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, 3, 8, 10-12, 14-17, and 20 are currently pending and have been examined below. Claims 2, 4-7, 9, 13, and 18-19 have been cancelled.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In lines 44-45 of claim 12, “wherein the second magnetic strip is adhered to the sixth body portion with a first adhesive” seems that it should read --wherein the second magnetic strip is adhered to the sixth body portion with a
In the last line of claim 12, “a closed position” should read --the closed position--.
Appropriate correction is required if necessary. 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, 3, 10-12, 14-17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haruichi Abe (JP 6510725) (hereinafter “Haruichi”) in view of Webb (US 7836635) in view of Albenda (US 5001862) and in further view of Raheb et al. (US 5581844) (hereinafter “Raheb”).
Claim 1
(Haruichi discloses) A system (figure 1 and 8), comprising:
a doorframe (16), comprising:
a first side jamb (16a), having a top end, a bottom end (respective top and bottom ends of jamb 16a in figure 1), a door side, and a first face perpendicular to the door side (both shown in Annotated figure 2a below),
wherein the first side jamb comprises a magnetic material (Excerpt 1 from page 9 below);
a door (12), comprising:
a first side (right side of the door by the hinge as viewed in figure 1),
a second side (left side of the door by the knob) opposite the first side,
a first face of the door perpendicular to the first side and extending between the first side and the second side (Annotated figure 2a below),
wherein a portion of the door comprises a magnetic material (Excerpt 1 below);
a door hinge (14) that connects the first side jamb of the doorframe to the first side of the door (Annotated figure 2a below), the door side of the first side jamb of the doorframe being parallel to the first side of the door when the door is in a closed position (Annotated figure 2a below),
a guard (410; embodiment of the guard in Annotated figure 8 below), comprising:
a plurality of body portions (Annotated figure 8 below),
wherein each of the plurality of body portions comprises a top end and a bottom end (respective top and bottom ends of each of the body portions best shown in the view of figure 1),
wherein the plurality of body portions comprises a first body portion, a second body portion, a third body portion, a fourth body portion, a fifth body portion, and a sixth body portion (all six body portions shown in Annotated figure 8 below),
wherein the second body portion, the third body portion, the fourth body portion, and the fifth body portion covering a gap between the first side of the door and the door side of the first side jamb when the door is in the closed position and covering the door hinge (similar gap shown in figure 2b when the door is closed; note that for ease of understanding, figures 2a and 2b were used to show the guard mounted to the door and door frame despite the guard in the embodiment of figure 8 was used),
wherein the second body portion, the third body portion, the fourth body portion, and the fifth body portion are extended when the door is in an open position (figure 2a);
a plurality of magnetic strips (two magnetic strips 414; figure 8),
wherein the plurality of magnetic strips comprises a first magnetic strip and a second magnetic strip (respective left and right magnetic strips in figure 8),
wherein the first magnetic strip extends between the top end of the first body portion and the bottom end of the first body portion (Annotated figure 8 below; note that this recitation does not require the magnetic strip to entirely extend and reach the top most and bottom most ends of the first body portion; the magnets extending at a point from the top end to a point to the bottom end meets this limitation; also note that ‘adhere’ was interpreted as --to stay attached-- see definition below),
wherein the second magnetic strip extends between the top end of the sixth body portion and the bottom end of the sixth body portion (Annotated figure 8 below),
wherein the first magnetic strip is magnetically coupled to the first face of the door (not shown, but this is taught in light of where the guard is attached with respect to the door shown in Annotated figure 2a below),
wherein the second magnetic strip is magnetically coupled to the first face of first side jamb (similar to Annotated figure 2a below).
Haruichi fails to disclose:
(i) a doorframe, comprising:
a second side jamb, having a top end and a bottom end;
a head jamb, extending between the top end of the first side jamb and the top end of the second side jamb;
(ii) wherein the first body portion hingedly connects to the second body portion via a first connection portion, wherein the second body portion hingedly connects to the third body portion via a second connection portion, wherein the third body portion hingedly connects to the fourth body portion via a third connection portion, wherein the fourth body portion hingedly connects to the fifth body portion via a fourth connection portion, wherein the fifth body portion hingedly connects to the sixth body portion via a fifth connection portion;
(iii) wherein the second body portion, the third body portion, the fourth body portion, and the fifth body portion form an M shape;
(iv) wherein the first magnetic strip is adhered to the first body portion with a first adhesive;
(v) wherein the second magnetic strip is adhered to the sixth body portion with a second adhesive.
(i) (However, Webb teaches) a doorframe (4; Webb figure 11), comprising:
a first side jamb (vertical jamb away from the door knob), having a top end (Webb figure 11);
a second side jamb (second vertical door jamb of the doorframe by the door knob; Webb figure 11), having a top end and a bottom end (respective top and bottom ends of the second side jamb);
a head jamb (horizontal top jamb of the doorframe extending left to right), extending between the top end of the first side jamb and the top end of the second side jamb (Webb figure 11).
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 door frame of Haruichi with the second side jamb and head jamb of Webb, with a reasonable expectation of success, for fully covering and protecting the door against bumps and damages as non-limiting examples. Additionally, the head jamb and second side jamb also provides the predictable and expected benefits of supporting the door by preventing it from opening too far and also seals the door when in the closed position.
(However, Albenda teaches) a guard (4; Albenda figure 1), comprising:
a plurality of body portions comprising a first body portion, a second body portion, a third body portion, a fourth body portion, a fifth body portion, and a sixth body portion (all sixth body portions shown in Annotated figure 1 below),
(ii) wherein the first body portion hingedly connects to the second body portion via a first connection portion, wherein the second body portion hingedly connects to the third body portion via a second connection portion, wherein the third body portion hingedly connects to the fourth body portion via a third connection portion, wherein the fourth body portion hingedly connects to the fifth body portion via a fourth connection portion, wherein the fifth body portion hingedly connects to the sixth body portion via a fifth connection portion (all body portions are hingedly connected to one another via a respective connecting portions as shown in Annotated figure 1 above);
(iii) wherein the second body portion, the third body portion, the fourth body portion, and the fifth body portion form an M shape (Annotated figure 1 below showing the M-shape of the second-fifth body portions).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the guard of modified Haruichi such that the body portions are hingedly connected and such that the second-fifth body portions form an M shape when the door is closed as taught by Albenda, with a reasonable expectation of success, to further protect and extend the lifespan of the guard as the M-shape provides more creases and allows the guard to bend therefore decreasing the stress of the guard when the door is closed and prevents the guard from being too stretched when the door is opened. Additionally, the hingedly connected body portions allow for a greater expansion of the guard to accommodate a bigger gap between the door and door frame when the door is fully opened therefore preventing the tearing or pulling of the guard away from the door or door frame.
(iv and v) (However, Raheb teaches) a magnetic strip (38; Raheb figure 4) is adhered to a body portion (32) with an adhesive (40; Raheb figure 4; Excerpt 2 from col. 4 below).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to respectively adhere the first magnetic strip and the second magnetic strip of modified Haruichi to the first body portion and sixth body portion via an adhesive as taught by the guard of Raheb, with a reasonable expectation of success, for further enhancing the attachments of the magnetic strips to their respective body portions therefore the guard is less likely to fall off from the magnetic strips.
PNG
media_image1.png
455
498
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 2a
PNG
media_image2.png
329
1047
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 8
PNG
media_image3.png
566
755
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 1
PNG
media_image4.png
150
760
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Excerpt 1
PNG
media_image5.png
116
440
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Excerpt 2
PNG
media_image6.png
168
439
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Source: Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary, © 2010 K Dictionaries Ltd. Copyright 2005, 1997, 1991 by Random House, Inc. All rights reserved.
Claim 3
(Haruichi, as modified above, discloses) The system of claim 1, wherein the guard comprises a polymer (412 is disclosed as a resin; Excerpt 1 above; also note that resin is a type of polymer - see below).
PNG
media_image7.png
153
910
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Source: https://prlresins.com/introduction-to-polymer-resins-a-basic-guide/
Claim 10
(Haruichi, as modified above, discloses) The system of claim 1, wherein a length of the first body portion (L; figure 1) is at least 50% of a length of the first side of the door (12H; figure 1).
Claim 11
(Haruichi, as modified above, discloses) The system of claim 1, wherein the first magnetic strip extends from the top end to the bottom end of the first body portion (see cross-section in figure 8; note that this was interpreted such that the magnetic strip can extend anywhere from the top end to the bottom end without requiring to extend all the way through similar to applicant’s disclosure below from page 6) and the second magnetic strip extends from the top end to the bottom end of the sixth body portion (see cross-section in figure 8).
PNG
media_image8.png
197
756
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Claim 12
(Haruichi discloses) An assembly (figure 1 and 8), comprising:
a door (12), comprising:
a first side (right side of the door by the hinge as viewed in figure 1), having a top end and a bottom end (respective top and bottom ends of the first side of the door),
a second side (left side of the door by the knob) opposite the first side, having a top end and a bottom end (respective top and bottom ends of the second side of the door),
a bottom side (bottom horizontal side by the floor), extending between the bottom end of the first side of the door and the bottom end of the second side of the door (figure 1), and
a top side (top horizontal side away from the floor), extending between the top end of the first side of the door and the top end of the second side of the door (figure 1),
a first face of the door perpendicular to the first side and extending between the first side, the second side, the bottom side, and the top side (Annotated figure 2a above),
wherein a portion of the door comprises a magnetic material (Excerpt 1 above);
a guard (410; embodiment of the guard in figure 8), comprising:
a plurality of body portions (Annotated figure 8 above),
wherein each of the plurality of body portions comprises a top end and a bottom end (respective top and bottom ends of each of the body portions similarly shown in the front view of figure 1),
wherein the plurality of body portions comprises a first body portion, a second body portion, a third body portion, a fourth body portion, a fifth body portion, and a sixth body portion (all six body portions shown in Annotated figure 8 above),
wherein the second body portion, the third body portion, the fourth body portion, and the fifth body portion are extended when the door is in an open position (figure 2a);
a plurality of magnetic strips (two magnetic strips 414; figure 8),
wherein the plurality of magnetic strips comprises a first magnetic strip and a second magnetic strip (respective left and right magnetic strips 414 in figure 8),
wherein the first magnetic strip and the second magnetic strip are magnets (Excerpt 1 above),
wherein the first magnetic strip is adhered to the first body portion between the top end of the first body portion and the bottom end of the first body portion (Annotated figure 8 above; note that this recitation does not require the magnetic strip to entirely extend and reach the top most and bottom most ends of the first body portion; the magnets extending at a point from the top end to a point to the bottom end meets this limitation; also note that ‘adhere’ was interpreted as --to stay attached-- see definition above),
wherein the second magnetic strip is adhered to the sixth body portion between the top end of the sixth body portion and the bottom end of the sixth body portion (Annotated figure 8 above),
wherein the first magnetic strip is configured to magnetically couple to the first face of the door (once the guard is mounted to the door and coupled by way of other elements in between), and
wherein the second magnetic strip is configured to magnetically couple to a first side jamb (16a; figure 1) of a doorframe (16),
a door hinge (14) that connects the first side jamb (16a) of the doorframe to the first side of the door (Annotated figure 2a above), a first side of the first side jamb (Annotated figure 2a above) of the doorframe being parallel to the first side of the door when the door is in a closed position (figure 2b).
Haruichi fails to disclose:
(i) wherein the first body portion hingedly connects to the second body portion via a first connection portion, wherein the second body portion hingedly connects to the third body portion via a second connection portion, wherein the third body portion hingedly connects to the fourth body portion via a third connection portion, wherein the fourth body portion hingedly connects to the fifth body portion via a fourth connection portion, wherein the fifth body portion hingedly connects to the sixth body portion via a fifth connection portion;
(ii) wherein the second body portion, the third body portion, the fourth body portion, and the fifth body portion form an M shape when the door is in a closed position;
(iii)
wherein the first magnetic strip is adhered to the first body portion with a first adhesive;
wherein the second magnetic strip is adhered to the sixth body portion with a first adhesive;
(iv) wherein the door is framed by a doorframe.
However, Albenda teaches:
a guard (4; Albenda figure 1), comprising:
a plurality of body portions comprising a first body portion, a second body portion, a third body portion, a fourth body portion, a fifth body portion, and a sixth body portion (all sixth body portions shown in Annotated figure 1 above),
(i) wherein the first body portion hingedly connects to the second body portion via a first connection portion, wherein the second body portion hingedly connects to the third body portion via a second connection portion, wherein the third body portion hingedly connects to the fourth body portion via a third connection portion, wherein the fourth body portion hingedly connects to the fifth body portion via a fourth connection portion, wherein the fifth body portion hingedly connects to the sixth body portion via a fifth connection portion (all body portions are hingedly connected to one another via a respective connecting portions as shown in Annotated figure 1 above);
(ii) wherein the second body portion, the third body portion, the fourth body portion, and the fifth body portion form an M shape when a door (1) is in a closed position (Annotated figure 1 above showing the M-shape of the second-fifth body portions).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the guard of Haruichi such that the body portions are hingedly connected via their respective connecting portions and such that the second-fifth body portions form an M shape when the door is closed as taught by Albenda, with a reasonable expectation of success, to further protect and extend the lifespan of the guard as the M-shape provides more creases and allows the guard to bend therefore decreasing the stress to the guard when the door is closed and prevents the guard from being too stretched when the door is opened. Additionally, the hingedly connected body portions allow for a greater expansion of the guard to accommodate a bigger gap between the door and door frame when the door is fully opened therefore preventing the tearing or pulling of the guard away from the door or door frame.
(iii) (However, Raheb teaches) a magnetic strip (38; Raheb figure 4) is adhered to a body portion (32) with an adhesive (40; Raheb figure 4; Excerpt 2 from col. 4 above).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to respectively adhere the first magnetic strip and the second magnetic strip of modified Haruichi to the first body portion and sixth body portion via an adhesive as taught by the guard of Raheb, with a reasonable expectation of success, for further enhancing the attachments of the magnetic strips to their respective body portions therefore the guard is less likely to fall off from the magnetic strips.
(iv) (However, Webb teaches) a door (2; Webb figure 11) is framed by a doorframe (4).
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 door of modified Haruichi such that it is framed by a door frame as taught by Webb, with a reasonable expectation of success, for fully covering and protecting the door against bumps and damages as non-limiting examples. Additionally, the head jamb and second side jamb also provides the predictable and expected benefits of supporting the door by preventing it from opening too far and also seals the door when in the closed position.
Claim 14
(Haruichi, as modified above, discloses) The assembly of claim 12, wherein the plurality of connecting portions comprises a polymer (each portion comprises their own resin film portion 412; figure 8).
Claim 15
(Haruichi, as modified above, discloses) The assembly of claim 12, wherein the first magnetic strip extends from the top end of the first body portion to the bottom end of the first body portion (Annotated figure 8 above; as noted above, this recitation does not require the first magnetic strip to entirely extend and reach the top most and bottom most ends of the first body portion; the magnetic strips extending at a point from the top end to a point to the bottom end meets this limitation).
Claim 16
(Haruichi, as modified above, discloses) The assembly of claim 15, wherein the second magnetic strip extends from the top end of the sixth body portion to the bottom end of the sixth body portion (Annotated figure 8 above).
Claim 17
(Haruichi, as modified above, discloses) The assembly of claim 12, wherein the first magnetic strip extends from the top end to the bottom end of the first body portion (see cross-section in figure 8; note that this was interpreted such that the magnetic strip can extend anywhere from the top end to the bottom end without requiring to extend all the way through similar to applicant’s disclosure above from page 6) and the second magnetic strip extends from the top end to the bottom end of the sixth body portion (see cross-section in figure 8).
Claim 20
(Haruichi, as modified above, discloses) The assembly of claim 12.
Modified Haruichi is silent regarding wherein a length of the first magnetic strip is at least 50% of a length of the first body portion.
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 length of the first magnetic strip such that it is at least 50% of a length of the first body portion, with a reasonable expectation of success, for sufficiently securing the guard with the door such that it is not easily and accidentally moved.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haruichi in view of Webb in view of Albenda in view of Raheb, as applied to claims 1, 3, 10-12, 14-17, and 20 above, in further view of Hwang (KR 102117200).
Claim 8
(Haruichi, as modified above, discloses) The system of claim 1, wherein the door hinge comprises a first hinge leaf (hinge leaf of hinge 14 attached to the door 12 in figure 2), a second hinge leaf (hinge leaf of hinge 14 attached to the door frame 16 in figure 2), and a hinge pin (pin part where 14 is pointing in figure 2).
Modified Haruichi is silent regarding:
(i) a first hinge knuckle connected to the first hinge leaf and a second hinge knuckle connected to the second hinge leaf;
(ii) the hinge pin connecting the first hinge knuckle and the second hinge knuckle;
(iii) wherein the first hinge knuckle is proximate the first side of the door, and wherein the first magnetic strip is magnetically coupled to the first side of the door, such that the guard covers the first hinge knuckle.
(i) (However, Hwang teaches) a first hinge knuckle (32; hinge of Hwang in figure 2) connected to a first hinge leaf (31) and a second hinge knuckle (34) connected to a second hinge leaf (33).
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 hinge of modified Haruichi with the hinge details and parts of Hwang, with a reasonable expectation of success, for providing the benefits of a traditional and standard hinge thus it is easily repairable/replaceable and its parts is common in the industry.
(ii and iii) Haruichi, as modified above, discloses:
the hinge pin connecting the first hinge knuckle and the second hinge knuckle; and
wherein the first hinge knuckle is proximate the first side of the door, and wherein the first magnetic strip is magnetically coupled to the first side of the door, such that the guard covers the first hinge knuckle (these are taught via the combination above and in light of the guard being magnetically coupled to the first face of the door).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments to the drawing and claim objections have been considered by the examiner.
Applicant's arguments filed on 11/17/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s arguments to: “1. The Office Action Does Not State a Prima Facie Case of Obviousness” (pages 2-7 of the Remarks section). In response to applicant's argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, examiner notes that one of the ordinary skill in the art would understand that a fully covered element (e.g., a door fully surrounded by a doorframe) is significantly protected and guided than an exposed element. Although there are doors without full coverage and they are capable of functioning, doors with a head jamb and additional side jamb would allow the door to be guided and stabilized especially when closed and can provide as a bumper for protecting the door. Additionally, the additional framework can help maintain the hinges from overturning.
Applicant argues “Adding more folds than Haruichi already has will have no beneficial effect based on anything stated in the prior art here. Thus, nothing here supports that a POSITA would not have been motivated to combine Albenda, Webb, and Haruichi. The prior art thus does not disclose, teach, or suggest second-fifth body portions form an M shape when the door is closed as recited in the independent claims” and “Regarding (3) and (4), Albenda and Haruichi are silent on stresses or stretching of the M shape. Again, nothing in Albenda or Haruichi explains that more or less folds is desirable or would remedy or worsen the problems posed by the Office Action, and Haruichi already includes folds”, examiner notes that Albenda clearly discloses benefits of having folds to the guard (see 15-25 of col. 2 of Albenda below).
PNG
media_image9.png
343
486
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Arguments directed to Raheb under “1. The Office Action Does Not State a Prima Facie Case of Obviousness” were directed to elements not relied upon in the rejection above (i.e., “instant invention . . . more specifically [] relates to an improved doorstop… Raheb does not suggest body portions but rather a single "block member 12" of fixedly attached components that does not attach to a door frame at all but rather leaf 16.”). Thus, examiner notes that, in response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show non-obviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Regarding “Raheb thus does not disclose a guard that falls off or not and does not disclose magnetic strips”, examiner notes that Raheb does disclose using an adhesive to install a guard to a magnetic strip (see element 40 in figure 4 and lines 17-20 of col. 4).
Regarding applicant’s arguments to: “2. Raheb Does Not Teach or Suggest an Adhesive that Adheres a Magnetic Strip to a Body Portion of a Guard” (pages 7-8 of the Remarks section). In response to applicant's argument that the invention of Raheb is non-analogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, examiner notes that the invention of Raheb is in the same field of endeavor as applicant’s invention as well as the other prior art (Haruichi, Webb, Albenda, and Hwang) as they all pertain to inventions directed to door parts/elements at the hinge side. Additionally, examiner notes that it seems that applicant’s definition of “guard” is significantly narrowed and limited. Examiner notes the definition of guard below and emphasizes that Raheb’s invention meets this definition.
PNG
media_image10.png
216
721
media_image10.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.
Regarding applicant’s arguments to: “3. The References Teach Away From Each Other and the Proposed Combination” (pages 8-10 of the Remarks section). Albenda does not disclose "fixed connection" as applicant argued. See col. 3, lines 27-42 of Albenda prioritizes attaching the protective device without damaging the door and door frame which the magnet of the combination effectively does so. Examiner also emphasizes the citation as Albenda clearly states " Screws, nails, or the like could be used to attach the protective devices to the door and/or door frame" which examiner interprets that Albenda does not stress on using adhesive as the sole attaching element and allows other attaching elements to be used so long as it does not damage the door or door frame which the magnets are suitable for.
Regarding applicant’s arguments to: “4. Claim 8 Rejection” (page 10 of the Remarks section), this is simply directed to the rejection in claim 8. Examiner notes that applicant does not present any arguments directed to Hwang.
Regarding applicant’s arguments to: “5. Claims 11, 17 Amendment” (pages 11-12 of the Remarks section), applicant argues that “The examiner's prior mapping of your "extends between" language to D1 rested on a broad interpretation that did not require full-height coverage (CTNF, 103 rejection, Claim 15/16 notes). However, this is an incorrect interpretation as reflected throughout the Specification because "extends between" or "extending between" is used consistently in the Specification as extending from one end to another end such as for a head jamb”. Note that applicant’s own disclosure discloses its magnetic strip to not fully extend from the topmost end to the bottommost end of the body portion (see page 6 of applicant’s disclosure below).
PNG
media_image8.png
197
756
media_image8.png
Greyscale
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 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