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 is the First Office Action on the merits of Application No. 18/794333, filed on 08/05/2024. Claims 1-20 are still pending in the application.
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.
Claims 4-6, 16 are 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 recites the limitation "the first switch" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the first orientation" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the second orientation" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 and 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by US Patent No. 1,649,475 to Jones (henceforth referred to as Jones).
Regarding claims 1 and 4-6, Jones discloses a door interlock (Fig. 2), comprising:
a baseplate (i.e. Fig. 2, ref. 7);
a keeper (i.e. Fig. 2, ref. 8) removably and pivotally attached to the baseplate, the keeper comprising a bore (i.e. Fig. 4, ref. 21) and a grooved opening (i.e. page 1, lines 47-49: “This head is provided with a mouth or opening which is adapted to receive the latch…”), the grooved opening configured to connect to an arm (i.e. Fig. 2, ref. 4), the arm connecting to a door (i.e. Fig. 1, ref. 1) to the interlock; and
an actuator (i.e. Fig. 2, springs shown pushing on ref. 19, 20) comprising a cylinder (i.e. Fig. 4, ref. 20), the actuator configured to insert or retract the cylinder into or out of the bore, respectively, based on a positioning of an elevator, thereby causing the keeper to move between a locked configuration (i.e. Fig. 2) and an unlocked configuration (i.e. Fig. 4), and causing the door to either be openable when the keeper is in the unlocked position or unopenable when the keeper is in the locked position.
Further comprising: a guide (i.e. Fig. 2, not referenced but housing of ref. 19 and 20 that’s screwed to ref. 7) attached to the baseplate, the guide configured to:
prevent axial rotation of the cylinder during movement of the cylinder; and
cause the cylinder to contact the first switch (i.e. Fig. 4, ref. 18) when the cylinder is activated by the actuator (i.e. Fig. 2 shows when the switch in Fig. 6, ref. 15 is activated).
Wherein the guide comprises a groove (i.e. Fig. 2 shows groove containing springs actuating ref. 19 or 20); and
the guide is configured to align a pin (i.e. Fig. 2, ref. 19 and 20 are pin shaped) connected to the cylinder to prevent the axial rotation of the cylinder during movement of the cylinder and to cause the cylinder to contact the first switch (i.e. Fig. 4, ref. 18) when the cylinder is activated by the actuator.
Wherein the guide is substantially U-like in shape (i.e. Fig. 2, shows groove containing springs has a U shaped cross section).
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) 7, 10-11, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent No. 1,649,475 to Jones.
Regarding claims 7, 10-11, and 16, Jones teaches a locking apparatus (i.e. Fig. 2) for an elevator door (i.e. Fig. 1, ref. 1), the locking apparatus configured to move between a locked configuration (i.e. Fig. 2) to prevent opening of the elevator door and an unlocked configuration to allow opening of the elevator door. Jones does not specifically teach the locking apparatus is reversible between a left hand door swing and a right hand swing. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make installation of the locking apparatus reversible for installation on both a left handed swing door or a right handed swing door to accommodate building structures that may prevent the elevator door from opening since it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art.
Further comprising: a baseplate (i.e. Fig. 2, ref. 7);
a keeper (i.e. Fig. 2, ref. 8) removably and pivotally attached to the baseplate, the keeper comprising a bore (i.e. Fig. 4, ref. 21) and a grooved opening (i.e. page 1, lines 47-49: “This head is provided with a mouth or opening which is adapted to receive the latch…”); and
an actuator (i.e. Fig. 2, springs shown pushing on ref. 19, 20) comprising a cylinder (i.e. Fig. 4, ref. 20), the actuator configured to insert the cylinder into the bore based on a first positioning of an elevator, thereby causing the locking apparatus to be in the locked configuration (i.e. Fig. 2); and retract the cylinder out of the bore based on a second positioning of the elevator, thereby causing the locking apparatus to change the unlocked configuration (i.e. Fig. 4).
Claim(s) 9 and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent No. 1,649,475 to Jones.
Regarding claims 9 and 17-20, Jones teaches a locking apparatus (i.e. Fig. 2) for an elevator door (i.e. Fig. 1, ref. 1), the locking apparatus configured to move between a locked configuration (i.e. Fig. 2) to prevent opening of the elevator door and an unlocked configuration (i.e. Fig. 4) to allow opening of the elevator door.
Jones does not specifically teach the locking apparatus comprises a maximum spatial envelope ranging from 2” width, 6.75 in length, and 2.25 in height to approximately 2” in width, 8.75 in length, and 2.25” in height. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a maximum spatial envelope ranging from 2” width, 6.75 in length, and 2.25 in height to approximately 2” in width, 8.75 in length, and 2.25” in height to accommodate small openings in residential usages since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
Further comprising: a baseplate (i.e. Fig. 2, ref. 7);
a keeper (i.e. Fig. 1, ref. 8) removably and pivotally attached to the baseplate, the keeper comprising (i.e. Fig. 4, ref. 21) and a grooved opening (i.e. page 1, lines 47-49: “This head is provided with a mouth or opening which is adapted to receive the latch…”); and
an actuator (i.e. Fig. 2, springs shown pushing on ref. 19, 20) comprising a cylinder (i.e. Fig. 4, ref. 20), the actuator configured to insert the cylinder into the bore based on a first positioning of an elevator, thereby causing the locking apparatus to be in the locked configuration (i.e. Fig. 2); and retract the cylinder out of the bore based on a second positioning of the elevator, thereby causing the locking apparatus to change the unlocked configuration (i.e. Fig. 4).
Further comprising: a guide (i.e. Fig. 2, not referenced but housing of ref. 19 and 20 that’s screwed to ref. 7) attached to the baseplate, the guide configured to:
prevent axial rotation of the cylinder during movement of the cylinder; and
cause the cylinder to contact the first switch (i.e. Fig. 4, ref. 18) when the cylinder is activated by the actuator (i.e. Fig. 2 shows when the switch in Fig. 6, ref. 15 is activated).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3, 8, 12-15 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US Patent No. 1,615,090 to Lang teaches a door interlock with a keeper and an actuator;
US Patent No. 1,425,762 to Girten teaches a door interlock with a keeper and an actuator;
US Patent No. 1,479,027 to Clancy teaches a door interlock with a keeper and an actuator;
US Patent No. 1,476,710 to Girten teaches a door interlock with a keeper and an actuator;
US Patent No. 3,122,615 to Chance teaches a door interlock with a keeper and an actuator;
US Patent No. 1,898,450 to Hutton teaches a door interlock with a keeper and an actuator;
GB 506,380 to Chapple teaches a door interlock with a keeper and an actuator.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIEM M TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7825. The examiner can normally be reached M 9-5, W-F 10-2.
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, Michael Mansen can be reached at 571-272-6608. 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.
/DIEM M TRAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3654