Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/122,331

Elevator Button Bezel Assembly

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Mar 16, 2023
Examiner
GLASS, ERICK DAVID
Art Unit
2846
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allow Rate
626 granted / 700 resolved
+21.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+7.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
723
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
39.0%
-1.0% vs TC avg
§102
46.1%
+6.1% vs TC avg
§112
12.1%
-27.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 700 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Claim Objections Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 6, line 8, applicant claims “a control panel”, that been previously stated twice before. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claim 6 is 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 6 is same apparatus claim as claim 1, trying to be put in method form but no clear method of use is actually being described. 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) 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muo (PGPUB 2009/0218207). With respect to claim 1, Mou teaches an elevator button bezel assembly for inhibiting an emergency call button in an elevator from being inadvertently engaged, said assembly comprising: an call button (fig. 2, 24) being integrated into a control panel (paragraph 0033; 22 body of panel) of an elevator wherein said call button is configured to be engaged by a user (paragraph 0026; easily engaged by user) in the event; and a bezel (fig. 2, 10) being positioned around said call button, said bezel having a depth being greater than a thickness of (fig. 2; depth is greater than 10 thickness) said call button such that said bezel extends outwardly beyond said call button (fig. 2, 10 sticks out further than button) wherein said bezel is configured to inhibit the user from inadvertently engaging (paragraph 0026; protected from accidental engagement) said call button by bumping against said call button. Mou does not teach an elevator, and button for an emergency. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have an emergency button in elevator, as its well known in art. It has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be used solely for an emergency in elevator, employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987). With respect to claim 2, Mou teaches said emergency call button is integrated into a forward surface (fig. 2, top is forward) of a mounting panel (fig. 2, 30), said mounting panel being positioned behind said control panel such that said emergency call button extends outwardly through an opening (fig. 2, hole thru 22) in said control panel; said bezel comprises a bezel panel (fig. 3, 14) having a front surface (fig. 3, top of 14) and a back surface (fig. 3, bottom of 14), said bezel panel having an opening (fig. 3, hole thru 14) extending through said front surface and said back surface, said opening being centrally positioned on said bezel panel, said back surface of said bezel panel being positioned against a forward side of said mounting panel associated with said emergency call button such that said bezel panel is positioned between said mounting panel and a back side (fig. 2, bottom of 22) of said control panel; and said emergency call button (fig. 2, button extends thru hole thru 22 for parts of button to be above and below) extends through said opening in said bezel panel. With respect to claim 3, Mou teaches wherein said bezel includes an annular ring (fig. 3, 26) having a rear edge (bottom edge of 26) and a forward edge (fig. 3, top part of 26), said rear edge being bonded to (fig. 3, 26 seals onto 14) said front surface of said bezel panel having said annular ring surrounding said opening in said bezel panel such that said annular ring surrounds said emergency call button (fig. 3, 26 surrounds 24). With respect to claim 4, Mou teaches wherein: said emergency call button is integrated into a forward surface of a mounting panel; and said bezel comprises: a bezel panel (fig. 3, 14) having a front surface (fig. 3, top of 14) and a back surface (fig. 3, bottom of 14), said bezel panel having an opening extending (fig. 3, hole thru 14) said front surface and said back surface, said opening being centrally positioned on said bezel panel, said emergency call button extending through said opening; and an annular ring (fig. 3, 26) having a rear edge (bottom edge of 26) and a forward edge (fig. 3, top part of 26), said rear edge being bonded to said front surface of said bezel panel having said annular ring surrounding said opening in said bezel panel such that said annular ring surrounds said emergency call button (fig. 3, 26 surrounds 24), a distance between said rear edge and said forward edge being greater than a thickness of said emergency call button such that said forward edge is spaced outwardly beyond an exposed surface of said emergency call button. With respect to claim 5, Mou teaches an elevator button bezel assembly for inhibiting an emergency call button in an elevator from being inadvertently engaged, said assembly comprising: an call button (fig. 2, 24) being integrated into a control panel (paragraph 0033; 22 body of panel) of an elevator wherein said emergency call button is configured to be engaged by a user (paragraph 0026; easily engaged by user) in the event of an emergency, said emergency call button being integrated into a forward surface (fig. 2, top of 22 would be forward) of a mounting panel, said mounting panel being positioned behind said control panel such that said call button extends outwardly through an opening (fig. 2, hole thru 22 for parts of button to be above and below) in said control panel; and a bezel (fig. 2, 10) being positioned around said call button, said bezel having a depth being greater than a thickness of (fig. 2; depth is greater than thickness) said call button such that said bezel extends outwardly beyond said emergency call button wherein said bezel is configured to inhibit (paragraph 0026; protected from accidental engagement) the user from inadvertently engaging said emergency call button by bumping against said emergency call button, said bezel comprising: a bezel panel (fig. 3, 14) having a front surface (fig. 3, top of 14) and a back surface (fig. 3, bottom of 14), said bezel panel having an opening extending (fig. 3, hole thru 14) through said front surface and said back surface, said opening being centrally positioned on said bezel panel, said back surface of said bezel panel being positioned against said forward surface of said mounting panel associated with said call button such that said bezel panel is positioned between said mounting panel and a back side (fig. 2, bottom of 22) of said control panel, said emergency call button extending through (fig. 2, button extends thru hole thru 22 for parts of button to be above and below) said opening in said bezel panel; and an annular ring (fig. 3, 26) having a rear edge (bottom edge of 26) and a forward edge (fig. 3, top part of 26), said rear edge being bonded to said front surface of said bezel panel having said annular ring surrounding said opening in said bezel panel such that said annular ring surrounds said emergency call button (fig. 3, 26 surrounds 24), a distance between said rear edge and said forward edge being greater than a thickness of said emergency call button such that said forward edge is spaced outwardly beyond (fig. 2, 10 sticks out further than button) an exposed surface of said emergency call button. Muo does not teach an elevator in event of emergency. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have an emergency button in elevator, as its well known in art. It has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be used solely for an emergency in elevator, employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987). With respect to claim 6, Muo teaches a method of inhibiting an emergency call button in an elevator from being inadvertently engaged, the steps of said method comprising: having a control panel (paragraph 0033; 22 body of panel) and an call button (fig. 2, 24) extending through said control panel; providing a bezel (fig. 2; 10) comprising a bezel panel (fig. 3, 14) and an annular ring (fig. 3, 26) extending away from said bezel panel, said annular ring having a depth being greater than a thickness (fig. 2; depth is greater than thickness) of said call button; and installing said bezel panel behind the control panel in said elevator such that annular ring surrounds (fig. 3, 10 surrounds button 24) said all button having said annular ring extending outwardly beyond an exposed surface (fig. 2, 10 sticks out further than button) of said emergency call button thereby inhibiting (paragraph 0026; protected from accidental engagement) said emergency call button from being inadvertently engaged. Muo does not teach an elevator in event of emergency. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have an emergency button in elevator, as its well known in art. It has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be used solely for an emergency in elevator, employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERICK DAVID GLASS whose telephone number is (571)272-8395. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri_8-5pm. 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, Eduardo Colon-Santana can be reached at 571-272-2060. 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. /ERICK D GLASS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2846
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 16, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12580504
CURRENT BASED RESONANT FREQUENCY TRACKING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573973
SALIENCY TRACKING FOR BRUSHLESS DC MOTORS AND OTHER PERMANENT MAGNET SYNCHRONOUS MOTORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12559343
EMERGENCY TERMINAL DECELERATION IN ELEVATOR SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12552647
HOIST APPARATUS COMPRISING A MONITORING DEVICE AND MANAGEMENT SYSTEM USING THE HOIST APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12556114
METHOD FOR CONTROLLING AN OPERATING DEVICE COMPRISING A MASTER ACTUATOR AND A SLAVE ACTUATOR AND ASSOCIATED HOME AUTOMATION SHADING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
89%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+7.0%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 700 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month