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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1, 5-10, 13-14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Number 9,732,549 to Chow.
Chow discloses a podium comprising: a secure storage area defined by: a service side defining an opening that accesses the secure storage area; a back panel; and a plurality of secondary sides (storage area shown in figure 3); a door frame (6) extending as a first elongate body from the service side in a transverse direction into the secure storage area; a latch (door frame ledge structure) extending from the door frame in an axial direction orthogonal to the transverse direction; and a door (2) pivotably coupled to the door frame, wherein a portion of a door contacts the latch when the door is pivoted (via 10, 15, 16) towards the secure storage area, thereby preventing the door from entering the secure storage area, and wherein the door comprises: a frame abutment body (orthogonal structure extending in the lateral direction of the door) that extends as a second elongate body in the transverse direction from a main body of the door, wherein the frame abutment body defines an elongated edge configured to contact the latch when the door is pivoted towards the secure storage area (figures 5 and 7), and a catch (shoulder structure that contacts the door frame ledge) extending, in the axial direction as a third elongate body, from the elongated edge of the frame abutment body, wherein the catch is configured to contact the latch when the door is pivoted towards the secure storage area (figures 5 and 7), as in claim 1.
PNG
media_image1.png
197
251
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Chow also discloses a second latch extending from the door frame in the axial direction, wherein the second latch is positioned along a different side of the door frame than the latch (figures 5-11 show latches disposed on both sides of the door frame), as in claim 5, and the latch extends from the door frame only in the axial direction orthogonal to the transverse direction (as best shown in figure 3), as in claim 6.
Chow further discloses the door further comprises: one or more reinforcement sections (axial extending material at the distal end of the door, figure 5), wherein the one or more reinforcement sections extend along an interior surface the main body of the door, wherein the interior surface faces the transverse direction into the secure storage area when the door is pivoted towards the secure storage area (figures 5-11), as in claim 7, wherein the one or more reinforcement sections comprise additional material configured to increase the force required to leverage the door to the open position when the door secured in a closed position (additional material thickens the door), as in claim 8, as well as at least one of the one or more reinforcement sections extends in a different direction along the interior surface of the main body of the door compared to at least one other reinforcement section (reinforcement section extend about the periphery of the door and filled therein), as in claim 9.
Chow additionally discloses the door further comprises a locking member (25), and the locking member is positioned along a different side of the door from the frame abutment body and the catch (figures 4-6), as in claim 10, and the catch is configured to prevent access to the secured storage area by kicking the door (contact between the latch and the catch prevent unauthorized access thereof), as in claim 13, as well as the catch is configured to prevent a leveraging device from torquing or twisting of the door when the door is secured in a closed position (labyrinth path prevents torquing of the door in relation to the door frame), as in claim 14, wherein the number of frame abutment bodies and catches of the door correspond with the number of edges of the main body of the door (figures 2-3), as in claim 16.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chow, as applied above.
Chow discloses the invention substantially as claimed. Chow discloses the frame abutment body and the door frame, when in a closed position, define a gap therebetween (as shown in figure 1), as in claim 4.
However, Chow does not disclose the dimension of the gap. It is common knowledge in the prior art to minimize the gap between a door and a door frame in the same field of endeavor for the purpose of preventing foreign objects from entering through the gap and gaining unauthorized to the contents. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the dimension of the gap be less than or equal to 3/16 inch in order to prevent unauthorized access between the frame abutment body and the door frame. A change in the size of a prior art device is a design consideration within the skill of the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Claim(s) 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chow, as applied above.
Chow teaches the safe is typically constructed of metal plates. However, Chow does not a section of the assembly is constructed by metal break-forming.
It is common knowledge in the prior art to form structures with metal plates by utilizing a metal brake in the same field of endeavor for the purpose of shaping simple bends or creases to form the safe assembly. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to create the shape of the safe using a metal brake in order to simplify the construction process.
Chow also discloses at least one of the door, the frame abutment body, or the catch is a strengthened section of the podium (thickened portion of the door), as in claim 11, wherein the strengthened section of the podium prevents the door from being leveraged to an open position from a closed position (the arrangement of the labyrinth prevents a tool from being placed between the door and the door frame), as in claim 12.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chow, as applied above, in view of U.S. Patent Number 3,143,983 to Maynard.
Chow discloses the invention substantially as claimed. Chow discloses the door being substantially rectangular in shape. Maynard teaches of a safe comprising: a secure storage area defined by: a service side defining an opening that accesses the secure storage area; a back panel; and a plurality of secondary sides (storage area shown in figure 1); a door frame (frame surrounding opening 12) extending from the service side in a transverse direction into the secure storage area; a latch (17-20) extending from the door frame in an axial direction orthogonal to the transverse direction, wherein a portion of the door contacts the latch when the door is pivoted (33) towards the secure storage area, thereby preventing the door from entering the secure storage area; and a door (16) pivotably coupled to the door frame, wherein the door comprises: a frame abutment body (24) that extends in the transverse direction from a main body of the door, wherein the frame abutment body defines an elongated edge configured to contact the latch when the door is pivoted towards the secure storage area (figures 1 and 2), and a catch (34) extending, in the axial direction, from the elongated edge of the frame abutment body, wherein the catch is configured to contact the latch when the door is pivoted towards the secure storage area (figure 2), wherein the door is not of rectangular shape (figure 1 shows the door being circular in shape), as in claim 15.
Because both Chow and Maynard teach safe enclosures with pivoting doors, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to substitute the rectangular shaped door in Chow with cylindrical shaped door as taught by Maynard to achieve the predictable result of providing a tight, nonbinding interfit between the safe door and the body opening. A change in the shape of a prior art device is a design consideration within the level of skill of one skilled in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 15, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to the applicant’s arguments concerning the use of the terms “ledge,” “surface,” and “shoulder” of Chow to identify surfaces, and not the claimed “bodies”, the examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner identified the respective structures in Chow to assist the applicant in understanding the reference and the associated figures. Chow clearly discloses the door being comprised of various three-dimension structures of cuboid shapes integrally combined to produce the overall construction of the door and to provide a resistance to break-in as a solid body. Moreover, Chow does not use the terms “ledge” and “shoulder” within its disclosure, and uses “surface” to describe a plane of the safe.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER J BOSWELL whose telephone number is (571)272-7054. The examiner can normally be reached M-R: 9-4; F 9-12.
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.
/CHRISTOPHER J BOSWELL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
CJB /cb/
September 18, 2025