.
Applicant also quoted page 8 of the substitute specification, the quoted disclosure only provides support to the pivot arms but not the guide rollers. Examiner even points out that the quoted disclosure discloses the rolling of the guide rollers 8 and 9 along their respective guiding profiles 10 and 11 which supports with the new matter rejection that the door seal moves in another direction other than the vehicle transverse direction.
Regarding “Applicant respectfully asserts that swiveling (Teufl) and a horizontal movement (claimed invention) of a door seal are not synonymous. As Applicant has shown, all movement of the claimed door seal is in a horizontal direction relatively to the door leaf. The claims are amended to negate other types of movement” and the arguments under the 102 rejection, this was found unpersuasive because applicant's door seal movement is also done via swiveling (via connecting means 6 and rotary device 7). Additionally, the claims recite “without swiveling or moving in the vertical direction” which clearly recites options or at least two types of movements of the door seal which was anticipated in the rejection above.
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
Prosecution Insights