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 .
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 “a linear electrical generator mechanically coupled to the door opener arm”, as recited in claim 1, must be shown or the features canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered.
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.
Specification
The amendment filed 9/08/2025 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows:
Claim 1: “a linear electrical generator mechanically coupled to the door opener arm, wherein the linear electrical generator converts linear motion of the door opener arm during garage door operation into electrical energy to charge the secondary electrochemical cell”.
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.
Claim 1 is 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 recites “a linear electrical generator mechanically coupled to the door opener arm, wherein the linear electrical generator converts linear motion of the door opener arm during garage door operation into electrical energy to charge the secondary electrochemical cell”. Examiner notes that Applicants disclosure as originally filed makes no mention of “a linear electrical generator mechanically coupled to the door opener arm, wherein the linear electrical generator converts linear motion of the door opener arm during garage door operation into electrical energy to charge the secondary electrochemical cell”, and these features are not shown in the drawings. Examiner notes that the only disclosure with respect to “a linear electrical generator” is found in Applicants paragraph [0020], “the linear kinetic energy charger is preferably associated with the door opener arm” and paragraph [0051], “the kinetic energy charger comprises one or more linear kinetic energy chargers preferably associated with, secured to, connected to, and/or forms part of the garage door, the door opener arm, and/or any other component of the garage door opener assembly”, as well as “U.S. Patent No. 5,347,186, entitled "Linear motion electric power generator” and “US. Patent No. 4,500,827, entitled "Linear reciprocating electrical generator”. However, “wherein the linear electrical generator converts linear motion of the door opener arm during garage door operation into electrical energy to charge the secondary electrochemical cell” is not disclosed. Additionally, it is entirely unclear how Applicants examples of US 5,347,186 and US 4,500,827, would be incorporated for use with the travel of a typical garage door, or with Applicants door opener arm (element 32) as shown in Figure 1.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heng et al. (US 2012/0112875) (hereinafter Heng) in view of Witkowski (US 2020/0126392).
Regarding claim 1, Heng discloses a garage door opener assembly, for opening and closing a garage door, comprising:- a garage door (See Figure 1), wherein the garage door includes at least one hinge (See Figure 1) and a plurality of wheels (element 18), and wherein the garage door is displaceable between open and closed positions;- left and right tracks (See Figure 1), wherein the left and the right tracks collectively retain the plurality of garage door wheels: a motor (element 12), wherein the motor drives at least one of a screw shaft, a belt, and a chain and, in turn, a door opener arm secured to the garage door (See Figure 1, shown but not labeled); a battery backup unit, wherein the battery backup unit comprises a secondary electrochemical cell in electrical communication with the motor (Examiner notes that element 52 is “in electrical communication” with element 12 via element 20); and a linear electrical generator (element 50, Examiner notes that element 50 translates in a linear manner, and is therefore considered to be a “linear electrical generator”) mechanically coupled to the door opener arm (Examiner notes that all elements of the system are at least indirectly mechanically coupled), wherein the linear electrical generator converts linear motion of the door opener arm during garage door operation into electrical energy to charge the secondary electrochemical cell (Examiner notes that the generator and battery are necessarily connected in order for the system to function as intended).
Heng does not give explicit detail with regard to the drive system and suspension of the garage door (i.e. cable drums, a torsion rod, a torsion spring, a screw shaft, a belt, and a chain, etc.). Witkowski, however, teaches that it is known in the art to configure a garage door opener assembly, for opening and closing a garage door, comprising: a garage door (See Figure 1), wherein the garage door includes at least one hinge and a plurality of wheels (Figure 1, element 12), and wherein the garage door is displaceable between open and closed positions; left and right tracks (Figure 1, element 14), wherein the left and the right tracks collectively retain the plurality of garage door wheels; left and right cable drums (Figure 1, element 70), wherein the left and the right cable drums contain cable (Figure 1, element 95) in communication with the garage door; a torsion rod (Figure 1, element 60), wherein the torsion rod is secured to and positioned between the left and the right cable drums; a torsion spring (Figure 1, element 55), wherein the torsion spring is associated with the torsion rod; a motor (element 20), wherein the motor drives at least one of a screw shaft, a belt, and a chain and (element 28, paragraph [0021]), a door opener arm (element 45) secured to the garage door; a trolly track (element 35), wherein the trolly track houses the screw shaft, belt and/or chain, a wall mounted door controller (element 80, paragraph [0022]), and a remote door controller (element 80, paragraph [0022]).
Therefore, 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 garage door system of Heng such that it includes the garage door structure taught by Witkowski above, since garage door structure of this nature is extremely well-known in the art, and would have functioned as intended for the purpose of Heng. Additionally, all the claimed elements were known in the prior art as evidenced above, and one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed, or substituted one known element for another, using known methods with no change in their respective functions. Such a combination or substitution would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, since the elements perform as expected and thus the results would be expected. MPEP 2143.
Examiner additionally notes that 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 garage door system of Heng such that it includes the structure of claim 1, since it is prima facie obvious to choose from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of results (MPEP 2143(E)), and all of the structure claimed is extremely well known and would have been a predictable solution with a reasonable expectation of results.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hedrich (US 2004/0187387) in view of Witkowski (US 2020/0126392).
Regarding claim 1, Hedrich discloses a garage door opener assembly, for opening and closing a garage door, comprising: a garage door, wherein the garage door is displaceable between open and closed positions; a motor (element 23); a battery backup unit (at least elements 5-6 and 10), wherein the battery backup unit comprises a secondary electrochemical cell in electrical communication with the motor; and a linear electrical generator (element 1, Examiner notes that element 1 moves linearly with the garage door) mechanically coupled to the door opener and electrically connected to the secondary electrochemical cell, wherein the linear electrical generator converts linear motion of the door opener during garage door operation into electrical energy to charge the secondary electrochemical cell; and power conditioning circuitry (element 16) electrically connected between the linear electrical generator and the secondary electrochemical cell, wherein the power conditioning circuitry regulates the electrical energy from the linear electrical generator to provide appropriate charging characteristics for the secondary electrochemical cell.
Hedrich does not explicitly disclose wherein the motor drives at least one of a screw shaft, a belt, and a chain and, in turn, a door opener arm secured to the garage door, and the electrical generator is mechanically coupled to the door opener arm.
Witkowski, however, teaches that it is known in the art to configure a garage door opener assembly, for opening and closing a garage door, comprising: a garage door (See Figure 1), wherein the garage door includes at least one hinge and a plurality of wheels (Figure 1, element 12), and wherein the garage door is displaceable between open and closed positions; left and right tracks (Figure 1, element 14), wherein the left and the right tracks collectively retain the plurality of garage door wheels;- left and right cable drums (Figure 1, element 70), wherein the left and the right cable drums contain cable (Figure 1, element 95) in communication with the garage door; a torsion rod (Figure 1, element 60), wherein the torsion rod is secured to and positioned between the left and the right cable drums; a torsion spring (Figure 1, element 55), wherein the torsion spring is associated with the torsion rod; a motor (element 20), wherein the motor drives at least one of a screw shaft, a belt, and a chain and (element 28, paragraph [0021]), in turn, a door opener arm (element 45) secured to the garage door; a trolly track (element 35), wherein the trolly track houses the screw shaft, belt and/or chain, a wall mounted door controller (element 80, paragraph [0022]), and a remote door controller (element 80, paragraph [0022]). Therefore, 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 garage door system of Hedrich such that it includes the garage door structure taught by Witkowski above, since garage door structure of this nature is extremely well-known in the art, and would have functioned as intended for the purpose of Hedrich. Additionally, all the claimed elements were known in the prior art as evidenced above, and one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed, or substituted one known element for another, using known methods with no change in their respective functions. Such a combination or substitution would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, since the elements perform as expected and thus the results would be expected. MPEP 2143. Examiner notes that a modification of this nature would provide the electrical generator being mechanically coupled to the door opener arm, since all components of the system would be either directly or indirectly mechanically coupled
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/8/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the argument “Original claims 2 and 3 specifically recite the linear kinetic energy charger associated with the door opener arm”. Examiner agrees, however simply stating that the “linear kinetic energy charger” is “associated with the door opener arm” is not inherently the same as “a linear electrical generator mechanically coupled to the door opener arm”. In other words, the terms “associated” and “mechanically coupled” are different, and can be reasonably interpreted as claiming different things. Additionally, the claim limitation “wherein the linear electrical generator converts linear motion of the door opener arm during garage door operation into electrical energy to charge the secondary electrochemical cell” is not found in the disclosure as originally filed.
Regarding the argument “The drawing objection must be withdrawn as a matter of law. The examiner's requirement that internal components of the linear electrical generator be shown exceeds the statutory requirements for patent drawings and contradicts established USPTO practice and Federal Circuit precedent”. This is incorrect. Examiner has not required “that internal components of the linear electrical generator be shown”. Examiner is requiring that “The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “a linear electrical generator mechanically coupled to the door opener arm”, as recited in claim 1, must be shown or the features canceled from the claims”. This is required because the only disclosure with respect to “a linear electrical generator” is found in Applicants paragraph [0020], “the linear kinetic energy charger is preferably associated with the door opener arm” and paragraph [0051], “the kinetic energy charger comprises one or more linear kinetic energy chargers preferably associated with, secured to, connected to, and/or forms part of the garage door, the door opener arm, and/or any other component of the garage door opener assembly”, as well as “U.S. Patent No. 5,347,186, entitled "Linear motion electric power generator” and “US. Patent No. 4,500,827, entitled "Linear reciprocating electrical generator”. However, “wherein the linear electrical generator converts linear motion of the door opener arm during garage door operation into electrical energy to charge the secondary electrochemical cell” is not disclosed. Additionally, it is entirely unclear how Applicants examples of US 5,347,186 and US 4,500,827, would be incorporated for use with the travel of a typical garage door.
Regarding the argument “Element 18 in Figure 2 combined with the incorporated references U.S. Patents 5,347,186 and 4,500,827 provides more than sufficient disclosure.”. Examiner disagrees and notes that it is entirely unclear how either of U.S. Patent No. 5,347,186, entitled "Linear motion electric power generator” and US. Patent No. 4,500,827, entitled "Linear reciprocating electrical generator” would be “mechanically coupled to the door opener arm” in such a way as to convert “linear motion of the door opener arm during garage door operation into electrical energy”.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JUSTIN B REPHANN whose telephone number is (571)270-7318. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-4:30pm.
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.
/JUSTIN B REPHANN/Examiner, Art Unit 3634