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 First Office Action on the Merits in application 18/812,082, filed 8/22/2024.
Claims 1-14 are pending and examined.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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, the step pressed against the limit seat(see claim 5 and para. [0030]; it appears from the specification and figures that the spring is between the limit seat and step and the seat and step do not make contact) 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 05 and 06(see Figs. 5 and 9).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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.
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.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: in lines 13-14, “positioning mechanism” should be “the positioning mechanism”. 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 1-14 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.
The claims are replete with unclear phrases and phrases that lack antecedent basis. Below are many, but not all, examples of the phrases. The claims should be amended accordingly.
In claims 1-14, line 1, “type” renders the metes and bounds of the claim unclear. By changing “A new type of” to “A” in claim 1 and “The” in claims 2-14 the rejections would be overcome.
In claim 1, line 2, “the locking side” has no antecedent basis and should be changed to “a locking side” to overcome the rejection.
In claim 1, line 3, “the pivot connection side” has no antecedent basis and should be changed to “a pivot connection side” to overcome the rejection.
In claim 1, lines 6 and 7 and 16, “the position” has no antecedent basis and should be changed to “a position” to overcome the rejection. See at least claim 9 as well.
In claim 1, line 9, “the upper and lower parts” have no antecedent basis and should be changed to “an upper part and a lower part” to overcome the rejection. See claim 9 as well.
In claim 1, line 11, “the lower part” have no antecedent basis and should be changed to “a lower part” to overcome the rejection.
In claim 1, line 11, “the upper part” have no antecedent basis and should be changed to “an upper part” to overcome the rejection.
In claim 1, line 12, “can be” renders the metes and bounds of the claim indefinite and should be changed to “is” to overcome the rejection.
In claim 1, line 14, “can perform horizontal swing” renders the metes and bounds of the claim unclear. By changing the phrase to “can swing” the rejections would be overcome.
In claim 1, line 17, “is away” renders the metes and bounds of the claim unclear. By changing the phrase to “is spaced” the rejections would be overcome.
In claim 2, line 6, “the wall” has no antecedent basis and should be changed to “a wall” to overcome the rejection. See claim 9 as well.
In claim 2, line 8, “the bottom wall” has no antecedent basis and should be changed to “a bottom wall” to overcome the rejection.
In claim 2, line 9, “the socket” has no antecedent basis and should be changed to “the insertion hole” to overcome the rejection.
In claim 3, line 3, “the rod portion” has no antecedent basis.
In claim 4, lines 3 and 5, “the position” has no antecedent basis and should be changed to “a position” to overcome the rejection.
In claim 4, line 8, “the upper part” has no antecedent basis and should be changed to “an upper part” to overcome the rejection.
In claim 5, line 3, “the flexible bottom-up insertion” have no antecedent basis and should be changed to “a flexible bottom-up insertion” to overcome the rejection.
In claim 5, it is not clear how the step is pressed against the limit seat, as the step 431 is spaced from the limit seat 202 in Figs. 5-6 and appears that the spring is between the limit seat and step such that the seat and step are movable with respect to one another but not in contact.
In claim 5, line 7, “the inner wall” has no antecedent basis and should be changed to “an inner wall” to overcome the rejection.
In claim 6, line 1, “the outer wall” has no antecedent basis and should be changed to “an outer wall” to overcome the rejection.
In claim 6, line 4, “the inner wall” has no antecedent basis and should be changed to “an inner wall” to overcome the rejection.
In claim 9, lines 7-8 “the third connecting member” and “the fourth connecting member” have no antecedent basis.
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.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raffi(U.S. Pat. Appl. Publ. 2018/0112457; cited on PTO 892).
Raffi discloses a protective sliding door, including a door railing body(14), a locking mechanism(16/50, see para. [0049] and Fig. 5) located on a locking side of the door railing body(see Fig. 5), and a positioning mechanism(21) located on a pivot connection side of the door railing body(see Fig. 5), the door railing body includes a first door body(27) having the pivot connection side(see paras. [0048] and [0049] and Fig. 5) and a second door body(28) having the locking side(see paras. [0048] and [0049] and Fig. 5), the first door body and the second door body are movably connected(slidable, see para. [0049]), and the second door body can move between a position where it overlaps the first door body and the position where it is staggered from the first door body(see Figs. 3-4), and the first door body and second door body are both formed by a plurality of connected bar components(see Figs. 3-4) and have a plurality of hollows(between the bar components, see Figs. 3-4), upper and lower parts of the pivot connection side are respectively provided with a first connecting member(top one of 13, see para. [0056] and Fig. 18) and a second connecting member(top one of 13, see Fig. 18), the first connecting member can be pivotally provided with a connecting piece(upper fastener, see Fig. 5) for detachable and fixed assembly with an upper part of positioning mechanism, the door railing body can swing relative to the positioning mechanism(see para. [0049]), and the locking side can, along with the swing of the door railing body, swing between a position where it is locked with the locking mechanism and a position where it is away from the locking mechanism(see para. [0049]).
Raffi discloses the second connecting member(bottom one of 13, see Fig. 18) as a bracket “attached” to the rod 21 but lacks the member 13 specifically detachably connected to a lower part of the positioning mechanism.
It would have been well within the purview of a skilled artisan to have provided the bracket 13 as detachable given the intended use and specific design requirements of the door in order to replace the bracket due to wear and tear or breakage thereof.
Claims 1, 5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang(8,615,928; cited on PTO 892) in view of Raffi.
Wang discloses a protective sliding door(10), including a door railing body(20), a locking mechanism(13/14/40, see Fig. 1) located on a locking side of the door railing body, and a positioning mechanism(12) located on a pivot connection side of the door railing body, and the door body is formed by a plurality of connected bar components(see Fig. 1) and have a plurality of hollows(between the components, see Fig. 5), the upper and lower parts of the pivot connection side are respectively provided with upper(60) and lower(80) connecting members(see Fig. 1), and the lower connecting member(80) is detachably connected to the lower part of the positioning mechanism(see Fig. 6), the upper connecting member(60) can be pivotally provided with a connecting piece(50) for detachable and fixed assembly with the upper part of positioning mechanism(12, via screws see Fig. 4), the door railing body can perform horizontal swing relative to the positioning mechanism(see Fig. 2), and the locking side can, along with the swing of the door railing body, swing between the position where it is locked with the locking mechanism and the position where it is away from the locking mechanism(see Fig. 1 and 2).
Wang lacks the door body having multiple bodies.
Raffi discloses the door as discussed above.
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing dare of the invention to have substituted the door body of Wang with the 2 body door 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 claim 5, Wang and Raffi disclose, as best understood, the protective sliding door according to claim 1, wherein a sleeve(51 of Wang) with a top opening and a bottom opening is provided on the connecting piece(50, see Fig. 4), a slot(around 61) is provided on the upper connecting member(60) for a flexible bottom-up insertion of the sleeve(51, see Fig. 4), and an insertion column(61) that can extend into the sleeve(see Fig. 4) is provided in the slot(see Fig. 4), the end of the insertion column is connected to a limit seat(62), and a step(see Fig. 5) that is pressed against the limit seat(62) is formed above the limit seat(62) corresponding to an inner wall of the sleeve(50, see Figs. 4 and 5), the door railing body can perform vertical reciprocating motion relative to the connecting piece(50) to make the limit seat(62) contact or move away from the step (the spring allows for movement between the seat and step meeting the claim limitation, see Figs. 4 and 5).
Regarding claim 13, Wang discloses the protective sliding door according to claim 1, wherein the first door body(considered body 20 of Wang) extends outward to form a first extending portion(see Figs. 1 and 4) and a second extending portion(see Figs. 1 and 6), and the upper and lower connecting members(60, 80) are respectively attached to the extending portions and locked by screws(see Figs. 4 and 6).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4, 6-12 and 14 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.
No prior art of record shows a door having a two part slidable body with a locking mechanism on a locking side and a positioning mechanism on a pivot side, the positioning mechanism having upper and lower connecting members, the lower connecting member detachable and the upper connecting member having a pivoting connecting piece with an open bottom hole, the mechanism further having a rod configured to be inserted into the bottom hole, a lower seat at the lower end of the rod and having a top hole, a sliding seat movably sleeved on the rod and for connection to a wall, and a bottom wall of the lower connecting member having a pin for insertion into the top hole, as in claim 2, or a door having a two part slidable body with a locking mechanism on a locking side and a positioning mechanism on a pivot side, the positioning mechanism having upper and lower connecting members, the lower connecting member detachable and the upper connecting member having a pivoting connecting piece, a sleeve with top and bottom openings on the connecting piece, a slot on a bottom of the upper connecting member for receiving the sleeve and a column for insertion into the sleeve, and a step with the seat movable therewith, the insertion column having a limit strip extending longitudinally and the seat having a groove, as in claim 6, or a door having a two part slidable body with a locking mechanism on a locking side and a positioning mechanism on a pivot side, the positioning mechanism having upper and lower connecting members, the lower connecting member detachable and the upper connecting member having a pivoting connecting piece, a sleeve with top and bottom openings on the connecting piece, a slot on a bottom of the upper connecting member for receiving the sleeve and a column for insertion into the sleeve, and a step with the seat movable therewith, and the sleeve having an upper end with a V shaped first position and second limit position, as in claim 7, or a door having a two part slidable body with a locking mechanism on a locking side and a positioning mechanism on a pivot side, the positioning mechanism having upper and lower connecting members, the lower connecting member detachable and the upper connecting member having a pivoting connecting piece, the locking mechanism having a rod, a lower seat, a sliding seat and a locking seat, third and fourth connecting members, the third connecting member having an expansion member, and a spring, as in claim 9, nor any motivation to do so.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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