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 .
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 1-11 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, line 1, “in particular…” renders the claim indefinite because the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. Note similar issues in claims 9-11.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-7, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Kellum ‘301 (US 2021/0381301 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kellum shows a spring element (100, fig. 2) for a sliding door, including a base body on which a strip (106) and a spring arm (110) are formed, wherein the spring arm is at least approximately adjustable about an axis of rotation (the lower end joining the base) which is stationary relative to the strip. Note that intended use, for sliding doors of recreational vehicle, is given no patentable weight.
As to claim 4, at least the strip (106) and the spring arm (110) of the base body are formed in one piece (fig. 2, and [0051]).
As to claim 5, the base body is formed at least substantially from a plastic ([0051]).
As to claim 6, the spring arm is elastically deformable along its longitudinal extension ([0027] and [0051]).
As to claim 7, the spring arm (110) is designed in such a manner that it has a force curve that progressively increases with deformation (i.e., torque exerted on the rotation end of the arm progressively increases with deformation).
As to claim 9, Kellum shows at least one insertion element (150, screw is fir-tree-shaped element) provided on the strip of the based body, which insertion element can be inserted into a recess (i.e., a fastener bore).
As to 10, Kellum shows a sliding door (i.e., the sliding window) having at least one door leaf (e.g., lower sash 16) and at least one spring element (100), which is connected to the door leaf (figs. 5-6). Intended use, for a recreational vehicle, is given no patentable weight.
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 8 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kellum ‘301.
Regarding claim 8, Kellum discloses the invention as claimed but for the force curve increases from approximately 5N to approximately 15 N. However, Kellum states that the spring element can be formed from suitable material (“zinc, steel, aluminum…Molded plastic”, [0051]) so as to generate the required resilient strength and movement ([0051]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the spring element of Kellum with suitable material such that the force curve increases from approximately 5N to approximately 15 N to meet the required resilient strength and movement, 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. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
As to claim 11, Kellum shows a sliding door as claimed but for the sliding door mounted in a motorhome or camper. However, a sliding door installed in a house (or home) and a sliding door installed in a motorhome or camper are comparable structures that perform similar functionals, and therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to install the sliding door of Kellum in a motorhome, to enhance lighting and ventilation of a living space.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892.
Related prior art:
4,805,262 (Marshik) shows a spring element including a base body with a strip and a spring arm extending from the strip, and the spring arm is adjustable about an axis of rotation which is stationary relative to the strip.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUCK MAH whose telephone number is (571)272-7059. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00-3:00.
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, Jason San can be reached at 571-272-6531. 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.
/CHUCK Y MAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3677 CM
October 16, 2025