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 following office action is in response to the reply filed December 17, 2025.
Drawings
The drawing correction filed December 17, 2025 has not been approved for the following reasons.
The drawings are objected to because they fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(l) since the lines, numbers, and letters are not sufficiently dense and dark, and uniformly thick and well-defined as to give the drawings satisfactory reproduction characteristics. Additionally, the shading in figures 1-4, 10, 12, 15, 22, 23 and 25 needs to be removed since it is confusing.
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.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because “a drive shaft” on line 3 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is unclear if the applicant is referring to the drive shaft set forth above or is attempting to set forth a drive shaft in addition to the one set forth above.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1, 3-6 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Worner (US 2017/0362874). Worner discloses a door assist system for a door closer, the system comprising:
a track 16 (fig. 3); and
a drive assembly 10 (fig. 3) operatively coupled to the track 16, wherein the drive assembly 10 comprises:
a carriage 14;
a motor assembly 20 operatively coupled to the carriage 14; and
a drive shaft 34 operatively coupled to the motor assembly 20;
wherein the track 16 is configured to be operatively coupled with a door or with a door frame or a wall;
wherein the drive assembly 10 is configured to be operatively coupled with the door closer through a drive arm 12 (fig. 4), and wherein the door closer (not shown, as the door closer is not positively recited) is configured to be operatively coupled to the opposite of the door or the door frame or the wall to which the track is operatively coupled;
wherein the drive shaft 34 is configured to be operatively coupled to the drive arm 12; and
wherein energy generated by the motor assembly 20 is mechanically transferred to the drive shaft 34; and
wherein the drive assembly 10 is configured to move the drive arm 12 and slide with respect to the track 16 to aid in opening or closing the door (claim 1);
wherein the carriage 14 comprises: one or more slides 14 configured to contact track surfaces (labeled below) allowing the carriage 14 to slide with respect to the track 16 (claim 3);
wherein the carriage comprises: one or more carriage projections (labeled below) configured to extend into one or more holder cavities (labeled below) formed by one or more track projections, wherein the one or more carriage projections (labeled below) and the one or more holder cavities locate the carriage within the track (claim 4);
wherein the one or more carriage projections comprise four carriage projections (labeled below), wherein the one or more track projections comprise four track projections (labeled below), and wherein the one or more holder cavities comprise four holder cavities (labeled below) formed by the four track projections (claim 5).
wherein the carriage 14 comprises: a first carriage portion (labeled below); and a second carriage portion (labeled below) operatively coupled to the first carriage portion to secure the motor assembly 20 and the drive shaft 34 at least partially within the carriage (claim 6);
wherein the track 16 comprises: an upper portion; a face portion; and a mounting portion (claim 8);
wherein the track 16 further comprises: a lower portion defining a drive shaft aperture (labeled below); wherein the drive shaft aperture allows a drive shaft 34 of the drive assembly 10 to slide within the drive shaft aperture when the drive assembly 10 slides with respect to the track (claim 9);
wherein the track 16 further comprises: one or more holder projections (labeled below as track projections) extending into a track cavity (labeled below) defined by the track 16, wherein the one or more holder projections and the track 16 define one or more holder cavities (labeled below) for securing at least a portion of the drive assembly 10 within the track cavity (claim 10).
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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Worner as applied to claims 1, 3-6 and 8-10 above and further in view of DE 196 18 834. Worner discloses that the motor assembly 20 comprising a motor 20; and a drive train 32, 38 operatively coupled to the motor 20; wherein the motor assembly has a reduction ratio.
Worner is silent concerning the specific reduction ratio to transfer torque from the motor to the drive shaft.
However, DE 196 18 834 discloses a door assist system comprising a motor assembly which comprises a motor 12 (fig. 5); and a drive train 15 operatively coupled to the motor 12; wherein the motor assembly has a reduction ratio to transfer torque from the motor 12 to a drive shaft (labeled below).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide Worner with a drive train, as taught by DE 196 18 834, with a reasonable expectation of success to reduce the amount of horizontal space required to house the drive assembly.
Additionally, 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 with a reduction ratio of at least 30 to 1 to increase the torque output of the motor to ensure that the motor assembly is able to move the door between opened and closed positions.
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Worner as applied to claims 1, 3-6 and 8-10 above, and further in view of Houser et al. (US 2006/0010771). Houser et al. discloses one or more sensors 170 to determine when to activate or deactivate a drive assembly 100 as set forth on lines 7-12 of paragraph 47, wherein the one or more sensors 170 comprise a position sensor as set forth on lines 7-12 of paragraph 47, a force sensor, or an accelerometer sensor (claim 11);
wherein the one or more sensors 170 comprise: the position sensor as set forth on lines 7-12 of paragraph 47 which is configured to identify a position of a door 42 or the drive assembly 100 for activating or deactivating the drive assembly (claim 12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide Worner with a position sensor, as taught by Houser et al., with a reasonable expectation of success to enable the controller to properly control the drive assembly.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Worner as applied to claims 1, 3-6 and 8-10 above. Worner discloses that the door assist system and a door closure are configured to allow opening and closing of the door, but is silent concerning the forces to allow opening and closing of the door.
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 provide the door assist system of Worner with opening and closing forces which allow opening of the door with less than or equal to five lbs of force and closing of the door with greater than or equal to five lbs of force with a reasonable expectation of success to enable a user to easily open and close the door.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Worner as applied to claims 1, 3-6 and 8-10 above. Worner discloses that the door assist system allows opening and closing of the door, but is silent concerning activating the door assist system to aid in closing the door when the door closer has a closing force that is less than or equal to five pounds of force.
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 activate the door assist system of Worner to aid in closing the door when the door closer has a closing force that is less than or equal to five pounds of force with a reasonable expectation of success to ensure that the door moves from the open position to the closed position. See lines 13-14 of paragraph 37 which discloses the use of the door assist system to close the door.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Worner as applied to claims 1, 3-6 and 8-10 above. Worner discloses that the door assist system is activated to open the door, but is silent as to when the door assist system is activated based on the closing force of the door closer.
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 activate the door assist system of Worner to aid in opening the door when the door closer has a closing force that is greater than or equal to five pounds of force to aid a user in opening the door and to ensure that the door is automatically fully opened.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 196 18 834 in view of Worner (US 2017/0362874). DE 196 18 834 discloses a door closer and assist system comprising:
a door assist comprising:
a track 5 (fig. 5); and
a drive assembly operatively coupled to the track 5, wherein the drive assembly comprises:
a motor assembly 12; and
a drive shaft (labeled below) operatively coupled to the motor
assembly 12;
a door closer 2 (fig. 1); and
a drive arm 3 (figs. 1 and 5) operatively coupling the door assist and the door closer 2;
wherein the door closer 2 is configured to be operatively coupled with a door 1 or with a door frame or a wall;
wherein the track 5 is configured to be operatively coupled to the opposite of the door or the door frame or the wall to which the door closer is operatively coupled;
wherein the drive shaft is configured to be operatively coupled to the drive arm 3 as shown in figure 5;
wherein energy generated by the motor assembly 12 is mechanically transferred to the drive shaft; and
wherein the drive assembly is configured to move the drive arm 3 and slide with respect to the track 5 to aid in opening or closing the door (claim 16).
DE 196 18 834 is silent concerning a carriage.
However, Worner discloses an assist system comprising a track 16 (fig. 3) and a drive assembly which comprises a carriage 14 and a motor assembly 20 operatively coupled to the carriage 14.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide DE 196 18 834 with a carriage, as taught by Worner, with a reasonable expectation of success to ensure the smooth and linear movement of the of the motor assembly as the motor assembly translates along the track.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 196 18 834 in view of Worner as applied to claim 16 above.
DE 196 18 834 discloses that the motor assembly comprises a motor 12 and a drive train 15 operatively coupled to the motor 12 and a drive shaft (labeled below), wherein the motor assembly has a reduction ratio to transfer torque from the motor 12 to the drive shaft.
DE 196 18 834, as modified above, is silent concerning the particular reduction ratio.
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 provide the motor assembly of DE 196 18 834, as modified above, with a reduction ratio of at least 30 to 1 to increase the torque output of the motor to ensure that the motor assembly is able to move the door between opened and closed positions.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 196 18 834 in view of Worner as applied to claim 16 above and further in view of Patriquin et al. (US 3178759). DE 196 18 834, as modified above, is silent concerning the particular structure of the door closer 2.
However, Patriquin et al. discloses a door closer comprising a spring 16 to close a door; and a damper 12 operatively coupled to the spring 16 to control a closing speed of the door.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the door closer of DE 196 18 834, as modified above, with a damper and spring combination, as taught by Patriquin et al., with a reasonable expectation of success to more accurately control the closing speed of the door.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 196 18 834 in view of Worner (US 2017/0362874) and Rietdijk (US 10612288). DE 196 18 834 discloses a method of assisting in opening or closing a door 1 (fig. 1) using a door closer 2 (fig. 1) and assist system comprising:
a door assist having,
a track 5 (fig. 5), and
a drive assembly operatively coupled to the track 5, wherein the drive assembly comprises:
a motor assembly 12; and
a drive shaft (labeled below) operatively coupled to the motor
assembly 12;
a door closer 2 having a drive arm 3 (figs. 1 and 5) operatively coupling the door assist and the door closer 2, wherein the door closer 2 is operatively coupled with the door 1 or with a door frame or a wall, and wherein the track 5 is operatively coupled to the opposite of the door or the door frame or the wall to which the door closer system is operatively coupled, wherein the drive shaft is configured to be operatively coupled to the drive arm 3, wherein energy generated by the motor assembly 12 is mechanically transferred to the drive shaft, and wherein the drive assembly is configured to move the drive arm 3 and slide with respect to the track 5 to aid in opening or closing the door 1, the method comprising:
activating the drive assembly to assist in opening the door 1; or
activating the drive assembly to assist in closing the door 1.
DE 196 18 834 is silent concerning a carriage and a motor assembly operatively coupled to the carriage and identifying when the door is being moved in an open direction and an opening force to open the door is greater than or equal to a set opening force.
However, Worner discloses an assist system comprising a track 16 (fig. 3) and a drive assembly which comprises a carriage 14 and a motor assembly 20 operatively coupled to the carriage 14.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide DE 196 18 834 with a carriage, as taught by Worner, with a reasonable expectation of success to ensure the smooth and linear movement of the of the motor assembly as the motor assembly translates along the track.
Additionally, Rietdijk discloses a method of assisting in opening or closing a door 11 (fig. 1) comprising identifying when the door 11 is being moved in an open direction and an opening force to open the door 11 is greater than or equal to a set opening force, and in response activating a drive assembly 3 to assist in opening the door 11 as set forth on lines 29-32 of column 19.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide DE 196 18 834 with a control algorithm, as taught by Rietdijk, with a reasonable expectation of success to enable a user to initiate power assisted movement of the door by simply moving the door.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 17, 2024 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY J STRIMBU whose telephone number is (571)272-6836. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-4:30 Monday-Friday.
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.
/GREGORY J STRIMBU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634