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 .
This Office Action is in response to RCE filed on 2/17/26.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the limitations of new claim 30, see 112 2nd paragraph rejection below, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 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 30 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 30 requires that the switch triggers a latch release that is immediately adjacent to an edge of the vehicle door.
At the instant, there is no support for that in the application. As described, see paragraphs 17 and 20, the switch unlatches the door by releasing the 1st and 2nd latch components.
Therefore, in order to continue with the examination, a very broad interpretation will be given. Correction is required.
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, 9-11, 15, 16, 22, 23, and 25-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2019027076 to Ono et al (Ono) in view of US Pat No 4,895403 to Osenkows, DE 10309821 to Menke et al (Menke) and DE 102019131339 to Schwier.
PNG
media_image1.png
417
456
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 1, 9 and 15, Ono discloses an apparatus that comprises a door (2) that includes a 1st latch component (door latch 1) configured to couple with a 2nd latch component (striker) that is mounted to a jamb; and a push panel (5) covering at least a portion of a cavity. The push panel is configured to release the 1st latch component of the door from coupling with the 2nd latch component mounted to the jamb in response to the push panel being pressed into the cavity (by moving door release lever 7).
PNG
media_image2.png
378
692
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Wherein, the door is configured to be opened by a force pulling on the edge adjacent to the push panel after the 1st latch component is released from coupling the 2nd latch component in response to the push panel being pressed into the cavity.
First, Ono fails to disclose that the push panel and the cavity are provided on the jamb of the vehicle adjacent an upper edge of the door. Ono discloses that the push panel and the cavity are provided on the door and that the door is configured to be opened away from the jamb by the force pulling the door.
PNG
media_image3.png
384
1141
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Osenkows teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a push panel (18) that operates a door latch (not shown), that can be either mounted on a vehicle door (120 or in a jamb or pillar (14) t which the door relatively pivots (col 3 line 27).
PNG
media_image4.png
820
1462
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Menke teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a panel handle (4) located at a region (21) that is located between two adjacent frames parts of a front and rear doors of a vehicle body (11). The region (21) is part of the B or C pillar section of the vehicle body, and located in a location adjacent an upper edge of the door (1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the push panel/cavity described by Ono coupled to a jamb of the vehicle, as taught by Osenkows, and adjacent an upper edge of the door, as taught by Menke, in order to provide a clean door surface or to provide less structure within the door.
Second, Ono fails to disclose that the push panel is configured to actuate the switch in response to the push panel being pressed into the cavity. Ono discloses that the apparatus comprises a switch (4) to electrically release the 1st latch component from the 2nd latch component. The switch is located within the cavity and is actuated by the user.
PNG
media_image5.png
453
854
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Schwier teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a push panel (30) that will operate a switch (36) in response to the push panel being pressed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the switch described by Ono being operated by the push panel, as taught by Schwier, in order to automatically operate the switch.
As to claims 2, 10 and 16, Ono is configured to have the door unlatched from the jamb by an extending motion of a hand, the extending motion pressing the push panel (15) into the cavity after overcoming actuation resistance of the push panel but overcoming no inertial resistance of the door.
As to claims 3 and 11, Ono is configured to have the door opened away from the jamb by a retracting motion of a hand, the retracting motion pulling the edge of the door after overcoming inertial resistance of the door but no actuation desistance of the push panel.
As to claim 4, Ono discloses that the door includes a handle (at 16) along an interior surface, adjacent to the push panel (5).
As to claim 22, Ono, as modified by Osenkows and Menke, teaches that push panel is capable of being coupled to the jamb about a pivotable axis located at a top of the cavity, and is adjacent to the upper edge of the door when the door is closed against the jamb.
As to claim 23, Ono discloses that the first latch component and the second latch component (latch and striker) are located away from the cavity.
As to claim 25, Menke illustrates that the door is capable of terminating in an acute comer. The combination will then be capable of having the termination adjacent to the push panel in its closed position, and a distal end of the handle aligns with the cute corner of the door.
Applicant is reminded that 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.
As to claim 26, Ono, as modified by Osenkows and Menke, teaches that the entirety of the push panel is pressed into the cavity of the jamb by rotating the push panel about the axis located at the top of the cavity.
As to claim 27, Menke teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a panel handle (4) with a sensing unit (2’) configured to detect when the push panel is pressed into the cavity of the jamb, wherein the sensing unit is configured to communicate with a lock controller to lock or unlock the door.
As to claim 28, Ono discloses that the push panel is pressed into the cavity by pivoting about a pivotable axis located at the top of the cavity. Osenkows and Menke teaches that the push panel/cavity is coupled to a jamb of the vehicle. Schwier teaches that the push panel will press the switch in response to the push panel being pressed.
As to claim 29, Ono, as modified by Osenkows, Menke and Schwier, will teach that the switch is mounted to the jamb within the cavity adjacent the upper edge of the vehicle door.
As to claim 30, Ono discloses that the switch triggers a latch release (9). In combination with Osenkows and Menke, the latch release will be adjacent to the edge of the door.
Claim(s) 6, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2019027076 to Ono et al (Ono) in view of US Pat No 4,895403 to Osenkows, DE 10309821 to Menke et al (Menke), DE 102019131339 to Schwier, and further in view of US Pat No 9,227,558 to Spence et al (Spence) and US Pat No 5,611,613 to Bergen et al (Bergen).
Ono, as modified by Osenkows, Schwier and Menke, fails to disclose that the apparatus comprises a light source at the jamb; and the push panel including a light pipe configured to receive light from the light source and emit the received light from the push panel.
PNG
media_image6.png
568
564
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Spence teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a movable panel (24) with a light pipe (42) that receives light from a light source (LED not shown) and emit the received light.
PNG
media_image7.png
482
700
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Bergen teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a light source (58) located remotely from where the light will be emitted by a light pipe assembly (66, 68, 72).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the apparatus described by Ono, as modified by Osenkows, Schwier and Menke, with a light pipe/light source, as taught by Spence, in order to illuminate a desired area or provide indication to the user.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the light source remotely, as taught by Bergen, in order to provide the elements at any desired location while performing the function desired.
Claim(s) 8 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2019027076 to Ono et al (Ono) in view of US Pat No 4,895403 to Osenkows, DE 10309821 to Menke et al (Menke), DE 102019131339 to Schwier and further in view of US Pat No 10,794,096 to Hamacher et al (Hamacher).
Ono discloses that the apparatus comprises a spring (5c) configured to move the push panel out of the cavity after the push panel is pressed into the cavity.
However, Ono, as modified by Osenkows, Schwier and Menke, fails to disclose a damper configured to slow the push panel while the push panel is moving out of the cavity.
PNG
media_image8.png
412
573
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Hamacher teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a damper (48) configured to slow the movement of a movable panel (12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the apparatus described by Ono, as modified by Osenkows, Schwier and Menke, with a damper, as taught by Hamacher, in order to slow the movement of the panel.
Claim(s) 1-4, 9-11, 15, 16, 22, 23, and 25-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2019027076 to Ono et al (Ono) in view of US Pat No 4,895403 to Osenkows, DE 10309821 to Menke et al (Menke) and US Pat Application Publication No 20240418018 to Zhou.
Regarding claims 1, 9 and 15, Ono discloses an apparatus that comprises a door (2) that includes a 1st latch component (door latch 1) configured to couple with a 2nd latch component (striker) that is mounted to a jamb; and a push panel (5) covering at least a portion of a cavity. The push panel is configured to release the 1st latch component of the door from coupling with the 2nd latch component mounted to the jamb in response to the push panel being pressed into the cavity (by moving door release lever 7).
Wherein, the door is configured to be opened by a force pulling on the edge adjacent to the push panel after the 1st latch component is released from coupling the 2nd latch component in response to the push panel being pressed into the cavity.
First, Ono fails to disclose that the push panel and the cavity are provided on the jamb of the vehicle adjacent an upper edge of the door. Ono discloses that the push panel and the cavity are provided on the door and that the door is configured to be opened away from the jamb by the force pulling the door.
Osenkows teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a push panel (18) that operates a door latch (not shown), that can be either mounted on a vehicle door (120 or in a jamb or pillar (14) t which the door relatively pivots (col 3 line 27).
Menke teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a panel handle (4) located at a region (21) that is located between two adjacent frames parts of a front and rear doors of a vehicle body (11). The region (21) is part of the B or C pillar section of the vehicle body, and located in a location adjacent an upper edge of the door (1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the push panel/cavity described by Ono coupled to a jamb of the vehicle, as taught by Osenkows, and adjacent an upper edge of the door, as taught by Menke, in order to provide a clean door surface or to provide less structure within the door.
Second, Ono fails to disclose that the push panel is configured to actuate the switch in response to the push panel being pressed into the cavity. Ono discloses that the apparatus comprises a switch (4) to electrically release the 1st latch component from the 2nd latch component. The switch is located within the cavity and is actuated by the user.
PNG
media_image9.png
531
929
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Zhou teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a push panel (300) that will operate a switch (200) in response to the push panel being pressed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the switch described by Ono being operated by the push panel, as taught by Zhou, in order to automatically operate the switch.
As to claims 2, 10 and 16, Ono is configured to have the door unlatched from the jamb by an extending motion of a hand, the extending motion pressing the push panel (15) into the cavity after overcoming actuation resistance of the push panel but overcoming no inertial resistance of the door.
As to claims 3 and 11, Ono is configured to have the door opened away from the jamb by a retracting motion of a hand, the retracting motion pulling the edge of the door after overcoming inertial resistance of the door but no actuation desistance of the push panel.
As to claim 4, Ono discloses that the door includes a handle (at 16) along an interior surface, adjacent to the push panel (5).
As to claim 22, Ono, as modified by Osenkows and Menke, teaches that push panel is capable of being coupled to the jamb about a pivotable axis located at a top of the cavity, and is adjacent to the upper edge of the door when the door is closed against the jamb.
As to claim 23, Ono discloses that the first latch component and the second latch component (latch and striker) are located away from the cavity.
As to claim 25, Menke illustrates that the door is capable of terminating in an acute comer. The combination will then be capable of having the termination adjacent to the push panel in its closed position, and a distal end of the handle aligns with the cute corner of the door.
Applicant is reminded that 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.
As to claim 26, Ono, as modified by Osenkows and Menke, teaches that the entirety of the push panel is pressed into the cavity of the jamb by rotating the push panel about the axis located at the top of the cavity.
As to claim 27, Menke teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a panel handle (4) with a sensing unit (2’) configured to detect when the push panel is pressed into the cavity of the jamb, wherein the sensing unit is configured to communicate with a lock controller to lock or unlock the door.
As to claim 28, Ono discloses that the push panel is pressed into the cavity by pivoting about a pivotable axis located at the top of the cavity. Osenkows and Menke teaches that the push panel/cavity is coupled to a jamb of the vehicle. Zhou teaches that the push panel will press the switch in response to the push panel being pressed.
As to claim 29, Ono, as modified by Osenkows, Menke and Zhou, will teach that the switch is mounted to the jamb within the cavity adjacent the upper edge of the vehicle door.
As to claim 30, Ono discloses that the switch triggers a latch release (9). In combination with Osenkows and Menke, the latch release will be adjacent to the edge of the door.
Claim(s) 6, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2019027076 to Ono et al (Ono) in view of US Pat No 4,895403 to Osenkows, DE 10309821 to Menke et al (Menke), US Pat Application Publication No 20240418018 to Zhou, and further in view of US Pat No 9,227,558 to Spence et al (Spence) and US Pat No 5,611,613 to Bergen et al (Bergen).
Ono, as modified by Osenkows, Zhou and Menke, fails to disclose that the apparatus comprises a light source at the jamb; and the push panel including a light pipe configured to receive light from the light source and emit the received light from the push panel.
Spence teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a movable panel (24) with a light pipe (42) that receives light from a light source (LED not shown) and emit the received light.
Bergen teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a light source (58) located remotely from where the light will be emitted by a light pipe assembly (66, 68, 72).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the apparatus described by Ono, as modified by Osenkows, Zhou and Menke, with a light pipe/light source, as taught by Spence, in order to illuminate a desired area or provide indication to the user.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the light source remotely, as taught by Bergen, in order to provide the elements at any desired location while performing the function desired.
Claim(s) 8 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2019027076 to Ono et al (Ono) in view of US Pat No 4,895403 to Osenkows, DE 10309821 to Menke et al (Menke), to US Pat Application Publication No 20240418018 to Zhou and further in view of US Pat No 10,794,096 to Hamacher et al (Hamacher).
Ono discloses that the apparatus comprises a spring (5c) configured to move the push panel out of the cavity after the push panel is pressed into the cavity.
However, Ono, as modified by Osenkows, Zhou and Menke, fails to disclose a damper configured to slow the push panel while the push panel is moving out of the cavity.
Hamacher teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a damper (48) configured to slow the movement of a movable panel (12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the apparatus described by Ono, as modified by Osenkows, Zhou and Menke, with a damper, as taught by Hamacher, in order to slow the movement of the panel.
Response to Arguments
The current amendment to claims 1, 9 and 15 is just incorporating the limitations of claim 7, 13, 19 and 24. As mentioned during prosecution, Ono discloses that the push panel is pressed into the cavity by pivoting about a pivotable axis located at the top of the cavity. Osenkows and Menke teaches that the push panel/cavity is coupled to a jamb of the vehicle. Schwier teaches that the push panel will press the switch in response to the push panel being pressed.
Furthermore, a new rejection has been made on the record in view of Zhou, to demonstrate that it is well known in the art to provide a push panel that will operate a switch in response to the push panel being pressed.
Therefore, the arguments are still not persuasive and the rejection is maintained.
Furthermore, in view of the amendment, a new drawing objection and a new 112 2nd paragraph rejection has been made on the record in view of new claim 30.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLOS LUGO whose telephone number is (571)272-7058. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6pm.
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.
/Carlos Lugo/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3675
March 7, 2026