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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 2-3, 9-15 and 16-20 are withdrawn.
Claims 1, 4-8 are addressed on the merits herein.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species B in the reply filed on 12/24/25 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
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, 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeche (US 5,595,408) in view of Prescott et al (“Prescott”) (US 5,154,461) and Sweet (US 5,340,172).
Re claim 1, Jeche discloses a security door system (Fig. 1), comprising:
a reinforcing member (2);
a door (1) having opposite first and second faces (front/back faces of 1), opposite first and second vertical edges (left/right edges of 1), opposite top and bottom ends (top/bottom ends of 1), and an opening (27) in at least one of the first and second vertical edges (left/right edges of 27), the opening (27) sized and shaped to receive (Col 7 lines 46-50) the reinforcing member (2); and
a housing (10; 36) positioned in the inner space (as modified below), and sized and shaped to receive (Col 6 lines 30-34) the reinforcing member (2);
wherein the housing (10; 36) is aligned with the opening (27) to receive (Col 6 lines 30-34) the reinforcing member (2) through (Col 7 lines 46-50) the opening (27),
but fails to disclose the door as hollow with an inner space between the first and second faces, and the reinforcing member as removable.
However, Prescott discloses the door (21) as hollow (Col 3 line 38-40) with an inner space (Fig. 1) between the first and second faces (faces shown in Fig. 5, for example).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the security door system of Jeche with the door as hollow with an inner space between the first and second faces as disclosed by Prescott in order to reduce the weight of the door, as hollow doors are extremely well-known and common in the art.
In addition, Sweet discloses the reinforcing member (10) as removable (Col 3 lines 20-22).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the security door system of Jeche with the reinforcing member as removable as disclosed by Sweet in order to neatly store the reinforcing member (Col 3 lines 20-22) when not in use or not required.
Re claim 4, Jeche as modified discloses the security door system of claim 1, wherein the housing (10, 36) is a bracket (36) comprising: a base (Fig. 8, the vertical arm of 36) coupled to the first face (one face of 1); and an arm (horizontal arm of 36 and/or 10) positioned on the base (vertical arm of 36), the arm (horizontal arm of 36 and/or 10) extending between the first and second faces (front/back faces of 1), and sized and shaped to (Fig. 5) support the reinforcing member (2) in the inner space (as modified by Prescott); wherein the arm (horizontal arm of 36 and/or 10) is aligned with the opening (27) to removably receive (as modified by Sweet) the reinforcing member (2) through the opening (27).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 5-8 is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE WALRAED-SULLIVAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8838. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am - 5:00pm.
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, Brian Mattei can be reached at (571)270-3238. 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.
KYLE WALRAED-SULLIVAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3635
/KYLE J. WALRAED-SULLIVAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635