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 § 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-11 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 4,080,813 to McKann in view of US 4,631,866 to Otto et al.
Regarding claim 1, McKann discloses a door assembly comprising: a door panel (11, 12, 13) comprising a plurality of lock bolt holes (31, 32, 33, Fig.1) extending through an edge (13, 22) of the door panel; a lock plate (42) comprising a hole (47), wherein the lock plate is coupled to the edge of the door panel and the lock plate hole is aligned with a respective lock bolt hole of the plurality of lock bolt holes (Fig. 4, 5, 6); and a removable trim plate (55) coupled to the lock plate and disposed over the plurality of lock plate holes (Fig.1).
McKann does not disclose wherein the lock plate comprises a plurality of lock plate holes.
Otto et al. discloses providing a lock plate with a plurality of lock plate holes (58, 60, 62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have provided the lock plate with aligned holes so to enable a user to fill the gap within the adapter assembly all while choosing which bolt lock hole is being used within the assembly.
Regarding claim 2, McKann does not disclose wherein the trim plate (55) comprises a trim plate hole aligned with a first lock bolt hole of the plurality of lock bolt holes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have provided the trim plate with a hole exposing the bolt hole in the door panel, thereby allowing the bolt to travel through the trim plate to engage the striker plate to lock the door assembly.
Regarding claim 3, McKann discloses wherein the trim plate covers the plurality of lock bolt holes (55, Fig.1).
Regarding claims 4-9, McKann does not disclose the specific heights of the holes from the bottom edge 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 have provided holes within the door and the trim plate to coincide with known common heights of door knobs, locks, deadbolts, etc. thereby eliminating the need to drill holes on site during installation.
Regarding claim 10, McKann does not disclose wherein the plurality of lock bolt holes are spaced at least 1 inch apart.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have formed the holes having at least 1 inch of spacing so to ensure the holes ca n be placed at the desired locations and further to ensure that holes do not overlap or interfere with adjacent hardware.
Regarding claim 11, although McKann does not disclose the specific door size, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have formed the door with common, standard dimensions such as 35 3/4 inches by 83 1/8 inches, which coincide with buildings having raised ceiling heights.
Regarding claim 19, McKann discloses further comprising installing in the door panel a lock plate (42) comprising a lock plate hole (47), wherein the lock plate is coupled to the edge of the door panel (Fig.1) and the lock plate hole is aligned with a respective lock bolt hole of the plurality of lock bolt holes (Fig.4-6).
McKann does not disclose wherein the lock plate comprises a plurality of lock plate holes.
Otto et al. discloses providing a lock plate with a plurality of lock plate holes (58, 60, 62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have provided the lock plate with aligned holes so to enable a user to fill the gap within the adapter assembly all while choosing which bolt lock hole is being used within the assembly.
Regarding claim 20, further comprising installing in the door panel a lock assembly at a location corresponding to the first lock bolt hole (Abstract and Background).
Claim(s) 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 4,080,813 to McKann.
Regarding claim 17, McKann discloses a method to install a door, the method comprising: positioning a door panel in a door frame (door having a lock will be installed into a frame), the door panel comprising a plurality of lock bolt holes (31, 32, 33) extending through an edge of the door panel; installing a trim plate (55, Fig.4-6) on the door panel to cover the plurality of lock bolt holes other than the first lock bolt hole (47, Fig.4-6).
McKann does not specifically disclose locating a locking hole corresponding to a frame and attaching the door to a frame.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have used the lock bolt hole of the door panel of McKann which corresponds to the hole within the frame, and further to attach the door to the door frame in order to provide a door which opens and also a door which locks within the door frame.
McKann teaches using different holes for the bolt lock, and locating the appropriate hole would be routine to one skill in the art and would not yield unexpected results.
Regarding claim 18, further comprising installing in the door panel a lock assembly at a location corresponding to the first lock bolt hole (Abstract and Background).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-16 allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record fails to disclose a polyethylene door having two halves with mirrored cutouts, the halves of the doors being coupled on the inner faces, the door panel having multiple bolt lock holes and a lock plate having multiple holes aligned with the multiple bolt lock holes. Although the prior art teaches polyethylene doors, sandwich panel, doors, etc., the prior art fails to disclose the combination of all of the elements.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN D KWIECINSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-5160. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday from 8:30 am to 4:00 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, Brian Mattei can be reached at (571) 272-3238. 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.
RDK
/RYAN D KWIECINSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635