DETAILED ACTION
This final Office action is in response to the claims filed on January 5, 2026.
The replacement abstract filed January 5, 2026 has been approved.
Status of claims: claim 7 is cancelled; claims 1-6 and 8 are hereby examined below.
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 because the specification appears to contradict FIGS. 3a and 3b.
More specifically, the specification states: “In particular, in the locked state illustrated in Fig. 3a, the control system 20 is adapted to set the same polarity to the electromagnet 141 as that of the permanent magnet 121 so that the permanent magnet 121 is attracted by the electromagnet 141.” However, FIG. 3a illustrates the permanent magnet 121 with a “N” polarity, which is not the same polarity as the polarity “S” of the electromagnets 141.
Similarly, the specification states “in the released state illustrated in Fig. 3b, the control system 20 is adapted to set an opposite polarity to the electromagnet 141 than that of the permanent magnet 121.” However, FIG. 3b illustrates the permanent magnet 121 with a “N” polarity, which is not an opposite polarity of the polarity “N” of the electromagnets 141.
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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The specification states: “In particular, in the locked state illustrated in Fig. 3a, the control system 20 is adapted to set the same polarity to the electromagnet 141 as that of the permanent magnet 121 so that the permanent magnet 121 is attracted by the electromagnet 141.” However, FIG. 3a illustrates the permanent magnet 121 with a “N” polarity, which is not the same polarity as the polarity “S” of the electromagnets 141. Should the specification be amended to say that the magnets have opposite polarity, as illustrated in FIG. 3a?
Similarly, the specification states “in the released state illustrated in Fig. 3b, the control system 20 is adapted to set an opposite polarity to the electromagnet 141 than that of the permanent magnet 121.” However, FIG. 3b illustrates the permanent magnet 121 with a “N” polarity, which is not an opposite polarity of the polarity “N” of the electromagnets 141. Should the specification be amended to say that the magnets have the same polarity, as illustrated in FIG. 3b?
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 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.
Claims 1 and 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KR 10-2010-0065891to Park et al. (hereinafter “Park”).
Park discloses a window control device for controlling the up and down displacement of a window glass 120 comprising:
first and second permanent magnet strips 132a,132b attached to the window glass; (FIG. 3)
a window frame 50 surrounding at least partially the window glass and being provided with first and second sets of electromagnets 142a,142b; and (see FIGS. 2 and 3)
a control system 150 for controlling the polarity of the electromagnets and the intensity of the magnetic field generated by the first and the second sets of electromagnets so that, in a locked state, the first set of electromagnets are adapted to attract the first permanent magnet strip, thus preventing any up and down displacement of the window glass, and, in a released state of the window glass, the first set of electromagnets are adapted to repel the first permanent magnet strip, thus allowing an up and down displacement of the window glass, and the second set of electromagnets are adapted to generate selectively a repulsive and/or attractive force on the second permanent magnet strip , thus resulting in an up or down displacement of the window glass. (see pages 2 and 3 of the machine translation of Park) (claim 1)
Park further discloses wherein the second permanent magnet strip has a series of individual permanent magnets (see FIGS. 5a, 5b) arranged in alternating polarity and the second set of electromagnets comprises a series of individual electromagnets that can each have either north or south polarity. (claim 3)
Park further discloses wherein the first and the second permanent magnet strips are disposed at opposite sides of the window glass. (see FIG. 3) (claim 4)
Park further discloses wherein the first and the second permanent magnet strips are disposed along an end edge of the window glass that is covered by the window frame. (see FIGS. 2 and 3) (claim 5)
Park further discloses a vehicle door comprising an upper window glass and the window control device according to claim 1 for controlling the up and down displacement of the upper window glass. (see FIGS. 1 and 2) (claim 6)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of FR 2822879 to Breynaert et al. (hereinafter “Breynaert”).
Park, as applied above, discloses the first permanent magnet strip comprises a plurality of flat permanent magnets with opposite polarity on each side (inherent) and the first set of electromagnets comprising a plurality of electromagnets that can have either north or south polarity, (see FIGS. 3, 5a, 5b) but fails to disclose the first permanent magnet strip comprises a single magnet and the first set of electromagnets comprises only one electromagnet.
Breynaert teaches the use of a single magnet 8, versus a magnet strip or a set of magnets, used in a similar window control device. (see FIG. 5)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Park first permanent magnet strip with a single permanent magnet as well as modify the Park first set of electromagnets with only one electromagnet, as taught by Breynaert with a reasonable expectation of success in order to facilitate assembly of the Park window control device, in order to facilitate replacement of the first permanent magnet strip and first set of electromagnets as well as since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two or more pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. (claim 2)
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park, as applied to claim 5 above, in view of US 4272923 to Anderson.
Park, as applied above, fails to disclose a lower window glass that is fixedly connected to the window frame.
Anderson teaches of a vehicle door with a lower window glass that is fixedly connected to a window frame. (see FIGS. 1 and 2)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Park vehicle door with a lower window glass fixedly coupled thereto as taught in Anderson with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide children and short people the ability to see through the vehicle door at a lower region of the door. (claim 8)
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 5, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 7 and 9 of the applicant’s response filed January 5, 2026, the applicant contends the following:
PNG
media_image1.png
168
642
media_image1.png
Greyscale
First, in response to applicant's argument that the reference fails to show certain features of applicant's invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “the control system 20 is adapted to set the same polarity to the electromagnet 141 as that of the permanent magnet 121”) are not recited in the rejected claims. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). And it should be noted the applicant’s quote is directly from applicant’s specification and not the claims.
Second, the Park reference, as is the case with applicant’s specification, explicitly discloses the Park control system 150 can control the polarity of the Park “first and second permanent magnet strips” 132a,132b and the “first and second sets of electromagnets” 142a,142b such that “the algorithm generated in the control system 150 can apply a current that can generate the same polarity as the Hark [sic] magnet array portions 132a and 132b in the magnet portions 142a and 142b.” (see portion of page 3 of the machine translation of Park below)
PNG
media_image2.png
102
576
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In other words, the control system 150 of Park is adapted to perform the same function with regard to polarity of the magnet strips and electromagnets as applicant’s control system; thus contradicting applicant’s assertion.
On page 8 of the applicant’s response filed January 5, 2026, the applicant contends the following, regarding claim 2:
PNG
media_image3.png
142
634
media_image3.png
Greyscale
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant’s first statement constitutes mere supposition. And it is unclear what applicant is contesting in the second statement; perhaps arguing limitations not recited in the claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCUS MENEZES whose telephone number is (571) 272-5225. The examiner can normally be reached on M - F 8-5 PST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Daniel Cahn can be reached on 571-270-5616. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Marcus Menezes/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634