DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 7-12, and 14-17 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 recites “a position where it partially extends the first connecting seat”. This is awkwardly worded and unclear (what is “it”? How is the seat partially extended?). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 recites “a position where it is partially opposite to the locking tab”. This is awkwardly worded and unclear (what is “it”? How can something be “partially opposite”?). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 recites “the limit piece”. This is unclear since “the limit piece” lacks proper antecedent basis. The dependency of claim 8 was changed from claim 3 which depended on claim 2, to amended claim 1. “A limit piece” is disclosed in claim 2. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 recites “the first connecting piece”. This is unclear since “the first connecting piece” lacks proper antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 recites “an another end”. This is awkwardly worded and should read “another end” or “an other end”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 recites “a position where it is opposite to the locking tab” and “a position where it is offset from the locking tab”. This is unclear (i.e. what is “it”?). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 recites “the hook portion swings, along with a swing of the inner door railing”. This is awkwardly worded. Examiner recommends “the hook portion swings along with the inner door railing”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 recites “the limit piece”. This is unclear since “the limit piece” lacks proper antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 7, 9-10, 12, 14, and 16-17 are objected to as depending from a base claim with an objection.
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.
Claim 4 is 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites “the other end of the first chamber is in elastic contact with the locking tab to apply elastic force to make the locking tab move in a direction where the locking tab partially passes through the ferrule and is exposed”. This is unclear as the chamber appears to includes multiple “ends” and it is unclear which end is “the other end of the first chamber”. Additionally, it is unclear how “the other end of the first chamber” would be in “elastic contact with the locking tab” since the first chamber is a rigid structure.
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)(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.
Claims 1-2 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a2 as being anticipated by Feng et al. (US 12,421,793) (hereinafter Feng).
Regarding claim 1, Feng discloses a locking mechanism, comprising a first connecting seat (at least element 13) and a locking tab (element 14) provided thereon, wherein the outer wall of the first connecting seat is provided with a hook portion (Figure 8, area of element 21), wherein the first connecting seat is provided with a first chamber (area of element 17) for accommodating the locking tab, and a ferrule (element 15, Examiner notes the term “ferrule” is considered to be very broad and element 15 is considered to be at least “a ring or cap.., put around the end of a post, cane, or the like”, See definition for “ferrule” below) is movably installed in the first chamber and is sleeved on the locking tab (Examiner notes that element 15 is at least partially installed in the first chamber and at least partially sleeved on element 14 via connections between elements 19 and 18), and front and rear sides of the first connecting seat are provided with a drive portion (considered top portion of element 15) that is fixedly connected to the ferrule (Examiner note that the top portion of element 15 is protrudes from element 13 and accessible from “front and rear sides of the first connecting seat”.
ferrule
[fer-uhl, -ool]
noun
a ring or cap, usually of metal, put around the end of a post, cane, or the like, to prevent splitting.
a short metal sleeve for strengthening a tool handle at the end holding the tool.
a bushing or adapter holding the end of a tube and inserted into a hole in a plate in order to make a tight fit, used in boilers, condensers, etc.
a short ring for reinforcing or decreasing the interior diameter of the end of a tube.
a short plumbing fitting, covered at its outer end and caulked or otherwise fixed to a branch from a pipe so that it can be removed to give access to the interior of the pipe.
Source: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/ferrule
Regarding claim 2, Feng discloses wherein the locking tab is movably disposed inside the first connecting seat and moves relative to the first connecting seat between the position where it partially extends the first connecting seat and the position where it retracts into the first connecting seat (See at least column 5, lines 5-31), the locking tab is connected to a drive portion (element 15) located outside the first connecting seat, the drive portion is used to drive the locking tab to move, a limit piece (element 40) is also provided and is movably installed on the first connecting seat, the limit piece moves relative to the first connecting seat between the position where it is partially opposite to the locking tab and the position where it is offset from the locking tab, and when the limit piece is partially opposite to the locking tab, it limits the locking tab to retract towards the interior of the first connecting seat (See at least column 5, lines 40-61, “The pressing piece 40 is arranged on a lower side of the handle 13. The elastic piece 46 is arranged in the handle 13 to provide restoring force for resetting of the pressing piece 40, and the elastic piece 46 is a spring. The pressing piece 40 is provided with an inserting rod 41. One end of the inserting rod 41 is capable of abutting against right side of the spring buckle 14 or is capable of inserting into the triangular groove 42. When the safety gate needs to be opened, the user can press the pressing piece 40 upwards to release the contact between the inserting rod 41 and the spring buckle 14, and then press the button 15 downwards”).
Regarding claim 5, Feng discloses wherein the drive portion is fixed to the ferrule through a connecting portion (See Figures 8 and 10, the drive portion and ferrule are one rigid piece), and the first connecting seat is provided with an avoidance port (Figure 8, considered opening in top of element 13 in which element 15 is installed) at a position corresponding to a movement trajectory of the connecting portion.
Regarding claim 6, Feng discloses wherein a bottom wall of the ferrule is provided with a first limit portion (element 19), the first chamber is provided with a first limit hole (Figure 8, considered hole in top of element 13), and the first limit portion partially extends into the first limit hole and moves within the first limit hole along with a movement of the ferrule
Regarding claim 7, Feng discloses wherein the outer wall of the drive portion is provided with anti-slip patterns (See at least Figure 8, Examiner notes that the “patterns” of element 15 are considered to be “anti-slip” to an undisclosed degree).
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 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Yates (US 2009/0064595).
Regarding claim 1, Yates discloses a locking mechanism, comprising a first connecting seat (element 36) and a locking tab (element 56) provided thereon, wherein an outer wall of the first connecting seat is provided with a hook portion (See at least Figure 3a, area of element 74); wherein the first connecting seat is provided with a first chamber (See at least Figures 3a-4b) for accommodating the locking tab, and a ferrule (considered at least elements 82 and 84) is movably installed in the first chamber and is sleeved on the locking tab, and front and rear sides of the first connecting seat are provided with a drive portion (element 82) that is fixedly connected to the ferrule. Examiner notes that the term “ferrule” is considered to be very broad, and element elements 82 and 84 of Yates is considered to be at least “a ring or cap, usually of metal, put around the end of a post, cane, or the like” or “a short metal sleeve for strengthening a tool handle at the end holding the tool” (See definition for “ferrule” above. Also see paragraph [0051], “The gate assembly can be formed from any or any combination of material, such as wood, plastic, metal, rubber, fabric and/or the like”).
Regarding claim 5, Yates discloses wherein the drive portion is fixed to the ferrule through a connecting portion (elements 82 and 84 are directly connected), and the first connecting seat is provided with an avoidance port (area of element 86) at a position corresponding to a movement trajectory of the connecting portion.
Regarding claim 6, Yates discloses wherein a bottom wall of the ferrule is provided with a first limit portion (element 84), the first chamber is provided with a first limit hole (See Figures 4a-4b, considered area in which element 84 is installed), and the first limit portion partially extends into the first limit hole and moves within the first limit hole along with a movement of the ferrule
Regarding claim 7, Yates discloses wherein the outer wall of the drive portion (121) is provided with anti-slip patterns (See at least Figure 2c, Examiner notes that the “patterns” of element 82 are considered to be “anti-slip” to an undisclosed degree.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the argument “The Applicant has amended independent claim 1 by incorporating the additional technical features of allowable claim 3, and thus amended independent claim 1 is patentable”. This is incorrect. In Non-Final Rejection filed 11/05/2025, Examiner indicated that claims 3-6, 8-10, 13-14, and 16 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the objections set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Applicant amended claim 1 to include the subject matter of claim 3 WITHOUT the intervening subject matter of claim 2, and therefore the subject matter of claim 1 as amended was not indicated as allowable. The indication of allowable subject matter identified in Non-Final Rejection filed 11/05/2025 is therefore withdrawn. See the art rejections for claims 1-2 and 5-7 above
Applicant has provided no additional arguments with regard to why claim 1 as amended would be allowable without the intervening subject matter of claim 2, as indicated in the previous Office Action.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-12 and 14-17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
As best understood, Claim 4 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
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 JUSTIN B REPHANN whose telephone number is (571)270-7318. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-4:30pm.
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.
/JUSTIN B REPHANN/Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights