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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I (Claims 1-5,10-15,17,19-30,32-35) in the reply filed on 12/01/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 6-9, 16, 18, and 31 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 11/19/2024 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
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) 1-4, 10-11, 14-15, 17, 19-20, 25-26, 28-30, 32-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimizu US 20140150505 and further in view of Cho US 20050104380.
Regarding claim 1, Shimizu teaches a latch assembly comprising:
a base (20);
a paddle (73) rotatably connected to the base to pivot about a paddle axis (through 75), the paddle having a drive surface (77) located at a position offset (see fig1) from the paddle axis, the drive surface being movable, upon rotation of the paddle about the paddle axis, through a first travel path (see fig11) extending between a first drive surface position (closed) and a second drive surface position (open position); and
a catch assembly (50) connected to the base, the catch assembly having:
a catch (51) rotatably connected to the base to rotate about an axis (through 52) that is generally perpendicular to the paddle axis (see fig1), the catch pinion comprising a plate (can be considered 51 fig4a) facing the paddle and having a concave recess (interior space shown in fig4a which 55 and 52 protrudes from and encases) to receive at least a portion of the drive surface when the drive surface moves between the first drive surface position and the second drive surface position, and
an activation surface (55) extending from the plate at a location offset (see fig4a) from the axis, the activation surface being movable, upon rotation of the catch about the axis, through a second travel path extending between a first activation surface position (when paddle is not actuated) adjacent the first drive surface position and a second activation surface position adjacent (when paddle is actuated) the second drive surface position, wherein the second travel path intersects the first travel path such that the drive surface can contact at least a portion of the activation surface throughout the first travel path.
Shimizu does not teach the catch is a catch pinion.
Cho teaches a latch assembly wherein the catch (30) is a catch pinion (pinion is defined as a small gear, therefore 30 can be considered a pinion).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the catch of Shimizu to be a catch pinion (thus having gear), as taught by Cho, in order to improve the efficiency of the mechanism (paragraph 17, Cho)
Regarding claim 2, Shimizu in view of Cho teaches the latch assembly of claim 1, further comprising at least one release member (Shimizu 60,61) movably mounted to the base to move between a first release member position (closed) and a second release member position (open), wherein the catch pinion is operatively connected to the at least one release member to move the at least one release member from the first release member position to the second release member position upon rotation of the catch pinion from the first activation surface position to the second activation surface position. (Shimizu paragraph 53)
Regarding claim 3, Shimizu in view of Cho further teaches the latch assembly of claim 2, further comprising a release member return spring (Shimizu, 58) connected between the base and the at least one release member (Shimizu, fig1) and configured to generate a restoring force to move the at least one release member towards the first release member position (closed/ engaged with engagement holes, paragraph 53, Shimizu)
Regarding claim 4, Shimizu in view of Cho further teaches the latch assembly of claim 3, wherein the release member return spring is connected between the base and the catch pinion (fig1).
Regarding claim 10, Shimizu in view of Cho further teaches latch assembly of claim 1, further comprising a lock (Shimizu 90) movably mounted to the paddle and comprising a first lock surface (Shimizu 95) that is selectively movable to a locking position at which the lock engages the catch pinion to prevent rotation of the catch pinion in at least one direction about the pinion axis. (Shimizu fig1)
Regarding claim 11, Shimizu in view of Cho further teaches the latch assembly of claim 1, wherein the activation surface comprises a post (Shimizu body of 55, fig1) extending from the pinion plate.
Regarding claim 14, Shimizu teaches a latch assembly comprising:
a base (20);
a paddle (73) rotatably connected to the base to pivot about a paddle axis (through 75), the paddle having a drive surface (77) located at a position offset (see fig1) from the paddle axis, the drive surface being movable through a first travel path (see fig11) when the paddle rotates about the paddle axis; and
a catch (51) rotatably connected to the base to rotate about an axis (through 52) that is generally perpendicular to the paddle axis (see fig1), the catch including an activation surface (55) positioned in the first travel patch such that movement of the drive surface through the first travel patch in at least one direction generates a force on the activation surface to rotate the catch abut the axis;
a lock (Shimizu 90) movably mounted to the paddle and comprising a first lock surface (Shimizu 95) that is selectively movable to a locking position at which the lock engages the catch to prevent rotation of the catch in at least one direction about the axis. (Shimizu fig1)
Shimizu does not teach the catch is a catch pinion.
Cho teaches a latch assembly wherein the catch (30) is a catch pinion (pinion is defined as a small gear, therefore 30 can be considered a pinion).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the catch of Shimizu to be a catch pinion (thus having gear), as taught by Cho, in order to improve the efficiency of the mechanism (paragraph 17, Cho)
Regarding claim 15, Shimizu in view of Cho teaches the latch assembly of claim 14, wherein:
the paddle is rotatable about the paddle axis between a first paddle position (closed) and a second paddle position (open);
the first travel path extends between a first drive surface position (closed, fig9) when the paddle is in the first paddle position and a second drive surface position (open, fig10) when the paddle is in the second paddle position; and
the lock comprises the first lock surface movably mounted to the paddle and selectively movable, when the paddle is in the first paddle position, to a latch locking position (paragraph 53,57, fig6b) located offset from the paddle axis. (fig1,11 Shimizu)
Regarding claim 17, Shimizu in view of Cho teaches the latch assembly of claim 15, wherein the catch pinion is rotatable about the pinion axis between a first pinion position (closed) and a second pinion position (open); and
the activation surface is at a first location (Shimizu, fig 9) offset from the pinion axis (see fig9) and is movable, upon rotation of the catch pinion from the first pinion position to the second pinion position, through a second travel path (see fig9-11) extending from a first activation surface position (closed, fig9) adjacent the first drive surface position to a second activation surface position (open, fig10) adjacent the second drive surface position, wherein the second travel path intersects (due to engagement of activation surface 55 and drive surface 77) the first travel path (see travel changes in fig11) such that the drive surface can contact at least a portion of the activation surface throughout the first travel path. (Shimizu compare movement of 55 & 77 in fig9-11)
Regarding claim 19, Shimizu in view of Cho teaches the latch assembly of claim 14, wherein the catch pinion comprises a plate (51) that faces the paddle, the activation surface extends from the plate, and the plate has a concave recess (interior of 51, Shimizu) to receive at least a portion of the drive surface when the drive surface moves through the first travel path. (Shimizu fig1)
Regarding claim 20, Shimizu in view of Cho teaches the latch assembly of claim 114, further comprising at least one release member (Shimizu 60,61) movably mounted to the base to move between a first release member position (closed) and a second release member position (open), wherein the catch pinion is operatively connected to the at least one release member to move the at least one release member from the first release member position to the second release member position upon rotation of the catch pinion from a first pinion position (closed) to a second pinion position (open). (Shimizu fig1)
Regarding claim 25, Shimizu in view of Cho further teaches latch assembly of claim 20, wherein the at least one release member comprises a first release member (Shimizu 60) slidingly mounted to the base to move along a first sliding axis (Shimizu along length of 60) and a second release member (Shimizu 61) slidingly mounted to the base to move along a second sliding axis (Shimizu along length of 61) (Shimizu fig1).
Regarding claim 26, Shimizu in view of Cho further teaches the latch assembly of claim 25, wherein each of the first release member and the second release member comprises a respective surface (inside 63 of each release member, fig1 Shimizu) held in engagement with the catch pinion such that rotation of the catch pinion causes the first release member and the second release member to slide relative to the base. (Shimizu fig1)
Regarding claim 28, Shimizu in view of Cho further teaches the latch assembly of claim 25, wherein the first sliding axis is parallel to the second sliding axis. (Shimizu fig1)
Regarding claim 29, Shimizu in view of Cho further teaches the latch assembly of claim 20, wherein the at least one release member comprises a catch (Shimizu, end of 60) rigidly fixed to the release member, the catch being movable between a first position (closed, Shimizu) to a second position (open, Shimizu) upon rotation of the catch pinion, and wherein the first position is at a first distance outside (because engages with a keeper to lock, Shimizu) the base; and
the second position is at a second distance (retracted away from the keeper to open/unlock) outside the base, the second distance being less than the first distance (extended-first- distance is longer than retracted-second- distance, Shimizu), or at a location that is not outside the base. (Shimizu fig1)
Regarding claim 30, Shimizu in view of Cho further teaches the latch assembly of claim 20, wherein the at least one release member comprises a catch receiver (Shimizu, end of 60).
Regarding claim 32, Shimizu in view of Cho further teaches a door assembly (Shimizu) comprising a door (Shimizu, lid) and the latch assembly of claim 1 coupled to the door. (Shimizu paragraph 1-2)
Regarding claim 33, Shimizu in view of Cho further teaches the door assembly of claim 32, the door being an automobile glove box door. (Shimizu paragraph 2)
Regarding claim 34, Shimizu in view of Cho further teaches the door assembly comprising a door (Shimizu, lid) and the latch assembly of claim 14 coupled to the door. (Shimizu paragraph 1-2)
Regarding claim 35, Shimizu in view of Cho further teaches the door assembly of claim 34, the door being an automobile glove box door. (Shimizu, lid of glove box paragraph 2)
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-2, 10, 14-15, 17, 20, 24-25 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1,3,7,8 of U.S. Patent No. US 12049773. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are both drawn to a latch assembly with a catch pinion, paddle, and a base.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5,12-13, 21-24, 27 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.
Regarding claims 5 and 21, references of record do not teach that the chamber receives at least a portion of a release member, the release member in Shimizu is located out of said chamber (fig9). Examiner can find no reason to combine or modify references of record without the use of impermissible hindsight.
Regarding claim 12, since reference figures are not drawn to scale, it would be considered hindsight to assume the two distances in the Shimizu reference are different from each other. The pinion axis and the activation surface remain in the same distance apart from one another (Shimizu fig4a), therefore relative to the pinion axis, which runs parallel to the axis of the component of the activation surface, there does not seem to be an apparent change in distance between the two activation surface positions. Examiner can find no reason to combine or modify references of record without the use of impermissible hindsight.
Regarding claims 24 (NOTE: This is also rejected under Double Patenting), 27 references of record do not teach an additional drive gear as well as catch pinion as well as independent claim language.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Art is related to latch assemblies.
Related but not relied upon prior art: US 10738511, US 8141398, US 1964066.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARIA F. AHMAD whose telephone number is (571)270-1334. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5:30 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, Christine M. Mills can be reached at (571) 272-8322. 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.
/F.F.A./
Examiner
Art Unit 3675
/CHRISTINE M MILLS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675