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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 29 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 16 June 2026, with respect to the prior art rejection of claim(s) 1 have been considered, and in response the same art is applied to the amended claims. Although the amendments overcome the previous rejection in view of Cetnar’s (US-5529356-A) device shown Figures 1-4, Cetnar discloses a functionally similar second embodiment, shown Figures 5-7, wherein outer surfaces in a direction perpendicular to the locking pin of the central piece and the mounting web have a same cross-sectional area. See the updated rejection(s) below.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1 objected to because of the following informalities: claim(s) should be amended to recite “wherein outer surfaces of the central piece and the mounting web have a same cross-sectional area in a direction perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the locking pin [[of the central piece and the mounting web have a same cross-sectional area]].” Appropriate correction or clarification is required.
Claim(s) 3 objected to because of the following informalities: claim(s) should be amended to recite “wherein the lock holder bracket comprises [[a]] the mounting web arranged parallel to the central piece.” Appropriate correction or clarification is required.
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 (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 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) 1-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cetnar (US-5529356-A) in view of Nakamura (US-5209532-A) in further view of Waldmann (EP-2031158-A2). All citations refer to the Cetnar reference unless otherwise noted.
With regards to claim 1, Cetnar discloses a lock holder (140 Figure 5) for a motor vehicle door lock (18 Figure 1), comprising:
a lock holder plate (150 Figure 5) and a lock holder bracket (158 Figure 6) which is secured to the lock holder plate,
wherein the lock holder bracket comprises a locking pin (166 Figure 6), a central piece (170 Figure 6), a connecting pin (174 Figure 6), and a mounting web (160 Figure 6),
wherein the lock holder is designed in at least two parts (150, 158 Figure 6), and
wherein the lock holder bracket defines an opening (between 166 and 174, Figure 6) for receiving a load arm (46 Figure 2) of a catch (42 Figure 2), and
wherein outer surfaces in a direction perpendicular to the locking pin (left/right, Figure 6) of the central piece and the mounting web have a same cross-sectional area (Figure 7 shows outer surfaces of the central piece 170 and the mounting web 160 have a same cross-sectional area).
Cetnar does not disclose wherein the central piece is equipped with a projection in a direction of a longitudinal axis of the central piece (left/right, Figure 1).
However, Nakamura discloses a lock holder (10 Figure 5) for a motor vehicle door lock (24 Figure 5) comprising a locking pin (18 Figure 5), a central piece (22 Figure 5), and a connecting pin (14 Figure 5), wherein the central piece is equipped with a projection (22a Figure 5) in a direction of a longitudinal axis of the central piece (left/right, Figure 5), wherein the projection and the central piece are arranged on a common plane to form a flat contact surface for a catch (30 Figure 5)(Col. 3 Lines 23-36). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to equip the central piece with a projection in a direction of a longitudinal axis of the central piece, with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to add such a projection to form a flat contact surface for a catch so that the strength of the door lock device against the load is increased, without increasing the thickness and width of the catch (Col. 3 Lines 37-44 – Nakamura).
Cetnar does not disclose wherein the central piece includes an indentation extending along the central piece above the opening.
However, Waldmann discloses a lock holder (2 Figure 1) for a motor vehicle door lock comprising a locking pin (5 Figure 1), a central piece (6 Figure 1) and a connecting pin (7 Figure 1), wherein the central piece includes an indentation (14 Figure 1) extending along the central piece above the opening (as shown Figure 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add Waldmann’s indentation to the central piece of Cetnar, with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to add such an indentation in order to reduce the amount of material required to achieve a high-strength cross-sectional profile of the central piece.
With regards to claim 2, Cetnar in view of Nakamura in further view of Waldmann teaches the lock holder according to claim 1, wherein the lock holder bracket (158 Figure 6) is non-detachably secured (by mean rivet heads 164 of projections 162, Figure 6) to the lock holder plate (150 Figure 5).
With regards to claim 3, Cetnar in view of Nakamura in further view of Waldmann teaches the lock holder according to claim 1, wherein the lock holder bracket (158 Figure 6) comprises a mounting web (160 Figure 6) arranged parallel to the central piece (170 Figure 6).
With regards to claim 4, Cetnar in view of Nakamura in further view of Waldmann teaches the lock holder according to claim 3, wherein the mounting web (160 Figure 6) comprises a flat contact surface (as shown Figure 7) corresponding to the lock holder plate (150 Figure 5).
With regards to claim 5, Cetnar in view of Nakamura in further view of Waldmann teaches the lock holder according to claim 3, wherein the mounting web (160 Figure 6) comprises at least one mounting element (162 Figure 6) integrally formed on the mounting web.
With regards to claim 6, Cetnar in view of Nakamura in further view of Waldmann teaches the lock holder according to claim 1, wherein the projection (22a Figure 5 – Nakamura) forms a contact surface (Col. Lines 23-36 – Nakamura) for a catch (42 Figure 1) of the motor vehicle door lock (18 Figure 1).
With regards to claim 7, Cetnar in view of Nakamura in further view of Waldmann teaches the lock holder according to claim 6, wherein the projection (22a Figure 5 – Nakamura) and the central piece (170 Figure 6) are arranged on a common plane (Figure 5 – Nakamura / Figure 6 – Cetnar) to form the contact surface (Col. Lines 23-36 – Nakamura) for the catch (42 Figure 1).
With regards to claim 8, Cetnar in view of Nakamura in further view of Waldmann teaches the lock holder according to claim 6, wherein the projection (22a Figure 5 – Nakamura) and the central piece (170 Figure 6) form the contact surface (Col. Lines 23-36 – Nakamura) for the catch (42 Figure 1), and wherein the contact surface is flat (Figure 5 – Nakamura / Figure 7 – Cetnar).
With regards to claim 9, Cetnar in view of Nakamura in further view of Waldmann teaches the lock holder according to claim 1, wherein the lock holder bracket (158 Figure 6) is designed as one piece.
With regards to claim 10, Cetnar in view of Nakamura in further view of Waldmann teaches the lock holder according to claim 1, wherein the locking pin (166 Figure 6) has a cylindrical cross-sectional shape (as shown Figure 5), and the central piece (170 Figure 6), the connecting pin (174 Figure 6) and the mounting web (160 Figure 6) have a square cross-sectional shape (as shown Figures 5, 7).
With regards to claim 11, Cetnar in view of Nakamura in further view of Waldmann teaches the lock holder according to claim 3, wherein the mounting web (160 Figure 6) extends along the lock holder plate (150 Figure 5) and abuts the lock holder plate.
With regards to claim 12, Cetnar in view of Nakamura in further view of Waldmann teaches the lock holder according to claim 3, wherein the lock holder bracket (158 Figure 6) is connected to the lock holder plate (150 Figure 6) using the mounting web (160 Figure 6).
With regards to claim 13, Cetnar in view of Nakamura in further view of Waldmann teaches the lock holder according to claim 1, wherein the projection (22a Figure 5 – Nakamura) is configured to extend from the central piece (170 Figure 6) beyond the locking pin (166 Figure 6) to engage with a catch arm of the catch (42 Figure 1) (Col. Lines 23-36 – Nakamura).
With regards to claim 14, Cetnar in view of Nakamura in further view of Waldmann teaches the lock holder according to claim 1, wherein the projection (22a Figure 5 – Nakamura) has a cross-sectional shape corresponding to the central piece (170 Figure 6) (as taught by Figure 5 – Nakamura).
With regards to claim 15, Cetnar in view of Nakamura in further view of Waldmann teaches a motor vehicle lock (18 Figure 1) comprising:
the lock holder (140 Figure 5) according to claim 1, and a catch (42 Figure 1), wherein the projection (22a Figure 5 – Nakamura) forms a contact surface for the catch (Col. Lines 23-36 – Nakamura).
With regards to claim 16, Cetnar in view of Nakamura in further view of Waldmann teaches the motor vehicle lock according to claim 15, wherein the projection (22a Figure 5 – Nakamura) and the central piece (170 Figure 6) are arranged on a common plane (Figure 5 – Nakamura / Figure 6 – Cetnar) in relation to the contact surface of the catch (42 Figure 1) to form a common contact surface for the catch (Col. Lines 23-36 – Nakamura).
With regards to claim 17, Cetnar in view of Nakamura in further view of Waldmann teaches the motor vehicle lock according to claim 15, wherein the projection (22a Figure 5 – Nakamura) and the central piece (170 Figure 6) form a flat contact surface (Figure 5 – Nakamura / Figure 7 – Cetnar) as the contact surface (Col. Lines 23-36 – Nakamura) for the catch (42 Figure 1).
With regards to claim 18, Cetnar in view of Nakamura in further view of Waldmann teaches the motor vehicle lock according to claim 15, wherein the projection (22a Figure 5 – Nakamura) is configured to extend from the central piece (170 Figure 6) beyond the locking pin (166 Figure 6) to engage with a catch arm of the catch (42 Figure 1) (Col. Lines 23-36 – Nakamura).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Noah Horowitz, whose telephone number is (571)272-5532. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 11:00AM - 7:00 PM.
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, Kristina Fulton, can be reached at (571) 272-7376. 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.
/NOAH HOROWITZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights