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 .
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, “wherein the shoulders abut against the frame” of claim 1 and “wherein the at least one arm includes a pair of arms” of claim 10 in addition to the futures of the dependent claims 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(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 6-7 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
In regards to claim 6, the embodiment of figure 10 does not have support for the rotating member being “an obtuse rhomboid”.
In regards to claim 7, the embodiment of figure 10 does not have support for “at least one joint”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 1-10 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.
In regards to claim 1, “wherein the shoulders abut against the frame” is unclear. This is because from the figures it doesn’t appear the shoulders 1154VII-A or 1154VII-B abut the frame despite being described as such in para 66. Thus, what is required by the claim is unclear. For the purposes of examination, it is assumed as long as the shoulders at least indirectly abut the frame the limitation is met.
In regards to claim 7, claim 7 recites the limitation " the second end ". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Furthermore, it’s unclear if the applicant intended to add the element in this claim or for this claim to depend on a claim which introduces this element. For the purposes of examination, the former is assumed.
Claims 2-6 and 8-10 are rejected due to their dependency on the rejected claims above.
Claim Objections
Claims 1,2, and 8 objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1 “when the rotating member is in the first position” should read “when the at least one rotating member is in the first position.
In claim 2 “each at least one arm” should read “each of the at least one arm”.
In claim 8 “wherein at least one arm supported by the at least one fulcrum” should read “wherein the at least one arm is supported by the at least one fulcrum”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1-5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Froehlich et al. DE 875306 C. (hereinafter Froehlich).
In regards to claim 1, as best understood in light of previous 112 rejections, Froehlich teaches the lock mechanism for at least one puller-equipped fastener comprising a zipper car (see fig 3), the lock mechanism comprising: a frame (1) having a slot (slot occupied by 27 in fig 5) comprising an open end (end right of 27 wrt fig 5) and a closed end (end left of 27 wrt fig 9) and configured for receiving a zipper car (27) between the open and the closed end of the slot (see fig 5); at least one arm (5; see reference image 1) for selectively obstructing and unblocking the slot (see figs 3-4); at least one actuator (9-10); and at least one rotating member that is operationally coupled with the at least one actuator and with the at least one arm (see reference image 1), wherein the at least one rotating member is selectively switchable by the at least one actuator between a first position (see fig 3) when the actuator is in the first state for obstructing the slot and a second position when the actuator is in the second state for unblocking the slot (see figs 3-4), wherein the at least one rotating member comprises a stem with round shoulders (see reference image 1), and wherein the shoulders abut against the frame (at least indirectly) when the rotating member is in the first position (see fig 4).
PNG
media_image1.png
639
1147
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Reference image 1
In regards to claim 2, Froehlich teaches the lock mechanism of claim 1, wherein the lock mechanism is configured to allow the at least one rotating member in the first position to counterpoise force enacted on the at least one arm coupled thereto to obstruct the slot (see fig 4), and in the second position to allow each at least one arm coupled thereto to unblock the slot (see fig 3).
In regards to claim 3, Froehlich teaches the lock mechanism of claim 1, wherein the actuator is selected from a group consisting of: manually (the actuator is a key), electrically, or electromechanically operable to selectively switch the rotating member between the first and second states (see figs 3-4).
In regards to claim 4, Froehlich teaches the lock mechanism of claim 1, wherein the frame comprises a front panel (19), the front panel comprising an exterior face (face seen in fig 5), an interior face (face facing 11) and the slot (see fig 5), wherein the at least one rotating member and the actuator are situated distal to the slot (at least in a position between figs 3-4), and proximal to the interior face (see figs 4-5).
In regards to claim 5, Froehlich teaches the lock mechanism of claim 1, wherein the at least one arm is movable by the actuator switching the at least one rotating member between the first position and the second position (see figs 3-4).
In regards to claim 7, as best understood in light of previous 112 rejections, Froehlich teaches the lock mechanism of claim 1, further comprising at least one joint (see reference image 1), wherein each of the at least one joint is engaged with one of the at least one rotating member (see reference image 1), and wherein at least one arm has the second end (end nearest the joint) of the at least one arm rotatably engaged with the joint (as it rotates about 2 due to its connection with the joint).
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, 6, 8, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Segal US 1510561 A (hereinafter Segal) in view of Froehlich.
In regards to claim 1, as best understood in light of previous 112 rejections, Segal teaches a mechanism for at least one puller-equipped fastener comprising a zipper car, the lock mechanism comprising: a frame (3) having a slot (see fig 1 for 7) comprising an open end (left end wrt fig 1) and a closed end (right end wrt fig 1) and configured for receiving a member between the open and the closed end of the slot (see fig 3); at least one arm for selectively obstructing and unblocking the slot (15 and/or 14); at least one actuator; and at least one rotating member (23 and portion of 22 inside the housing) that is operationally coupled with the at least one actuator and with the at least one arm, wherein the at least one rotating member is selectively switchable by the at least one actuator (portion of 22 outside of the housing) between a first position when the actuator is in the first state for obstructing the slot (see fig 3) and a second position (with 23 rotated) when the actuator is in the second state for unblocking the slot, wherein the at least one rotating member comprises a stem with round shoulders (see reference image 2), and wherein the shoulders abut against the frame when the rotating member is in the first position (at least indirectly).
However, Segal does not teach the slot configured for receiving a zipper car between the open and the closed end of the slot.
Froehlich teaches his slot configured for receiving a zipper car between the open and the closed end of the slot (see fig 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing of the invention, to have Segal’s slot configured for receiving a zipper car between the open and the closed end of the slot in order to prevent the undesired unzipping of a suitcase (note Froelich para 3 and 12).
PNG
media_image2.png
427
324
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Reference image 2
In regards to claim 6, Segal in view of Froehlich teaches a lock mechanism of claim 1, wherein the at least one rotating member is each independently an obtuse rhomboid or is ovaline (Segal see fig 3), and wherein the at least one rotating member is each rotatable and thereby switchable between the first and second positions (Segal: see fig 3).
In regards to claim 8, Segal in view of Froehlich teaches lock mechanism of claim 1, further comprising at least one arm fulcrum (Segal: 17 an/or 19), wherein at least one arm supported by the at least one fulcrum has a first free end (Segal: 14’ and/or 15’) and a second end (end with 17 or 19; at least an end of a section), each of the at least one arm fulcrum is situated at the second end (Segal: see fig 3), wherein each at least one rotating member is coupled to one of the at least one arm between the first free end and the second end (see fig 3), and wherein rotation of the rotating member causes the first free end to slide on the rotating member allowing selectively blocking and unblocking of the slot (see fig 3).
In regards to claim 10, Segal in view of Froehlich teaches the lock mechanism of claim 8, wherein the at least one arm includes a pair of arms (Segal: see fig 3 14 and 15).
Claim(s) 1 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lewis US 5551793 A in view of Froehlich and William GB 2557502 A (hereinafter William).
In regards to claim 1, as best understood in light of previous 112 rejections, Lewis teaches a lock mechanism for at least one puller-equipped fastener comprising a zipper car, the lock mechanism comprising: a frame (16); at least one arm (20) for selectively obstructing and unblocking (see fig 1); at least one actuator (60); and at least one rotating member (40) that is operationally coupled with the at least one actuator and with the at least one arm (see fig 1), wherein the at least one rotating member is selectively switchable by the at least one actuator between a first position when the actuator is in the first state for obstructing (solid lines of fig 2) and a second position (dashed lines, see fig 2) when the actuator is in the second state for unblocking (see fig 2).
However, Lewis fails to teach the frame having a slot comprising an open end and a closed end and configured for receiving a zipper car between the open and the closed end of the slot.
Froelich teaches a frame having a slot (slot occupied by 27, see fig 5) comprising an open end (end right of 27 wrt fig 5) and a closed end (end left of 27 wrt fig 5) and configured for receiving a zipper car (27) between the open and the closed end of the slot (see fig 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing of the invention, to have modified Lewis with a slot configured for receiving a zipper car between the open and the closed end of the slot in order to prevent the undesired unzipping of a suitcase (note Froelich para 3 and 12).
Additionally, Lewis fails to teach wherein the at least one rotating member comprises a stem with round shoulders, and wherein the shoulders abut against the frame when the rotating member is in the first position.
William teaches at least one rotating member (155) comprises a stem (protrusion with 105 connected) with round shoulders (portion 185 contacts and similar portion), and wherein the shoulders abut against the frame when the rotating member is in the first position (see fig 3B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing of the invention, to have provided Lewis with a stem with round shoulders, and wherein the shoulders abut against the frame when the rotating member is in the first position in order to prevent over rotation (William abstract)
In regards to claim 9, Lewis teaches the lock mechanism of claim 1, further comprising a resilient component (Lewis: 23) engaged with the frame and one of the at least one arms, wherein the resilient component is stretched when the at least one rotating member is at the first position (Lewis: see fig 2) and is relaxed when the at least one rotating member is at the second position (Lewis: see fig 2 note dashed lines).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER H WATSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5393. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 - 5.
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.
/PETER H WATSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3675