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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This is a non-final office action in response to the amendment filed 6/29/2026.
Claims 1 and 3-14 are amended, and claim 2 is canceled.
The substitute specification submitted has not been entered as the no amended copy was submitted with the clean copy.
Claims 1 and 3-14 are pending and examined.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: "the first door body extends outward to form a first extending portion (05) and a second extending portion (06), and the first connecting member (01) and the second connecting member (02) are respectively inserted into the first extending portion (05) and the second extending portion (06) and locked by screws. The examiner notes that the Figures show these features in Figs. 5 and 9 with the extending portions inserted onto the connecting members not into the connecting members.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in para. [0025], line 8(page 6, line 6), “with the socket” should be “into the insertion hole”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1 and 3-14 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.
In claim 1, in the last line, “a socket” renders the metes and bounds of the claim unclear as to how the insertion hole and socket and pin interrelate. By changing “with a socket” to “into the insertion hole” the rejection would be overcome.
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 and 3-12 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-12 of copending Application No. 18/802,788 in view of Raffi(2018/0112457); cited previously).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
‘788 discloses a protective sliding door, including: a door railing body and a locking mechanism located on a locking side of the door railing body, wherein the protective sliding door further includes a positioning mechanism located on a pivot connection side of the door railing body, a lower part of the pivot connection side is detachably and movably connected to a lower part of the positioning mechanism, and an upper part of the pivot connection side is rotatably provided with a connecting piece for detachable and fixed installation with an upper part of the positioning mechanism; wherein the positioning mechanism includes a first support rod, a first lower seat provided at a lower end of the first support rod, and a first sliding seat movably sleeved on the first support rod, the connecting piece is provided with an open-bottom connecting hole configured for an upper end of the first support rod to be inserted, the first sliding seat is detachably and fixedly connected to a first wall through a first quick release structure to fix the first support rod, and the first lower seat is provided with an open-top insertion hole, the lower part of the pivot connection side is provided with a pin(the connecting members are considered what connects the elements as claimed and meets the claim limitation, see claim 1).
‘788 lacks the body having a first door body and second door body slidable with respect one another and having bars and hollows.
Raffi discloses a protective sliding door having a door body with slidable bodies with bars and hollows.
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have substituted the door body of ‘788 with the door body of Raffi given that KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ.2d 1385 (Fed. Cir. 2005), cert. granted, 547 U.S. __ (2006) has found that the substitution of one known element for another would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claims 3-12, ‘788 discloses the door of claim 1, comprising the elements of claims 3-12.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment has overcome the previous drawing and claim objections and claim rejections.
Applicant’s previous specification objection would be overcome with the submission of a marked-up copy of the substitute specification.
The indication of allowable claims has been withdrawn because a double patenting rejection has been made.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-14 are would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 3-12 have been considered but are moot given the new ground of rejection.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the drawing and claim objections and claim rejections are moot given that they have been withdrawn.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BETH A. AUBREY whose telephone number is (571)272-1851. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8a-4:30p.
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 Glessner can be reached at 571-272-6754. 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.
BETH A. AUBREY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3633
/Beth A Aubrey/
Prosecution Insights