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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6 April 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities:
in line 3 of claim 6, “the inner end” should likely be --the inner end of the body-- to distinguish from “the inner end” of the striker previously recited in claim 1
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.
Claim 4 is 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.
Claim 4 requires “the structural part of the vehicle body structure comprises an opening.” It is unclear if the “opening” is intended to be a separate structure than the “passage in the structural part” recited in claim 1. The drawings appear to illustrate the striker extending through the same opening/passage as the base, because the passage of the base extends through the passage of the structural part. It is not clear from the specification that the inner end of the striker is structured to extend through an opening of the structural part when connected to the body that is different from the passage of the structural part through which the body extends. For purposes of examination, the opening in the structural part recited in claim 4 will be interpreted as referring to the passage in the structural part previously recited in claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 3, 4, 6, 10, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ham, KR 20100199612 A.
Claim 1: Ham discloses a vehicle door lock redundancy system comprising;
a body (20) attached to a structural part (2) of a vehicle body structure of a vehicle (the inner panel of the hood is a part of a vehicle body structure) and extending through a passage in the structural part (depicted in Fig. 2), the structural part having a first side and a second side (illustrated in Figs. 2-3),
a striker (10) releasably supported by the body, the striker having an inner end comprising a connection part (14) and the striker having an outer end (12), and
a connection member (30) releasably connected to the connection part of the inner end of the striker (the bolt is screw-coupled, which is a releasable connection), wherein the striker is detachable from the body upon release of the connection member from the connection part of the inner end of the striker (the striker can be detached after the bolt is unscrewed and removed),
wherein the outer end of the striker interacts with a locking unit (4) of a vehicle door for releasably connecting the vehicle door to the vehicle body structure (pp. 2-3; the hood correlates to a door because it is a swinging barrier that opens and closes), and
wherein the body comprises a passage through which the inner end of the striker passes (depicted in Fig. 2) so that the outer end of the striker is on the first side of the structural part and the connection part of the inner end of the striker is located on the second side of the structural part (shown in Fig. 1).
Claim 3: Ham discloses the vehicle door lock redundancy system according to claim 1, wherein the outer end is arranged on the outer side of the structural part when connected to the body (shown in Fig. 1).
Claim 4: Ham discloses the vehicle door lock redundancy system according to claim 1, wherein structural part of the vehicle body structure comprises an opening (the structural part comprises an opening to accommodate the tube 20, illustrated in Fig. 2), wherein the inner end is extending through the opening when connected to the body (depicted in Fig. 1), at least partly positioning the inner end of the inner side of the structural part (Figs. 1 and 3) (note interpretation under 112(b) above).
PNG
media_image1.png
513
563
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 6: Ham discloses the vehicle door lock redundancy system according to claim 1, wherein the body comprises an inner end arranged on the inner side of the structural part (Fig. 2 above), wherein the inner end comprises a receiving opening (Fig. 2 above), wherein the connection member is extending through the receiving opening into the connection part when the connection member is connected to the connection part (p. 5 (“the bolt shaft (32) of the fastening bolt (30) is screw-coupled to the upper part of the protrusion (14)”)).
Claim 10: Ham discloses the vehicle door lock redundancy system according to claim 1, wherein the connection member is arranged on the inner side of the structural part (Fig. 2), wherein the connection part is arranged on the inner side of the structural part when connected to the body (Figs. 2-3; p. 5 (the connection member remains on the inner side so the connection part is arranged on the inner side to be connected with the connection member)).
Claim 13: Ham discloses the vehicle door lock redundancy system according to claim 1, wherein the structural part of the vehicle body structure being a wall section (inner panel 2 is structured as a wall section of the vehicle body structure) arranged in connection to an A-pillar, B-pillar, C-pillar, or a D-pillar, of the vehicle body structure (the inner panel is indirectly connected to an A-pillar).
Claim 14: Ham discloses a vehicle (Fig. 1; p. 2) comprising the vehicle door lock redundancy system according to claim 1 (see claim 1 above).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-16 allowed.
Claims 7-9 and 11-12 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.
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 7-9, 11-12, and 15-16.
In regards to claim 7, Ham fails to disclose a releasing mechanism, wherein the releasing mechanism upon activation is configured to release the connection member from the connection part. The examiner can find no motivation to modify the connection member disclosed by Ham to include a release mechanism configured to release the connection member from the connection part without use of impermissible hindsight and/or destroying the intended structure of the device.
In regards to claims 8-9, the prior art fails to disclose each and every limitation of claim 7 from which the claims depend.
Regarding claim 11, Ham discloses the vehicle door lock redundancy system according to claim 1, but is silent to wherein the connection member is configured to be releasably connected to the connection part through snap-action. The examiner can find no motivation to modify the connection member to be releasably connected through snap-action without use of impermissible hindsight and/or destroying the intended structure to define a fully functioning apparatus.
Regarding claim 12, Ham discloses the vehicle door lock redundancy system according to claim 1, wherein the connection member in a normal operating state is connected to the connection part for connecting the striker to the body. However, Ham is silent to an emergency state wherein the connection member is configured to release from the connection part upon activation. The examiner can find no motivation to modify the connection member disclosed by Ham wherein upon activation in an emergency state the connection member is configured to release from the connection part, wherein, when the connection member is released from the connection part the striker can be removed from the body, without use of impermissible hindsight and/or destroying the intended structure.
Regarding claim 15, Ham discloses a method of providing a lock device having a body attached to a structural part of a vehicle body structure of a vehicle and a striker releasably connected to the body. However, Ham is silent to a method of releasing the connection member from the connection part upon activation in an emergency state and removing the striker from the body when the connection member is released from the connection part. The examiner can find no motivation to modify the method disclosed by Ham to be configured for releasing the connection member from the connection part upon activation in an emergency state and removing the striker from the body when the connection member is released from the connection part, without use of impermissible hindsight and/or destroying the intended structure of the device taught by Ham.
In regards to claim 16, the prior art fails to disclose each and every limitation of claim 15 from which the claim depends.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Emily Gail Brown whose telephone number is (571)272-5463. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-6pm 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, Kristina Fulton can be reached at (571) 272-7376. 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.
/EGB/ Examiner, Art Unit 3675
/KRISTINA R FULTON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights