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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 2 and 4-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2014/0260445 to Vellani, in view of U.S. Patent Number 688,747 to McMillen, in further view of U.S. Patent Number 3,996,774 to Best.
Vellani teach a hasp (200) for coupling an opening with a first side (224) and a second side (220), where the first side is secured to the second side with a hidden shackle padlock(128) , the hasp comprising: a first securing plate (212) for securing the hasp to the first side of the opening to be secured; a second securing plate (208) coupled to the second side of the hinge, the second securing plate comprising a front side and a rear side, the rear side comprising a first security base (rear surface of 216) and the front side comprising a first lock base (top surface of 216), where the first lock base comprises a first lock shroud (232; figures 3A, 3B and 4A-4C) and a first raised vertical tab (324b), and where the first raised vertical tab comprises a first shackle slot (328b) for coupling with shackle of the pad lock; and a third securing plate (204) for securing the hasp to the second side of the opening to be secured, the third securing plate comprising a front side and a rear side, the rear side comprising a second security base (rear surface of the plate the assembly is secured) and the front side comprising a second lock base (top surface of the plate the assembly is secured), where the second lock base comprises a second lock shroud (232; figures 3A, 3B and 5A-5C) and a second raised vertical tab (324a), and where the second raised vertical tab comprises a second shackle slot (328a) for coupling with the shackle of the pad lock, where the first side of the opening is secured to the second side of the opening when the shackle of the pad lock is coupled with the first shackle slot and the second shackle slot and placed in a locked position (figures 1A and 2).
Vellani does not disclose a hinge connecting the first securing plate and the second securing plate, the first security base and second security base are formed of laminated high strength steel, and the security bases being formed as an element separate from the securing plates.
McMillen teach a hasp for coupling an opening with a first side and a second side (figures 1-3), where the first side is secured to the second side with a padlock (figure 1), the hasp comprising: a first securing plate (2) for securing the hasp to the first side of the opening to be secured; a hinge (as shown in figures 1-3) with a first side, a second side and a pin (pintle of the hinge) having two ends, where the first side is coupled to the first securing plate and where the pin further comprises at least one domed end (figures 1-3); a second securing plate (4) coupled to the second side of the hinge, the second securing plate comprising a front side and a rear side, the rear side comprising a first security base (bottom surface thereof) and the front side comprising a first lock base (top surface thereof), where the first lock base comprises a first raised vertical tab (7), and where the first raised vertical tab comprises a first shackle slot (11) for coupling with shackle of the pad lock; and a third securing plate (9) for securing the hasp to the second side of the opening to be secured, the third securing plate comprising a front side and a rear side, the rear side comprising a second security base (bottom surface thereof) and the front side comprising a second lock base (top surface thereof), where the second lock base comprises a second raised vertical tab (8), and where the second raised vertical tab comprises a second shackle slot (opening through 8) for coupling with the shackle of the pad lock, where the first side of the opening is secured to the second side of the opening when the shackle of the pad lock is coupled with the first shackle slot and the second shackle slot and placed in a locked position (figure 1), as in claim 1, wherein the first securing plate is coupled to the first side of the hinge and second securing plate is coupled to the second side of the hinge by welding (lines 33-76), as in claim 4.
All of the component parts are known in Vellani and McMillen. The only difference is the combination of the “old elements” into a single device by mounting them on a single chassis. Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a hinge as taught by McMillen between the first securing plate and the second securing plate in Vellani by welding, since a hinge connecting the respective securing plates is in no way dependent on the lock preventing separation of a first side and a second side, and the hinge could be used in combination with hasp lock to achieve the predictable results of allowing the second securing plate to pivot to ease in opening and closing and locking the desired device to which the hasp is attached.
Additionally, McMillen doesn’t explicitly disclose the shape of an end pf the hinge pin. It is common knowledge in the prior art to change the shape of the end of pintles in the same field of endeavor for the purpose of aesthetic design of the hinge. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to dome an end of the hinge pin in order to have a more appeasing design of the hinge. A change in the shape of a prior art device is a design consideration within the level of skill of one skilled in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Best teaches a hasp (22) for coupling an opening with a first side and a second side (figures 1 and 3), where the first side is secured to the second side with a hidden shackle padlock (10), the hasp comprising: a second securing plate (22, 36) coupled to the second side of the hinge, the second securing plate comprising a front side and a rear side, the rear side coupled to a first security base (22) formed as an element separate from the second securing plate, where the first security base is formed of high strength laminated steel comprised of two or more layers of steel joined together by lamination (22 and 36 laminated together), and the front side comprising a first lock base (36), where the first lock base comprises a first raised vertical tab (18), and where the first raised vertical tab comprises a first shackle slot (aperture therein) for coupling with shackle of the pad lock; and a third securing plate (24, 40) for securing the hasp to the second side of the opening to be secured, the third securing plate comprising a front side and a rear side, the rear side coupled to a second security base (24) formed as an element separate from the second securing plate, where the second security base is formed of high strength laminated steel comprised of two or more layers of steel joined together by lamination (24 and 40 laminated together), and the front side comprising a second lock base (40), where the second lock base comprises a second raised vertical tab (20), and where the second raised vertical tab comprises a second shackle slot (aperture therein) for coupling with the shackle of the pad lock, where the first side of the opening is secured to the second side of the opening when the shackle of the pad lock is coupled with the first shackle slot and the second shackle slot and placed in a locked position (figures 1 and 2).
All of the component parts are known in Vellani, McMillen and Best. The only difference is the combination of the “old elements” into a single device by mounting them on a single chassis. Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the security bases being formed as an element separate from the securing plates, with the bases being laminated of high strength stelas taught by Best onto the hasp assemblies in Vellani and McMillen, since the hasp assembly is in no way dependent on the security base being a separate element, and the security bases could be used in combination with the hasp assembly to achieve the predictable results of preventing insertion of a pry bar or other tool between the hasp and the elements adjacent to the opening.
Vellani also discloses the second securing plate further comprises a third lock shroud (as shown in figure 3B), as in claim 2, as well as the hasp is made from a material selected from the group comprising high strength steel, stainless steel, aluminum, and cast iron (paragraph 40), as in claim 5, wherein the hasp is manufactured using a method selected from the group comprising casting, molding, forging, welding, and CNC cutting (any suitable manufacturing technique paragraph 40), as in claim 6.
Vellani further discloses the first lock shroud and second lock shroud meet to form an essentially circular shaped shroud around the padlock (as best shown in figure 3A), where any location on the essentially circular shaped shroud is measured in one of 360 degree increments, where the essentially circular shape including a break to access a key hole of the padlock (figures 5A and 5B), where the first lock shroud comprises a top portion and a bottom portion and the second lock shroud comprises a first end and a second end, and where the top portion of the first lock shroud meets the first end of the second lock shroud at a first degree measurement of the essentially circular lock shroud and the bottom portion of the first lock shroud meets the second end of the second lock shroud at a second degree measurement of the essentially circular lock shroud and the absolute value of the difference between the first degree measurement and second degree measurement is not 180 (as shown in figures 2, 3A and 3B), as in claim 7, as well as the combination of the first lock shroud and the second lock shroud forms and essentially circular lock shroud with a center point in the circular shape (as best shown in figure 3A), and where there are a first gap and second gap between the first lock shroud and the second lock shroud, and where the first gap and the second gap are offset such that a straight line drawn from the first gap through the center point of the circular lock shroud would not intersect the second gap (figure 3A shows the gaps), as in claim 8.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments directed toward the use of laminated steel has 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. To clarify the rejection, Best teaches the use of laminated steel in the construction of a high security hasp.
Regarding the argument of a domed end of a hinge pin, the applicant is reminded a change in the shape of a prior art device is a design consideration within the level of skill of one skilled in the art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER J BOSWELL whose telephone number is (571)272-7054. The examiner can normally be reached M-R: 9-4; F 9-12.
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, Kristina Fulton can be reached at 571-272-7376. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER J BOSWELL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
CJB /cb/
August 8, 2025
Prosecution Insights