Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/404,284

DOOR ASSEMBLY HAVING A SOFT BOTTOMED DOOR PANEL AND SYSTEM AND METHOD OF DRIVING THE SAME

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jan 04, 2024
Priority
Nov 30, 2018 — provisional 62/773,863 +1 more
Examiner
HANES JR., JOHN
Art Unit
3634
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Rytec Corporation
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
47%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
6m
Est. Remaining
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 47% of resolved cases
47%
Career Allowance Rate
54 granted / 115 resolved
-5.0% vs TC avg
Strong +39% interview lift
Without
With
+38.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
156
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
86.6%
+46.6% vs TC avg
§102
7.9%
-32.1% vs TC avg
§112
5.1%
-34.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 115 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Response to Appeal Brief In view of the appeal brief filed on 04/02/2026, PROSECUTION IS HEREBY REOPENED. New grounds of rejection are set forth below. To avoid abandonment of the application, appellant must exercise one of the following two options: (1) file a reply under 37 CFR 1.111 (if this Office action is non-final) or a reply under 37 CFR 1.113 (if this Office action is final); or, (2) initiate a new appeal by filing a notice of appeal under 37 CFR 41.31 followed by an appeal brief under 37 CFR 41.37. The previously paid notice of appeal fee and appeal brief fee can be applied to the new appeal. If, however, the appeal fees set forth in 37 CFR 41.20 have been increased since they were previously paid, then appellant must pay the difference between the increased fees and the amount previously paid. A Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) has approved of reopening prosecution by signing below: /DANIEL P CAHN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634 Drawings The amendment filed 12/04/2024 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. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: Fig 24 adds new matter, as the specific width, depth, and orientation of the fastener channel with respect to the interior channel shown in Fig 24 are not supported by the original disclosure. It is also not readily clear how the fastener channel shown in Fig 24 is able to be implemented, as the location of said channel would result in a fastener location that intersects with the Keder of the door panel. This intersection of the fastener, channel, and the Keder location is not sufficiently described in the original disclosure. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Pat. 3,637,004 – Wardlaw et al., hereinafter Wardlaw. Regarding claim 1. Wardlaw discloses a drive tooth (See annotated figs 3 and 4) for use in an overhead roll-up door assembly (Examiner notes that although this is intended use language, Wardlaw is directed to an operator for a roller door.), the drive tooth comprising: a cylindrically shaped body (See annotated figs 3 and 4) and outer surface, the outer surface having a toothed portion and a non-toothed portion (See annotated figs 3 and 4), the toothed portion comprising an engagement tooth (See “Drive Tooth” in annotated figs 3 and 4) extending laterally across the outer surface transverse to the height of the cylindrically shaped outer surface (See annotated figs 3 and 4); a first recess (See annotated figs 3 and 4) formed into the outer surface of the cylindrically shaped body located adjacent the engagement tooth, the first recess being positioned between the engagement tooth and a top surface of the cylindrically shaped body (See annotated figs 3 and 4); and a second recess (See annotated figs 3 and 4) formed into the outer surface of the cylindrically shaped body located adjacent the engagement tooth (See annotated figs 3 and 4), the second recess being positioned between the engagement tooth and a bottom surface of the cylindrically shaped body (See annotated figs 3 and 4). PNG media_image1.png 706 906 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 13. Wardlaw discloses all limitations of claim 1. Wardlaw further discloses the top surface and the bottom surface have a chamfered edge (See at gear root in fig 4) formed along at least a portion of a circumference of the cylindrically shaped body (See at gear root in fig 4). 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) 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Korean Patent 10-0698757 – Jeon Byeong-Seok in view of US Pat. 5,058,651 – Ashley et al., hereinafter Ashley, and Wardlaw. Regarding claim 1. Jeon Byeong-Seok discloses a drive tooth (210, fig 6) for use in an overhead roll-up door assembly (fig 1), the drive tooth comprising: A body and an outer surface, the outer surface having a toothed portion (Facing sprocket 17, fig 4) and a non-toothed portion (Facing away from sprocket 17, fig 4), the toothed portion comprising an engagement tooth (See annotated fig 4) extending laterally across the outer surface transverse to the height of the outer surface (Extending into the page, fig 4. Examiner notes that solid objects extend in all three spatial dimensions.); Jeon Byeong-Seok does not disclose a cylindrically shaped body; or a first recess formed into the outer surface of the body located adjacent the engagement tooth, the first recess being positioned between the engagement tooth and a top surface of the body; and a second recess formed into the outer surface of the body located adjacent the engagement tooth, the second recess being positioned between the engagement tooth and a bottom surface of the body. However, Ashley teaches a cylindrically shaped body (including two half-cylinders 112, fig 4). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, with a reasonable expectation of success, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the drive tooth of Jeon Byeong-Seok with the cylindrical shape of Ashley. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to yield the predictable result of allowing the teeth to rotate axially in the track, allowing the door sheet to bow and flex in response to wind or impacts and avoid damage. Also, Wardlaw teaches a first recess formed into the outer surface of the body located adjacent the engagement tooth, the first recess being positioned between the engagement tooth and a top surface of the body; and a second recess formed into the outer surface of the body located adjacent the engagement tooth, the second recess being positioned between the engagement tooth and a bottom surface of the body. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, with a reasonable expectation of success, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the drive tooth of Jeon Byeong-Seok with the first and second recess of Wardlaw. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to yield the predictable result of reducing gear chatter. PNG media_image2.png 698 900 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding claim 2. The combination of Jeon Byeong-Seok, Ashley, and Wardlaw teaches all limitations of claim 1. Jeon Byeong-Seok further discloses the top surface of the body comprises a flat top portion (See figs 6 and 4), and the bottom surface of the body comprises a flat bottom portion (See figs 6 and 4). Regarding claim 3. The combination of Jeon Byeong-Seok, Ashley, and Wardlaw teaches all limitations of claim 2. Jeon Byeong-Seok further discloses at least two pivot points, wherein a first pivot point is positioned adjacent the flat top portion and a second pivot is positioned adjacent a flat bottom portion (See annotated fig 6. Examiner notes that although the line along the pivot is only shown on one tooth in one view, each tooth must pivot with relation to its adjacent tooth along the line, as each tooth is constrained by its attachment to the keder along that axis). PNG media_image3.png 210 328 media_image3.png Greyscale Regarding claim 4. The combination of Jeon Byeong-Seok, Ashley, and Wardlaw teaches all limitations of claim 3. Jeon Byeong-Seok further discloses a first angled portion, the first angled portion extending across a portion the top surface of the cylindrically shaped body at a downward angle from the flat top portion from the pivot point towards the first recess (See annotated fig 6 below, and annotated fig 4 above). PNG media_image4.png 702 1543 media_image4.png Greyscale Regarding claim 5. The combination of Jeon Byeong-Seok, Ashley, and Wardlaw teaches all limitations of claim 4. Jeon Byeong-Seok further discloses a second angled portion, the second angled portion extending across a portion of the bottom surface of the cylindrically shaped body at an upward angle from the flat bottom portion towards the second recess (See annotated fig 6). Regarding claim 6. The combination of Jeon Byeong-Seok, Ashley, and Wardlaw teaches all limitations of claim 1. Jeon Byeong-Seok further discloses an opening channel (See annotated fig 7) and an interior channel (See annotated fig 7), wherein the opening channel is formed along a portion of a height of the body and extending through the body of the tooth from the outer surface to the interior channel, and the interior channel extends vertically through a middle portion of the body from the top surface to the bottom surface. PNG media_image5.png 400 378 media_image5.png Greyscale Regarding claim 7. The combination of Jeon Byeong-Seok, Ashley, and Wardlaw teaches all limitations of claim 6. Jeon Byeong-Seok further discloses a width of the opening channel is narrower than a width of the interior channel (See fig 7). Regarding claim 8. The combination of Jeon Byeong-Seok, Ashley, and Wardlaw teaches all limitations of claim 6. Jeon Byeong-Seok further discloses a fastener channel (See annotated fig 6), the fastener channel extending from the outer surface to an interior portion of the tooth (See annotated fig 6). PNG media_image6.png 396 743 media_image6.png Greyscale Regarding claim 9. The combination of Jeon Byeong-Seok, Ashley, and Wardlaw teaches all limitations of claim 8. Jeon Byeong-Seok further discloses the fastener channel at least partially intersects the interior channel (See first paragraph of page 8 of applicant supplied translation). Regarding claim 10. The combination of Jeon Byeong-Seok, Ashley, and Wardlaw teaches all limitations of claim 8. Jeon Byeong-Seok further discloses an outer edge of the fastener channel extends adjacent an outer edge of the interior channel (See annotated figs 7 and 6 above). Regarding claim 11. The combination of Jeon Byeong-Seok, Ashley, and Wardlaw teaches all limitations of claim 8. Jeon Byeong-Seok does not disclose the fastener channel begins in a portion of the outer surface which is opposite the toothed portion. However, Ashley teaches the fastener channel (See rivets, fig 4) begins in a face of the sheet, which in the combination, would be a portion of the outer surface which is opposite the toothed portion. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, with a reasonable expectation of success, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the combination of Jeon Byeong-Seok and Ashley with the fastener orientation of Ashley. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to yield the predictable result of improving clamping force on the keder through a pinch type grip. Regarding claim 12. The combination of Jeon Byeong-Seok, Ashley, and Wardlaw teaches all limitations of claim 8. Jeon Byeong-Seok further discloses the fastener channel is offset from the interior channel (a major axis of the fastener channel is offset by approximately 90 degrees from a major axis of the interior channel. See fig 6). Regarding claim 13. The combination of Jeon Byeong-Seok, Ashley, and Wardlaw teaches all limitations of claim 1. Jeon Byeong-Seok further discloses the top surface and the bottom surface have a chamfered edge formed along at least a portion of a circumference of the body (See radiused edge on non-toothed portion in figs 4 and 6). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot in light of the new ground of rejection. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN W HANES JR whose telephone number is (571)272-8840. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST. 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. /J.W.H./ Examiner, Art Unit 3634 /DANIEL P CAHN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 7 earlier events
May 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Aug 22, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 15, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Nov 17, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 02, 2026
Notice of Allowance
Apr 02, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 24, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12677973
FOLDABLE RAIL FOR ELECTRIC OPENING-CLOSING CURTAIN
2y 7m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12674355
ROLLING SHUTTER LOCK BAR SLAT
2y 9m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12644334
SCREEN APPARATUS
2y 7m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Patent 12594443
Safety System with Digital Tracking and Reporting and Method of Use
4y 1m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590463
PRIVACY SHADE
4y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
47%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+38.9%)
3y 0m (~6m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 115 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month