DETAILED ACTION
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 the claims filed on 04/27/2026.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined below.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
The abstract filed on 04/27/2026 is objected because it discloses “may include an output coupler to operably couple the transmission assembly to a drive tube” which discloses speculative applications as it could include or not include an output coupler.
Claim Interpretation
Note that claims 2 &12 introduces ‘longitudinal sides’ and examiner was interpreting the longitudinal sides in claims 1 & 11 as different longitudinal sides than the longitudinal sides of claims 2 & 12 in the rejection below. Additionally, since claims 3 & 13 and 4 & 14 are not dependent of each other, the first and second longitudinal sides on claims 3 & 13 and 4 & 14 were also interpreted as different longitudinal sides.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schutz et al. (US 6789599) (hereinafter “Schutz”).
Claims 1 and 11
(Schutz discloses)
“A transmission assembly (50; figures 1-5) for converting a garage door operator (GDO) from a ceiling mounted configuration to a jackshaft configuration by operably coupling the transmission assembly to a motorhead (36) configured to be employed in either the ceiling mounted configuration or the jackshaft configuration (intended use; the motorhead can be reconfigured from a ceiling mounted configuration to a jackshaft configuration relative to the transmission assembly), the transmission assembly comprising:” (claim 1).
“A garage door operator (GDO) system (figures 1-5) comprising:
a sectional door (31) movable on rails between an open position and a closed position (figure 3);
a motorhead (36) operable to provide power for movement of the sectional door between the open and closed positions via turning of a drive tube (33) in a jackshaft configuration or via movement of a trolley in a ceiling mounted configuration (intended use; the motorhead can be reconfigured from a ceiling mounted configuration to a jackshaft configuration); and
a transmission assembly (50) for enabling conversion from the ceiling mounted configuration to the jackshaft configuration, the transmission assembly comprising:” (claim 11).
an output coupler (3) to operably couple the transmission assembly to a drive tube (33) rotatable to alternately open and close a sectional door (31), the output coupler comprising an output pinion (figure 5);
an input coupler (1) to operably couple the transmission assembly to a motor output shaft (the shaft that goes into the aperture of 1 in figure 5) of the motorhead, the input coupler comprising an input pinion (figure 5);
a flexible coupling member (2) operably coupling the input pinion and the output pinion;
a transmission housing (51) configured to extend around at least a portion of each of the input pinion, the output pinion and the flexible coupling member (figure 4); and
a multi-position coupling bracket (Annotated figure 3 below) having a wall interface portion for rigid connection to a wall (Annotated figure 3 below), a transmission interface portion (Annotated figure 3 below) to hold the transmission housing relative to the wall interface portion at a first selected angle (intended use; mounting angle of the transmission assembly in figure 3), and a motorhead interface portion (Annotated figure 3 below) to operably couple the wall interface portion relative to the motorhead at a second selected angle (intended use; mounting angle of the motorhead in figure 3; Annotated figure 3 below),
wherein the transmission interface portion comprises a bounding bracket (Annotated figure 3 (II) below) that extends around both longitudinal sides (two longitudinal sides in Annotated figure 3 (II) below) of the transmission housing and one lateral side (Annotated figure 3 (II) below; note that 'around' was be interpreted as --In or near one's current location-- [see definition below]; since 'both' requires only two out of the three sides [three sides: two longitudinal sides and lateral side], the interpretation of the claim chose the left longitudinal side and the lateral side; therefore lines 16-17 was interpreted as --the bounding bracket extends near both the left longitudinal side and the lateral side-- as shown in Annotated figure 3 (II) below) to define a gap (Annotated figure 3 (II) below) between at least one of the longitudinal sides of the transmission housing and the bounding bracket (Annotated figure 3 (II) below) (claims 1 and 11) (Examiner notes that if the claims were amended such that the bounding bracket surrounds the two longitudinal side and the lateral side per applicant’s invention, and if the longitudinal sides were further defined relative to each other and the lateral side, it would overcome the prior art rejection).
PNG
media_image1.png
821
550
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 3
PNG
media_image2.png
671
733
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 3 (II)
PNG
media_image3.png
258
498
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Source: American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. Copyright © 2016 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.
PNG
media_image4.png
58
332
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Source: Abused, Confused, & Misused Words by Mary Embree Copyright © 2007, 2013 by Mary Embree
Claims 2 and 12
(Schutz discloses) “The transmission assembly of claim 1” (claim 2); “The system of claim 11” (claim 12),
further comprising a tensioning assembly (Annotated figure 5 below) disposed on opposing longitudinal sides of the transmission housing to engage the flexible coupling member and to tension the flexible coupling member (lines 12-15 of col. 7).
PNG
media_image5.png
586
664
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 5
Claims 3 and 13
(Schutz discloses) “The transmission assembly of claim 2” (claim 3); “The system of claim 12” (claim 13),
wherein the tensioning assembly comprises a first tensioning member and first biasing member attached to a first longitudinal side of the transmission housing (Annotated figure 5 above) to urge a first portion of the flexible coupling member toward a second longitudinal side of the transmission housing (Annotated figure 5 above), and
a second tensioning member and second biasing member attached to the second longitudinal side of the transmission housing (Annotated figure 5 above) to urge a second portion of the flexible coupling member toward the first longitudinal side of the transmission housing (Annotated figure 5 above; lines 12-15 of col. 7).
Claims 4 and 14
(Schutz discloses) “The transmission assembly of claim 1” (claim 4); “The system of claim 11” (claim 14),
wherein the motor output shaft attaches to the input pinion at any of a plurality of relative orientations (orientations of the shaft based on the installment of 38 to 32; note that the shaft is only attached to the input pinion at one orientation at a time) between a first angle where the gap is formed between a first longitudinal side of the transmission housing and the bounding bracket (Annotated figure 3 (II) above) and a second angle formed between a second longitudinal side of the transmission housing and the bounding bracket (Annotated figure 3 (II) above), and
wherein the first selected angle is between the first and second angles (Annotated figure 3 (II) above).
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.
Claims 5-7 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schutz, as applied to claims 1-4 and 11-14 above, in view of Errasti (EP 2383411).
Claims 5 and 15
(Schutz discloses) “The transmission assembly of claim 1” (claim 5); “The system of claim 11” (claim 15),
Schutz is silent regarding wherein the motorhead interface portion comprises a first protrusion and a second protrusion disposed on opposite sides of a shaft aperture that aligns with the input coupler when the transmission housing is disposed in the multi-position coupling bracket,
wherein the first and second protrusions are aligned with a first receiver set or a second receiver set formed at a casing of the motorhead, the first and second receiver sets being separated from each other angularly with respect to the motor output shaft.
(However, Errasti teaches) wherein a motorhead interface portion (Annotated figure 5 (II) below) comprises a first protrusion and a second protrusion (Annotated figure 5 (II) below) disposed on opposite sides of a shaft aperture (Annotated figure 5 (II) below) that aligns with a input coupler (39) when a transmission housing (C bracket at the left end of Errasti figure 5) is disposed in a multi-position coupling bracket (entire bracket of 100 in Errasti figure 2),
wherein the first and second protrusions are aligned with a first receiver set or a second receiver set formed at a casing (101) of the motorhead (Annotated figure 5 (II) below), the first and second receiver sets being separated from each other angularly with respect to a motor output shaft (M1).
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 motorhead of Schultz with the mounting elements as taught by Errasti, with a reasonable expectation of success, for properly securing the motorhead relative to the transmission assembly and to prevent rattling and vibration of the assembly.
PNG
media_image6.png
497
549
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 5 (II)
Claims 6 and 16
(Schutz, as modified above, discloses) “The transmission assembly of claim 5” (claim 6); “The system of claim 15” (claim 16);
wherein the casing of the motorhead further comprises a third receiver set (Annotated figure 5 (II) above).
Modified Schultz is silent regarding:
(i) wherein the first, second and third receiver sets are each angularly displaced from each other by sixty degrees;
(ii) to enable the second selected angle to be defined at intervals defined at 0, 60, 120, 180, 240 and 300 degrees relative to a reference plane in which the motor output shaft lies.
(i) However, one of ordinary skill in the art is expected to routinely experiment with parameters so as to ascertain the optimum or workable ranges for a particular use. Accordingly, it would have been no more than an obvious matter of engineering design choice, as determined through routine experimentation and optimization, for one of ordinary skill to provide the angular distance of the receiver sets of modified Schultz such that they are between 60° of each other, with a reasonable expectation of success, for providing an optimized position for the motorhead therefore it is away from any obstruction thus it operates properly.
(ii) (Schutz, as modified above, discloses) to enable the second selected angle to be defined at intervals defined at 0, 60, 120, 180, 240 and 300 degrees relative to a reference plane in which the motor output shaft lies (intended use; this is taught via the modification above, note that the second selected angle can rotate multiple times for defining the 180, 240 and 300 degrees).
Claims 7 and 17
(Schutz, as modified above, discloses) “The transmission assembly of claim 6” (claim 7); “The system of claim 16” (claim 17);
wherein the second selected angle is 0 degrees relative to the reference plane when the transmission assembly is mounted on a first lateral side of the sectional door, and
wherein the second selected angle is 180 degrees relative to the reference plane when the transmission assembly is mounted on a second lateral side of the sectional door (these two clauses are taught via the modification above, the second selected angle can be chosen between any of the angles based on the position of the transmission assembly relative to the sectional door).
Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schutz, as applied to claims 1-4 and 11-14 above, in view of GFA Elektromaten GmbH and Co KG (DE 202013003440) (hereinafter “Elektromaten”).
Claims 8 and 18
(Schutz discloses) “The transmission assembly of claim 1” (claim 8); “The system of claim 11” (claim 18),
wherein the first selected angle is one of a plurality of non-discrete mounting angles (figure 3; note that the transmission assembly can be rotated with respect to the transmission interface portion which teaches plurality of non-discrete mounting angles; note that discrete was interpreted as --constituting a separate thing; distinct; different--).
Schultz fails to disclose the second selected angle is one of a plurality of discrete mounting angles.
(However, Elektromaten teaches) a motorhead (2; Elektromaten figure 2) to operably couple a wall interface portion (8) relative to the motorhead at a second selected angle (mounting angle shown in Elektromaten figure 2) and the second selected angle is one of a plurality of discrete mounting angles (Elektromaten figures 3-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the mounting of the motorhead of Schultz such that it is provided with a plurality of discrete mounting angles as taught by Elektromaten, with a reasonable expectation of success, for providing an optimized position for the motorhead such that it is properly fitted within the different garage door spacing dimensions.
Claims 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schutz, as applied to claims 1-4 and 11-14 above, in view of Vincenzi (US 5698073) and in further view of Fellows et al. (US 5222327) (hereinafter “Fellows”).
Claims 9 and 19
(Schultz discloses) “The transmission assembly of claim 1” (claim 9); “The system of claim 11” (claim 19),
wherein the multi-position coupling bracket enables mounting the motorhead:
to a front wall (32) of a garage below the output pinion on a first side or a second side of the sectional door (right side of the sectional door; figure 3).
Schultz is silent regarding:
(i) to a front wall of the garage above the output pinion on the first side or the second side of the sectional door; and
(ii) to a ceiling of the garage above the output pinion on the first side or the second side of the sectional door.
(i) (However, Vincenzi teaches) wherein a multi-position coupling bracket (56; Vincenzi figures 1-2) enables mounting a motorhead (38) to a front wall (62) of a garage above an output pinion (84) on a first side or a second side of a sectional door (14; Vincenzi figures 1-2).
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 assembly of Schultz such that the motorhead is positioned to a front wall of the garage above the output pinion as taught by Vincenzi, with a reasonable expectation of success, for providing an optimized position for the motorhead such that it is properly fitted within the different garage door spacing dimensions.
(ii) (However, Fellows teaches) wherein a multi-position coupling bracket (15; Fellows figure 1) enables mounting a motorhead (11) to a ceiling of a garage above an output pinion (the other pinion opposite of 38 and that is connected to the shaft 42) on a first side or a second side of a sectional door (19; Fellows figure 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 assembly of modified Schultz such that the motorhead is positioned to a ceiling of the garage above the output pinion as taught by Fellows, with a reasonable expectation of success, for providing an optimized position for the motorhead such that it is properly fitted within the different garage door spacing dimensions.
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schutz, as applied to claims 1-4 and 11-14 above, in view of Vincenzi (US 5698073).
Claims 10 and 20
(Schultz discloses) “The transmission assembly of claim 1” (claim 10); “The system of claim 11” (claim 20),
Schultz fails to disclose further comprising a handle-operated releasable coupling assembly operably coupled to the motor output shaft, the releasable coupling assembly having an engaged state in which rotation of the motor output shaft is transferred to the input pinion and a disengaged state in which the rotation of the motor is not transferred to the input pinion.
(However, Vincenzi teaches) an assembly (40; Vincenzi figures 2-4) comprising a handle-operated releasable coupling assembly (handle-operated releasable coupling assembly shown in Vincenzi figure 4) operably coupled to a motor output shaft (44), the releasable coupling assembly having an engaged state (engaged state shown in Vincenzi figure 4) in which rotation of the motor output shaft is transferred to an input pinion (80; lines 17-22 of col. 6; lines 54-61 of col. 6) and a disengaged state (disengaged state shown in Vincenzi figure 5) in which the rotation of the motor is not transferred to the input pinion.
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 assembly of Schultz with the handle-operated releasable coupling assembly of Vincenzi, with a reasonable expectation of success, to provide a manually operated decoupling system between the motorhead and transmission assembly for providing the ease of replacing or fixing the motorhead without the extremely laborious and complex process of removing many parts of the assembly.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments directed to the drawing and claim objections were considered.
Applicant's arguments filed 04/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding “However, to advance prosecution, Applicants have further clarified that the bounding bracket extends around both longitudinal sides of the transmission housing and one lateral side to define the gap. Schutz does not include any bounding bracket that extends around sides of the transmission housing. Accordingly, independent claims 1 and 11 are patentable over Schutz”, examiner notes that applicant’s arguments are narrower than what the claims recite. In applicant’s invention and arguments, the bounding bracket is a C or U shaped bracket that encircles a first longitudinal side, second longitudinal side, and lateral side of the housing. However the claims merely recite “the bounding bracket extends around both longitudinal sides of the transmission housing and one lateral side to define the gap”, and as noted in the rejection above, “both” only requires two sides out of the three recited sides, the claim was interpreted such that the bounding bracket only extends on one of the longitudinal side and the lateral side. Additionally, ‘around’ was interpreted with the broadest reasonable interpretation as noted above. Such that the amendments do not overcome the prior art rejection.
In addition to the suggested above, examiner notes that applicant can further clarify that the lateral side is the lateral side of the transmission housing and further define the longitudinal sides relative to each other and the lateral side as it would seem to overcome the prior art rejection. Applicant can also further define the shape of the bounding bracket as a C or U shape per applicant’s spec as changing the shape of the bounding bracket of Schutz would not seem to accommodate the parts or render the bracket unusable.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK B PONCIANO whose telephone number is (571)272-9910. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30-4:00.
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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at (571) 270-5616. 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.
/PATRICK B. PONCIANO/Examiner, Art Unit 3634
/DANIEL P CAHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights