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 Group II in the reply filed on 9/2/25 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-10, 15, and 16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 13 recites “the floor” in line 2, “the bottom edge” in line 4, and “the floor surface” in lines 4-5. Each of these limitations are not previously introduced, and should instead recite --a floor--, --a bottom edge--, and --floor surface-- respectively.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Adrain (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0285743).
Regarding claim 11, Adrain discloses a system for preserving human life during an armed attack (paragraphs 0033-0038 disclose use of the barrier to slow down bullets, stop a rocket, missile, or other launched object, etc., which reads on a system for preserving human life), the system comprising:
at least one camera facing an outside of a building (paragraphs 0092, 0094, and 0126 disclose the use of cameras as part of an external security system, including doorbell cameras which are known to face an outside of a building),
at least one monitor (15) monitoring a video stream from the camera (paragraphs 0125-0126 disclose that the controller 15 utilizes input from video cameras/sensors to operate the system),
at least one mobile ballistic partition (5, 100; paragraph 0124 discloses that the barrier system 5 incorporated in the control system may be used with any of the embodiments of barrier systems, which includes barrier 100) within the building, the mobile ballistic partition stored in a stored configuration (paragraph 0068 discloses storage of the barrier layer 110 within the mounting structure 110), and
at least one automatic partition mover (10) operatively connected to the at least one mobile ballistic partition (paragraph 0124) [FIG. 9],
wherein the at least one mobile ballistic partition is automatically moved to an at least partially deployed conformation by the automatic partition mover in response to an action signal from the monitor (paragraph 0124 discloses actuation of the barrier system via the controller 15 in response to a threat detection or other status requiring barrier deployment; the actuation initiated by the controller reads on an action signal).
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 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adrain (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0285743) in view of Horner (WO 2021/202593).
Regarding claim 12, Adrain discloses the mobile ballistic partition, but does not disclose an overhead rail and roller supporting and carrying the partition.
Nonetheless, Horner discloses a system (2) comprising at least one overhead rail (90) to support the at least one mobile ballistic partition (page 26, lines 23-34), wherein the at least one mobile ballistic partition further comprises at least one roller (102) that rolls on the overhead rail to carry the mobile ballistic partition [FIG. 27], and wherein the at least one overhead rail further comprises a bulwark to shield the rail, the roller, and the top of the partition from bullets (as shown in Figure 27, the rail 90 is recessed into the ceiling; the wall structure 14 thereby defines a bulwark shielding the rail, roller, and top of the partition.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system and partition of Adrain to have the overhead rail and roller configuration taught by Horner, in order to allow for the use of heavier partitions that fully extend to the ceiling, so as to ensure adequate coverage and protection from dangerous or harmful events.
Regarding claim 14, Adrain discloses that the at least one mobile ballistic partition is held in a stored position (paragraph 0068), and wherein when the at least one automatic partition mover automatically moves the at least one mobile ballistic partition in response to an action signal (paragraph 0124; it is understood that the “action signal” recited in this limitation may be the same as or different from the action signal introduced in claim 11), the at least one mobile ballistic partition is at least partially exposed by pushing the at least one mobile ballistic partition out from the stored position so that it can be grabbed by a person and fully deployed manually (at least paragraph 0074 discloses automatic deployment by the partition mover system and manual operation of the partition; the partition is therefore capable of being operated in the claimed manner and reads on the functional limitation), but Adrain does not disclose concealing the partition behind a false wall.
Nonetheless, Horner discloses a mobile ballistic partition concealed behind a false wall (housing panel 74 defines a false wall as shown in Figures 17 and/or 23).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the partition of Adrain to be concealed behind a false wall when in the stored position, as taught by Horner, in order to hide the partition from view when not in use so as to protect the operating mechanisms from damage or debris, and to allow for the provision of additional wall space for decoration or other elements (e.g. in a classroom setting).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adrain (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0285743) in view of Mandall (U.S. Patent No. 8,336,260).
Regarding claim 13, Adrain discloses the mobile ballistic partition, but does not disclose a lower track inset into the floor or a roller that carries the partition.
Nonetheless, Mandall discloses a mobile partition (60) comprising a lower track (90) that is inset into a floor [FIG. 9], wherein the partition comprises at least one roller (74) that rolls on the lower track to carry the partition (column 6, line 59-column 7, line 7), wherein the bottom edge of the mobile partition is below the floor surface [FIG. 9] so that there are no gaps to allow a shooter to shoot into the safety chamber (column 7, lines 4-7).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the partition of Adrain to have the inset lower track and roller configuration taught by Mandall, in order to block access around the edges of the partition for an intruder, and to allow for greater sealing mechanisms around edges of the partition in a deployed state to prevent passage of harmful gasses or smoke.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABE L MASSAD whose telephone number is (571)272-6292. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:00.
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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at 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 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.
/ABE MASSAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634