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 .
The examiner acknowledges applicant’s amendments to claims 1-20 filed April 20, 2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 13, 19, and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In regards to claim 2, the claim should read as follows: “The alignment system of claim 1, wherein the latch pin is configured to engage and disengage from the latch receiver, and wherein the first spring assemblies is configured to control the position of the body of the latch receiver and the second spring assembly is configured to control the position of the body of the latch pin when the latch is disengaged from the latch receiver.” This language is suggested to make it clear that the latch pin is both engageable and disengageable from the latch receiver.
In regards to claim 13, the claim should read as follows: “The method of claim 12, wherein the latch pin is configured to engage and disengage from the latch receiver, and wherein the controlling of the amount of travel of the body of the latch receiver and the controlling of the amount of travel of the body of the latch pin occurs while the latch pin is disengaged from the latch receiver.” This language is suggested to make it clear that the latch pin is both engageable and disengageable from the latch receiver, and that the controlling steps of claim 13 refer to the controlling steps of claim 12.
In regards to claim 19, line 4, the phrase “a coupling event” should be changed to “the coupling event.”
In regards to claim 20, the claim should read as follows: “A latch system, comprising: a first structure configured to be operably coupled with a powered system; a second structure configured to be operably coupled with the powered system; a latch receiver comprising a body configured to be operably coupled with the first structure; a latch pin comprising a body configured to be operably coupled with the second structure, wherein the latch pin is configured to couple with and decouple from the latch receiver; two first spring assemblies configured to be operably coupled with the first structure, each of the first spring assemblies comprising a first pin configured to engage a surface of the body of the latch receiver when the latch pin is decoupled from the latch receiver; and two second spring assemblies configured to be operably coupled with the second structure, each of the second spring assemblies comprising a second pin configured to engage a surface of the body of the latch pin when the latch pin is decoupled from the latch receiver, wherein the two first spring assemblies are configured to control a position of the body of the latch receiver and the two second spring assemblies are configured to control a position of the body of the latch pin when the latch pin is decoupled from the latch receiver, and wherein the first pins of the first spring assemblies are configured to disengage from the surface of the body of the latch receiver and the second pins of the second spring assemblies are configured to disengage from the surface of the boy of the latch pin when the latch pin is coupled with the latch receiver.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In regards to claim 1, the metes and the bounds of the claim are unclear. Specifically, applicant remarks that claim 1 is drawn to the alignment system alone, however, the claim includes recitations of the latch receiver and the latch pin to define the operation of the first and second spring assemblies of the alignment system. For example, the claim recites that the second end of the first pin engages a surface of a body of the latch receiver to control a position of the body of the latch receiver. The claim requires the latch receiver and the latch pin to define the operation of the alignment system, and therefore, the claim must be drawn to the combination and has been examined as such.
In regards to claims 2-6 and 9-11, the metes and bounds of the claims are unclear. The limitations within each of these claims requires the latch receiver and/or the latch pin to define the operation of the alignment system, and therefore, claim 1 and its depend claims must be drawn to the combination. For example, if claim 1 were to be considered as drawn to the alignment system alone, so without the latch receiver and the latch pin, then claim 2 would have no limitations to be examined because the entire claim refers to the latch receiver and the latch pin to define the operation of the first and second spring assemblies. For examination purposes, the claims have been examined as drawn to the combination, requiring the latch receiver and the latch pin.
In regards to claim 12, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear. Specifically, applicant remarks that claim 12 is drawn to the alignment system alone, however, if the claim were to be examined without the latch receiver and latch pin, then the claim would not include any limitations to be examined. For example, the first method step is “controlling an amount of travel of a body of the latch receiver operably coupled with a first structure” which spans lines 3-11 of the claim, so if the claim were to be examined without the latch receiver, then this entire method step within lines 3-11 is not part of the claimed invention. This also applies to the second method step recited in lines 12-21, since this step refers to the controlling of a body of the latch pin. Since the claim requires the latch receiver and the latch pin to define the method, then the claim is drawn to the combination, including the latch receiver and the latch pin, and have been examined as such.
In regards to claims 13-16 and 19, the metes and bounds of the claims are unclear. The limitations within each of these claims requires the latch receiver and/or the latch pin to define the operational method of the alignment system in combination with the latch receiver and the latch pin. For example, if claim 12 were to be considered as drawn to the alignment system alone, so without the latch receiver and the latch pin, then claim 13 would have no limitations to be examined because the entire claim refers to method steps of controlling the amount of travel of the latch receiver and the latch pin. For examination purposes, the claims have been examined as drawn to the combination, requiring the latch receiver and the latch pin.
In regards to claim 19, the relationship between the “coupling event” in claim 19 and the “coupling event” in claim 12 is unclear from the claim language. It is understood from the specification that the “coupling event” of claim 19 is equivalent to the “coupling event” of claim 12, and has been examined as such. See claim objections above.
In regards to claim 20, it is unclear how the first and second spring assemblies as a whole disengage from the surface of the body, when the preceding lines of the claim recite that the first and second pins of the first and second spring assemblies engage, and therefore disengage, from the surface of the body, not the assemblies as a whole. Furthermore, the claim does not set forth that the latch receiver and the latch pin can couple with one another, thereby, providing antecedent basis for the coupling recited in lines 19 and 20, and providing the decoupling state in which the first and second pins engage the surfaces of the latch receiver and latch pin, respectively. For examination purposes, the claim has been examined with the language set forth in the claim objection above.
In regards to claims 7, 8, 17, and 18, these claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) because they depend from claims 1 and 12.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-6, 11-16, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Roedding et al. (US-2113747).
In regards to claim 1, Roedding et al. discloses an alignment system configured to control alignment of a latch pin 6 (considered as a pin since it has an elongated section 10, Figure 1) with a latch receiver 15, the alignment system comprising: a first spring assembly comprising: a first spring housing 14 configured to be operably coupled with a first structure 2, the first spring housing including a first pocket (see Figure 1 below); a first spring 23 configured to be disposed within the first pocket (Figure 1); and a first pin 19 configured to be disposed within the first pocket, the first pin extending between a first end configured to engage the first spring (see Figure 1 below, with the first end engaging the first spring via the component shown in Figure 1 below) and a second end 24 configured to extending out of the first pocket and a distance away from the first spring housing (the second end extending a distance away from the point of the housing shown in Figure 1 below) and engage a surface of a body of the latch receiver to control a position of the body of the latch receiver (see Figure 1 below), wherein the first spring is axially aligned with the first pin within the first pocket and controls an amount of travel of the first pin within the first pocket (Page 1, Col. 1, lines 35-37, and Page 1, Col. 2, lines 21-35); and a second spring assembly comprising: a second spring housing 5 configured to be coupled with a second structure 1, the second spring housing including a second pocket (see Figure 1 below); a second spring 8 configured to be disposed within the second pocket; and a second pin (see Figure 1 below) configured to be disposed within the second pocket, the second pin extending between a third end configured to engage the second spring (see Figure 1 below, with the third end engaging the second spring via the second spring housing) and a fourth end (see Figure 1 below) configured to extend out of the second pocket and a distance away from the second spring housing (extends a distance away from the point of the housing shown in Figure 1 below) and engage a surface of a body of the latch pin to control a position of the body of the latch pin (see Figure 1 below), wherein the second spring is axially aligned with the second pin within the second pocket and controls an amount of travel of the second pin within the second pocket (Page 1, Col. 1, lines 35-37, and Page 1, Col. 2, lines 21-35).
PNG
media_image1.png
902
885
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 2, Roedding et al. discloses that the latch pin is configured to engage and disengage from the latch receiver (Figure 2), and wherein the first spring assembly is configured to control the position of the body of the latch receiver and the second spring assembly is configured to control the position of the body of the latch pin when the latch pin is disengaged from the latch receiver (the latch pins and springs are still providing bias or control to the latch receiver and the latch pin when the latch pin is disengaged from the latch receiver).
In regards to claim 4, Roedding et al. discloses that the first pin is configured to control a distance of rotational travel of the body of the latch receiver (Figures 1 and 2), and the second pin is configured to control a distance of rotational travel of the body of the latch pin (Figures 1 and 2).
In regards to claim 5, Roedding et al. discloses that the first pin is configured to exert a force onto the body of the latch receiver in a direction of rotation that is opposite a direction of rotation of the body of the latch receiver while the latch pin is disengaged from the latch receiver (the first pin forces the latch receiver in a clockwise direction in Figure 1 which is opposite to the rotation of the body of the latch receiver in a counterclockwise direction to the disengaged position in Figure 2).
In regards to claim 6, Roedding et al. discloses that the second pin is configured to exert a force onto the body of the latch pin in a direction of rotation that is opposite a direction of rotation of the body of the latch pin while the latch pin is disengaged from the latch receiver (the second pin forces the latch pin in a clockwise direction in Figure 1 which is opposite to the rotation of the body of the latch pin in a counterclockwise direction at the end of the disengaging process when end 26 pushes portion 10 of the latch pin in the counterclockwise direction before the end 26 is moved free of portion 10, causing the second pin to force the latch pin into the position in Figure 2, Page 1, Col. 1, lines 21-35).
In regards to claim 11, Roedding et al. discloses that the first spring assembly is configured to control the position of the latch receiver and the second spring assembly is configured to control the position of the body of the latch pin during a coupling element of the latch pin and the latch receiver (the first and second spring assemblies apply force, and thereby control, to the latch pin and the latch receiver when the handle 22 is released in Figure 2 such that the latch pin and the latch receiver engage as shown in Figure 1).
In regards to claim 12, Roedding et al. discloses a method for aligning a latch receiver 15 with a latch pin 6 (considered as a pin since it has an elongated section 10, Figure 1) during a coupling event of the latch pin with the latch receiver (during movement of the latch receiver and the latch pin back into engagement from the position in Figure 2 to the position in Figure 1), the method comprising: controlling an amount of travel of a body of the latch receiver (see Figure 1 on Page 9 of the current Office Action) operably coupled with a first structure 2 via a first spring assembly (Figure 1), the first spring assembly comprising a first spring housing 14 configured to be operably coupled with the first structure, the first spring housing including a first pocket (see Figure 1 on Page 9 of the current Office Action) configured to receive a first spring 23 and a first pin 19, the first pin extending between a first end configured to engage the first spring (see Figure 1 on Page 9 of the current Office Action, with the first end engaging the first spring via the component shown in Figure 1 on Page 9 of the current Office Action) and a second end 24 configured to extend out of the first pocket, the second end of the first pin configured to engage a surface of the body of the latch receiver (see Figure 1 on Page 9 of the current Office Action), the first spring axially aligned with the first pin and configured to control an amount of travel of the first pin within the first pocket (Page 1, Col. 1, lines 35-37, and Page 1, Col. 2, lines 21-35); and controlling an amount of travel of a body of the latch pin (see Figure 1 on Page 9 of the current Office Action) operably coupled with a second structure 1 via a second spring assembly (Figure 1), the second spring assembly comprising a second spring housing 5 configured to be operably coupled with the second structure, the second spring housing including a second pocket (see Figure 1 on Page 9 of the current Office Action) configured to receive a second spring 8 and a second pin (see Figure 1 on Page 9 of the current Office Action), the second pin extending between a third end configured to engage the second spring (see Figure 1 on Page 9 of the current Office Action, with the third end engaging the second spring via the second spring housing) and a fourth end (see Figure 1 on Page 9 of the current Office Action) configured to extend out of the second pocket, the fourth end configured to engage a surface of the body of the latch pin (see Figure 1 on Page 9 of the current Office Action, the second spring axially aligned with the second pin and configured to control an amount of travel of the second pin within the second pocket (Page 1, Col. 1, lines 35-37, and Page 1, Col. 2, lines 21-35).
In regards to claim 13, Roedding et al. discloses that the latch pin is configured to engage and disengage from the latch receiver (Figures 1 and 2), and wherein the controlling of the amount of travel of the body of the latch receiver and the controlling of the amount of travel of the body of the latch pin occurs while the latch pin is disengaged from the latch receiver (the latch pins and springs are still providing bias or control to the latch receiver and the latch pin when the latch pin is disengaged from the latch receiver).
In regards to claim 14, Roedding et al. discloses that the first pin control the amount of travel of the body of the latch receiver (Figures 1 and 2), and wherein the second pin controls the amount of travel of the body of the latch pin (Figures 1 and 2).
In regards to claim 15, Roedding et al. discloses that the method further comprises exerting a force onto the body of the latch receiver with the first pin in a direction of rotation that is opposite a direction of rotation of the body of the latch receiver while the latch pin is disengaged from the latch receiver (the first pin forces the latch receiver in a clockwise direction in Figure 1 which is opposite to the rotation of the body of the latch receiver in a counterclockwise direction to the disengaged position in Figure 2).
In regards to claim 16, Roedding et al. discloses that the method further comprises exerting a force onto the body of the latch pin with the second pin in a direction of rotation that is opposite a direction of rotation of the body of the latch pin while the latch pin is disengaged from the latch receiver (the second pin forces the latch pin in a clockwise direction in Figure 1 which is opposite to the rotation of the body of the latch pin in a counterclockwise direction at the end of the disengaging process when end 26 pushes portion 10 of the latch pin in the counterclockwise direction before the end 26 is moved free of portion 10, causing the second pin to force the latch pin into the position in Figure 2, Page 1, Col. 1, lines 21-35).
In regards to claim 19, Roedding et al. discloses that the method further comprises controlling the amount of travel of the body of the latch receiver and controlling the amount of travel of the body of the latch pin to align the latch pin with a receiving pocket (pocket between portion 18 and upright portion of the latch receiver with reference character 15, Figure 1) of the latch receiver during the coupling event of the latch pin and the latch receiver (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(s) 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roedding et al. (US-2113747) in view of Turnbull (US-1566937). Roedding et al. fails to disclose two of the first spring assemblies, wherein the second end of the first pin of one of the first spring assemblies is configured to engage the surface of the body of the latch receiver on a first side of the latch receiver, and the second end of the first pin of the other first spring assembly is configured to engage the surface of the body of the latch receiver on a second side of the latch receiver. Roedding et al. also fails to disclose two of the second spring assemblies, wherein the fourth end of the second pin of one of the at least two of the second spring assemblies is configured to engage the surface of the body of the latch pin on a first side of the latch pin, and the fourth end of the second pin of the other second spring assembly is configured to engage the surface of the body of the latch pin on a second side of the latch pin. Turnbull teaches a first movable component 21 having two first spring assemblies 22, 23, 26 (Figure 3) that engage with a surface of a body of the first movable component on first and second sides of the first movable component (Figure 3), and a second movable component 12 having two second spring assemblies 34, 35, 37 (Figure 3) that engage with a surface (surface created by portions 12 and 36, Figure 3) of a body of the second movable component on first and second sides of the second movable component (Figure 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s invention to include a second one of both the first and second spring assemblies, with reasonable expectation of success, since it has been held that duplicating the components of a prior art device is a design consideration within the skill of the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
As noted above in the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), claims 3, 7, 8, 17, and 18 were examined as drawn to the combination.
Claims 3, 7, 8, 17, and 18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Although the references of record show some features similar to those of applicant’s device, the prior art fails to teach or make obvious the invention of claims 3, 7, 8, 17, 18, and 20.
In regards to claim 3, Baehr (US-4428609) fails to disclose that the second end of the first pin is configured to disengage from the surface of the body of the latch receiver and the fourth end of the second pin is configured to disengage from the surface of the body of the latch pin while the latch pin is coupled with the latch receiver. The first pin and the second pin of Baehr do not move relative to the bodies of the latch receiver and the latch pin, respectively, and therefore, no disengagement occurs. The examiner can find no motivation to modify the device of Baehr without employing improper hindsight reasoning and without destroying the intended structure and operation of the device.
In regards to claim 3, Roedding et al. (US-2113747) fails to disclose that the fourth end of the second pin is configured to disengage from the surface of the body of the latch pin while the latch pin is coupled with the latch receiver. The fourth end of the second pin is never shown or discussed to disengage from the surface of the body during operation of the device of Roedding et al. The examiner can find no motivation to modify the device of Roedding et al. without employing improper hindsight reasoning and without destroying the intended structure and operation of the device.
In regards to claim 7, Baehr (US-4428609) and Roedding et al. (US-2113747) both fail to disclose that the first pin includes a passage extending between a first side surface and a second side surface of the first pin, the passage configured to receive a first extension component, the first extension component configured to control a distance of travel of the pin into and out of the first pocket. The examiner can find no motivation to modify the devices of Baehr and Roedding et al. without employing improper hindsight reasoning and without destroying the intended structure and operation of the devices.
In regards to claim 8, Baehr (US-4428609) and Roedding et al. (US-2113747) both fail to disclose that the second pin includes a passage extending between a first side surface and a second side surface of the second pin, the passage configured to receive a second extension component, the second extension component configured to control a distance of travel of the second pin into and out of the second pocket. The examiner can find no motivation to modify the devices of Baehr and Roedding et al. without employing improper hindsight reasoning and without destroying the intended structure and operation of the devices.
In regards to claim 17, Baehr (US-4428609) and Roedding et al. (US-2113747) both fail to disclose that the method includes controlling a distance of travel of the first pin into and out of the first pocket with a first extension component, the first extension component disposed within a passage of the first pin. In regards to Baehr specifically, the first pin of Baehr does not travel or move in and out of the first pocket. The examiner can find no motivation to modify the devices of Baehr and Roedding et al. without employing improper hindsight reasoning and without destroying the intended structure and operation of the devices.
In regards to claim 18, Baehr (US-4428609) and Roedding et al. (US-2113747) both fail to disclose that the method includes controlling a distance of travel of the second pin into and out of the second pocket with a second extension component, the second extension component disposed within a passage of the second pin. In regards to Baehr specifically, the second pin of Baehr does not travel or move in and out of the second pocket. The examiner can find no motivation to modify the devices of Baehr and Roedding et al. without employing improper hindsight reasoning and without destroying the intended structure and operation of the devices.
In regards to claim 20, Baehr (US-4428609) fails to disclose that even if the first and second spring assemblies were duplicated, the first pin of the first spring assembly is not configured to disengage from the surface of the body of the latch receiver and the second pin of the second spring assembly is not configured to disengage from the surface of the body of the latch pin when the latch pin is coupled with the latch receiver. The first and second pins of Baehr do not move relative to the latch pin and the latch receiver, and therefore, no disengagement occurs. The examiner can find no motivation to modify the device of Baehr without employing improper hindsight reasoning and without destroying the intended structure and operation of the device.
In regards to claim 20, Roedding et al. (US-2113747) in view of Turnbull (US-1566937) fails to disclose that the second pins of the second spring assemblies are configured to disengage from the surface of the body of the latch pin when the latch pin is couped with the latch receiver. The second pin of Roedding et al. is never shown or discussed to disengage from the surface of the body of the latch pin. The examiner can find no motivation to modify the device of Roedding et al. without employing improper hindsight reasoning and without destroying the intended structure and operation of the device.
Response to Arguments
In light of applicant’s amendments to the claims, new rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), 102, and 103 are set forth in the current Office Action.
In light of applicant’s amendments to the drawings and claims, the objections to the drawings set forth in the previous Office Action are withdrawn.
In regards to applicant’s remarks concerning the claim interpretations of claims 1 and 12, applicant is referred to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) in the current Office Action based on applicant’s response including applicant’s amendments to the claims and applicant’s remarks concerning those amendments.
In light of applicant’s amendments to the claims, the claim objections and rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in the previous Office Action are withdrawn, however, new claim objections and rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) based on applicant’s response including applicant’s amendments to the claims and applicant’s remarks concerning those amendments are set forth in the current Office Action.
Conclusion
45. 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.
46. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALYSON MERLINO whose telephone number is (571)272-2219. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7 AM to 3 PM.
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, Christine Mills can be reached at 571-272-8322. 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.
/ALYSON M MERLINO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675 June 17, 2026
Prosecution Insights