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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/03/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The examiner respectfully disagrees that the retention component (as labeled in reference image 1) is a mere “detail” rather than a separate component. Hiscocks does not describe a “detail” and figure 1 is described as an exploded view. Further a ball and groove arrangements (see reference image x) appears to secure the separate retention component. The examiner agrees that the retention component disclosed by Hiscocks would not prevent side bars from “falling out” radially however this is not claimed. Hiscock teaches holes (the retention component marked in reference image 1) that would retain (“to continue to hold or contain something” – oxford learner’s dictionary) of the one or more side bars when it is/they are in the projecting position (as the holes would contain 128; noting the blocking via the pins 122 and para 47; at least as with the side bars being blocked by the pins 122 and the holes in between the side bars and the pins, the holes would retain 128 in the projecting position). The manner in which the retention components retain the side bars should be further clarified.
PNG
media_image1.png
525
660
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Reference image x
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The previous 112 rejections are overcome by the present amendments.
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 (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.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4, and 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hiscocks et al. US 20150114059 A1 (hereinafter Hiscocks).
In regards to claim 1, Hiscocks teaches a lock core for a pin tumbler lock, including a body (119), one or more side bars (at least one of 126), a keyway (164), and tumbler pins (some of 122) located in bores (120) in the body, each of the one or more side bars being adapted in a projecting position to project from the outside of the lock core (such as in fig 4), and in a released position to be received into the core when a correctly coded key is inserted into the keyway and engages the tumbler pins (para 34), wherein the lock core further includes a retention component (see reference image 1), separately formed from the body and including engagement features to retain each of the one or more side bars when it is/they are in the projecting position (at least as they retain 128, note fig 1) and wherein the retention component further includes one or more further bores and corresponding additional tumbler pins (see reference image 1) which must be operatively engaged by the correctly coded key in order for each of the one or more side bars to be received into the lock core (para 34).
PNG
media_image2.png
876
834
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Reference image 1
In regards to claim 4, Hiscocks teaches a pin tumbler lock, including a lock core adapted to rotate inside a shell, the lock core including a body (119), one or more side bars (at least one of 126), a keyway (164), and tumbler pins (some of 122) located in bores in the body, each of the one or more side bars being adapted in a projecting position to project from the outside of the lock core into a corresponding recess in the lock shell (such as in fig 4), and in a released position to be received into the core when a correctly coded key is inserted into the keyway and engages the tumbler pins (para 34), so that operatively the lock core can be rotated relative to the shell when the correctly coded key is inserted (paras 16-18), wherein the lock core further includes a retention component (see reference image 1), separately formed from the body and including engagement features (see reference image 1) to retain each of the one or more side bars when it is/they are in the projecting position (at least as they retain 128, note fig 1) and wherein the retention component further includes one or more further bores and corresponding additional tumbler pins (see reference image 1) which must be operatively engaged by the correctly coded key in order for each of the one or more side bars to be received into the lock core (para 34).
In regards to claim 6, Hiscocks teaches a pin tumbler lock according to claim 4 wherein the retention component is located within the body so that the bores in the retention component and the bores in the body are correctly aligned in line to permit operation of the tumbler pins by the correctly coded key (para 16).
In regards to claim 7, Hiscocks teaches a retention component adapted for use in a lock core according to any one of claim 1 (see reference image 1).
In regards to claim 8, Hiscocks teaches a retention component adapted for use in a pin tumbler lock according to claim 4 (see reference image 1).
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(s) 2-3 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiscocks as applied to claim 1, 4, and 6-8 above, and further in view of McCarthy GB 2439781 A (hereinafter McCarthy).
In regards to claim 2, Hiscocks teaches a lock core according to claim 1.
However, Hiscocks does not teach wherein the retention component is formed from a hardened material relative to the body of the lock core.
McCarthy teaches an insert (8A-9B) made of a material harder than the body (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have made the retention component is formed from a hardened material relative to the body of the lock core in Hiscocks in order to make attacking the lock more difficult (McCarthy: page 2 lines 1-2).
In regards to claim 3, Hiscocks in view of McCarthy teaches lock core according to claim 2, wherein the retention component is located within the body so that the bores in the retention component and the bores in the body are correctly aligned in line to permit operation of the tumbler pins by a key (Hiscocks para 16).
In regards to claim 5, Hiscocks teaches a lock core according to claim 4.
However, Hiscocks does not teach wherein the retention component is formed from a hardened material relative to the body of the lock core.
McCarthy teaches an insert (8A-9B) made of a material harder than the body (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have made the retention component is formed from a hardened material relative to the body of the lock core in Hiscocks in order to make attacking the lock more difficult (McCarthy: page 2 lines 1-2).
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER H WATSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5393. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 - 5.
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, Christine M Mills can be reached at (571) 272-8322. 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.
/PETER H WATSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights