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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 8 (claims 1-20, figs. 24-26) in the reply filed on 11/16/2025 is acknowledged.
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 1-20 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.
Claim 1 is vague and indefinite because it is not clear exactly how a lubrication section and a mounting section of the cartridge are “configured to mount onto a door hinge” (lines 2-4), without defining the geometry (or configuration) of the cartridge and of the corresponding hinge.
In claim 2, it is not clear whether “a lubricant” is part of the “lubricating cartridge” or merely part of an outside element. There no proper connection between claim 2 and claim 1.
In claim 4, line 1, “the mounting component” lacks proper antecedent basis.
In claim 6, line 2, it is not clear exactly how “a lubricant applicator” is structurally related/linked to the “lubricating cartridge”.
In claim 7, it is not clearly whether “the lubricant” is a positive limitation or an environment limitation. Claim 1 only addresses the intended use of a lubricant.
In claim 11, it cannot be understood exactly how “a lubricant applicator” (line 4) is fitted into “a plurality of sections having a plurality of dimensions” (lines 2-3).
In claim 12, it cannot be understood exactly how “a plurality of lubricant applicators” can be inserted into the lubricant applicator compartment (i.e., a single compartment). The disclosure only shows a single applicator being disposed in each compartment.
Note that other claims, depending from the rejected claims, are also considered vague and indefinite.
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 1-7, 9-14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Zach et al. ‘577 (US 7,703,577 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Zach et al. shows a lubricating cartridge (1) as claimed, including a lubrication section (10) comprising a compartment for containing a lubricant (21); and a mounting section (figs. 1-3, upper or lower section containing mounting component 14 or 26) coupled to the lubrication section and configured to mount onto a door hinge (100).
As to claim 2, a lubricant (21) is formulated to provide lubrication to the door hinge.
As to claim 3, the mounting section comprises a mounting component (14, or 26) for mounting onto the door hinge.
As to claim 4, the mounting component is selected from a group consisting one or more magnets (14) or clamping structure (26).
As to claim 5, the mounting section includes an inner surface (24) designed to receive a mounting component for secure attachment to the door hinge.
As to claim 6, Zach et al. further shows a lubricant applicator (20, 12) configured to transport the lubricant to a contact surface of the door hinge.
As to claim 7, the lubricant comprises a liquid lubricant (oil, col. 2, line 26).
As to claim 9, the lubrication section (10) comprises a first end collection well (the lower chamber defined by lower end cap 22 and tube 10); a lubricant applicator compartment (middle section of 10, see figs. 4-5); and a second end collection well (the upper chamber defined by upper end cap 22 and tub 10).
As to claim 10, a lubricant applicator (12) has a size corresponding to the lubricant applicator compartment and is configured to dispense the lubricant.
As to claim 11, the lubricant applicator compartment has a plurality of sections having a plurality of dimensions (16, 18, or 19) correspondingly; and a lubricant applicator is constructed to substantially match the plurality of dimensions of the lubricant applicator compartment (12, or 20) and provide a controlled release of the lubricant when applied onto a surface of the door hinge.
As to claim 12, a plurality of lubricant applicators (12, 20) are inserted into the lubricant applicator compartment (see col. 2, lines 20-23).
As to claim 13, the lubrication section includes one or more (Zach et al. shows one) lubricant applicator compartment to receive one or more lubricant applicators correspondingly; and the mounting section includes one or more mounting component compartments (24) to receive one or more mounting components, correspondingly.
As to claim 14, the one or more lubricant applicator compartments and the one of more counting component compartment are configured in a linear alignment (figs. 1-6).
As to claim 20, the mounting section is configured to allow the lubricating cartridge to be detachably and re-attachably mounted onto the door hinge (i.e., removable, see col. 2, lines 55-57).
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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zach et al. ‘577.
Zach et al. discloses the invention as claimed but for the liquid lubricant being silicone. Zach et al. only mentions the lubricant being oil. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select silicone as lubricant, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-19 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:
US 2021/0278041 A1 (Conner, II) shows a hinge lubrication device having a housing configured to be placed over the hinge pintle portion of a door hinge, an absorption element disposed in the housing to engage the hinge, a first opening for insertion of the hinge portion, and a second opening for receiving a straw of an aerosol lubricant spray container to apply lubricant to the hinge.
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
January 21, 2026