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 under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the
Claim 6 limitation “actuating shafts run parallel to one another and are offset with respect to one another”
Claim 11 “a receiving space”
Claim 18 “actuating shafts run parallel to one another and are offset with respect to one another”
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 11-12, and 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Gehrie (U.S. Patent No. 3,416,338).
For claim 1, Gehrie discloses, in Figures 1-12, a combination lock, in particular a suitcase lock, comprising a locking mechanism through which the combination lock can be transferred from a blockage position (Figure 5) into an opening position (Figure 6), the locking mechanism including at least three rotationally adjustable bearing sleeves (Each dial 22 has respective sleeve 20. Col.2, L 31-34. Figures 5-6.),
wherein the locking mechanism is, by at least one bearing sleeve (20) being in a blocking setting of the bearing sleeve (20), blocked by a blocking device (36, Col.2, L60-64) of the bearing sleeve (20) so as to be prevented from being transferred from the blockage position into the opening position, and, by virtue of all of the bearing sleeves (20) being arranged in a release setting of each bearing sleeve (20), said locking mechanism is released for a movement from the blockage position into the opening position (When the detent 36 of the bearing sleeve 20 engages the recess 38 of the dial 22, the dial and the sleeve is in blockage position. When the detent 36 and the recess 38 are not in engagement, the dial and sleeve are in open position. Col.2, L60-64.),
wherein, on each bearing sleeve (20), there is arranged a coding wheel (22) which projects partially into an aperture in a front cover (The face plate C has slots 42 through which the dials 22 extend. The face plate C defines the front cover, and the slot 42 defines the aperture. Figure 1.), such that a checking setting of each of the bearing sleeves (20) can be detected through the aperture on the basis of a coding, which is perceptible from the outside, of the bearing sleeve (20), and the release setting of the bearing sleeve (20) can be set by virtue of the bearing sleeve (20) being rotated through a coding angle of the particular bearing sleeve (20a) proceeding from the checking setting of the bearing sleeve (A visual indicator 110, in the form of luminescent paint, is provided on the shank of sleeve. The indicators 110 may be sighted through slots 112. The dials 22 are rotated until the visual indicator on each sleeve is visible, and this condition is open state. The visual indicator 110 defines the checking setting for each bearing sleeve 20. Figure 6. Col.5, L 54-75.),
wherein the coding angles of at least two bearing sleeves (20) differ, and the bearing sleeves (20) have a second coding which is formed as a key marking such that the coding angle of the particular bearing sleeve is fixedly assigned to the form of the key marking and can thus be determined, and the second coding, formed as a key marking, is formed as an all-over coloration of the bearing sleeve (20) or of the material of the bearing sleeve (20) or is haptically perceptible by means of a checking tool (When all the visual indicators 110 are not visible, then the angles of the bearing sleeves differ from each other. A visible visual indicator 110 defines a key mark. With the key mark for one bearing sleeve, the bearing sleeve can be adjusted to find the corresponding key mark. The detent 36 of the bearing sleeve 20 is a second coding. Col. 5, L54-75.)
For claim 2, Gehrie discloses the combination lock according to Claim 1, wherein at least one of the codings (110) is formed as a visually identifiable coding (110 is visible), in particular as a colored labeling (110 is a colored. Col.5, L56-57.)
For claim 3, Gehrie discloses the combination lock according to Claim 1, wherein the haptically perceptible second coding (36) is formed as a notch formed in the bearing sleeve (20), which the notch has having a width (36 has a width, Figures 7-8) which is determinable as a key marking by means of the checking tool, wherein the width indicates the coding angle (Engagement of 36 and 38 indicate a fixed angle, which defines the coding angle. Figures 7-8, and 11.)
For claim 4, Gehrie discloses the combination lock according to Claim 1, wherein the first coding (110), by means of which the checking setting of the bearing sleeve (20) can be detected, is provided by means of a position of the haptically perceptible coding on the bearing sleeve (20), and the second coding (36), which is formed as a key marking and by means of which the coding angle can be determined, is provided in a form of the haptically perceptible coding (Rotating the dial 22, 110 can be moved to visible area. Thus, a haptically perceptible coding.)
For claim 5, Gehrie discloses the combination lock according to Claim 1, wherein the locking mechanism has an actuating shaft (J), and the bearing sleeves (20) having the coding wheels (22) are arranged on the actuating shaft (J) so as to be mutually independently rotatable and so as to be coaxial with respect to one another, wherein, when all of the bearing sleeves (20) are in the release setting, the actuating shaft (J) is movable axially into a release position (Figure 6 release position), in which the locking mechanism is in the opening position and unlocked (Figure 6. Col.5, L68-72), and when at least one bearing sleeve (20) is in the blocking setting (Blocking setting occurs when 36 of bearing sleeve engages 38 of dial 22. Col.2, L67-70), said actuating shaft is blocked, by means of the blocking device (36 and 38), in a locking position in which the locking mechanism is locked in the blockage position (Figure 5.)
For claim 6, Gehrie discloses the combination lock according to Claim 1, wherein the bearing sleeves (20) having the coding wheels (12) are arranged in planar fashion with respect to one another, and so as to be mutually independently rotatable, on respectively dedicated actuating shafts (The bearing sleeve 20 and coding wheel 12 are arranged on the actuating shaft J, and the coding wheel 12 can rotate independent of bearing sleeve 20.), wherein the actuating shafts run parallel to one another and are offset with respect to one another (Figures 3-4.)
For claim 7, Gehrie discloses the combination lock according to Claim 1, wherein the coding wheels (12) are movable relative to the respective bearing sleeves (20) axially between a normal setting, in which the coding wheel (12) is fastened rotationally conjointly to the bearing sleeve (20), and a configuration setting such that, in the configuration setting, the coding wheel (12) is freely rotatable relative to the associated bearing sleeve (20) and can be re-installed into the normal setting with an angular offset on the bearing sleeve (Col.5, L70-75.)
For claim 11, Gehrie discloses a suitcase, in particular for luggage, having a receiving space which can be closed by means of a combination lock according to the preamble of Claim 1, characterized in that the combination lock has the characterizing features of Claim 1 (Luggage case, Col.1, L23-25. Figures 1-2.)
For claim 12, Gehrie discloses the suitcase according to Claim 11, wherein the receiving space can be closed by the combination lock (Figure 1)), wherein at least one of the codings is formed as a visually identifiable coding (Visual indicator 110. Col.5, L68.)
For claim 15, Gehrie discloses the suitcase according to Claim 11, wherein the receiving space can be closed by the combination lock (Luggage case, Col.1, L23-25. Figures 1-2.), wherein the haptically perceptible second coding (36) is formed as a notch formed in the bearing sleeve (20), the notch having a width (36 has a width, Figures 7-8) which is determinable as a key marking by means of the checking tool, wherein the width indicates the coding angle (Engagement of 36 and 38 indicate a fixed angle, which defines the coding angle. Figures 7-8, and 11.)
For claim 16, Gehrie discloses the suitcase according to Claim 11, wherein the receiving space can be closed by the combination lock, wherein the first coding (110), by means of which the checking setting of the bearing sleeve (20) can be detected, is provided by means of a position of the haptically perceptible coding on the bearing sleeve (20), and the second coding (36), which is formed as a key marking and by means of which the coding angle can be determined, is provided in a form of the haptically perceptible coding (Rotating the dial 22, 110 can be moved to visible area. Thus, a haptically perceptible coding.)
For claim 17, Gehrie discloses the suitcase according to Claim 11, wherein the receiving space can be closed by the combination lock, wherein the locking mechanism has an actuating shaft (J), and the bearing sleeves (20) having the coding wheels (22) are arranged on the actuating shaft (J) so as to be mutually independently rotatable and so as to be coaxial with respect to one another, wherein, when all of the bearing sleeves (20) are in the release setting, the actuating shaft (J) is movable axially into a release position (Figure 6 release position), in which the locking mechanism is in the opening position and unlocked (Figure 6. Col.5, L68-72), and when at least one bearing sleeve (20) is in the blocking setting (Blocking setting occurs when 36 of bearing sleeve engages 38 of dial 22. Col.2, L67-70), said actuating shaft is blocked, by means of the blocking device (36 and 38), in a locking position in which the locking mechanism is locked in the blockage position (Figure 5.)
For claim 18, Gehrie disclose the suitcase according to Claim 11, wherein the receiving space can be closed by the combination lock, wherein the bearing sleeves (20) having the coding wheels (12) are arranged in planar fashion with respect to one another, and so as to be mutually independently rotatable, on respectively dedicated actuating shafts (The bearing sleeve 20 and coding wheel 12 are arranged on the actuating shaft J, and the coding wheel 12 can rotate independent of bearing sleeve 20.), wherein the actuating shafts run parallel to one another and are offset with respect to one another (Figures 3-4.)
For claim 19, Gehrie discloses the suitcase according to Claim 11, wherein the receiving space can be closed by the combination lock, wherein the coding wheels (12) are movable relative to the respective bearing sleeves (20) axially between a normal setting, in which the coding wheel (12) is fastened rotationally conjointly to the bearing sleeve (20), and a configuration setting such that, in the configuration setting, the coding wheel (12) is freely rotatable relative to the associated bearing sleeve (20) and can be re-installed into the normal setting with an angular offset on the bearing sleeve (Col.5, L70-75.)
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 8-10, 14, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gehrie (U.S. Patent No. 3,416,338) in view of Minsley et al. (U.S. Pub. App. 2023-0039893).
For claim 8, Gehrie discloses the combination lock according to Claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the coding angles are paired with the serial number of the particular combination lock or with a serial number of a suitcase in which the combination lock is installed, such that, based on the serial number, the associated coding angles can be retrieved from a database.
Minsley et al. teaches a lock system with unlock code, including alphanumeric code, stored in a database, and the customer can retrieve the unlock code with proper identification (Para. [0011-0013, 0036, 0044, and 0054]), thus providing a secured and user-friendly lock system. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gehrie with a method of storing the coding angles in a database and retrieving when needed such that the coding angles are paired with the serial number of the particular combination lock or with a serial number of a suitcase in which the combination lock is installed, such that, based on the serial number, the associated coding angles can be retrieved from a database, as taught by Minsley et al. with a reasonable expectation of success of having a secured and user-friendly lock system.
For claim 9, Gehrie discloses the combination lock according Claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the coding angle is applied, as an alphanumeric code in encrypted form and so as to be identifiable from the outside, to the combination lock or to a suitcase in which the particular combination lock is installed.
Minsley et al. teaches a lock system with unlock code, including alphanumeric code, stored in a database, and the customer can retrieve the unlock code with proper identification (Para. [0011-0013, 0036, 0044, and 0054]), thus providing a secured and user-friendly lock system. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gehrie with a method of messaging using alphanumeric code such that wherein the coding angle is applied, as an alphanumeric code in encrypted form and so as to be identifiable from the outside, to the combination lock or to a suitcase in which the particular combination lock is installed, as taught by Minsley et al. with a reasonable expectation of success of having a secured and user-friendly lock system.
For claim 10, Gehrie discloses the combination lock according to Claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the coding angles are stored in an RFID tag and can be read out by means of a corresponding RFID reader- wherein, expediently, the RFID tag is/can be formed on the combination lock itself or in particular on the suitcase in which the particular combination lock is installed.
Minsley et al. teaches a lock system with RFID technology to operate the lock (Para. [0060]), thus providing a secured and user-friendly lock system. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gehrie with a RFID method of transmitting codes, as taught by Minsley et al. with a reasonable expectation of success of having a secured and user-friendly lock system.
For claim 14, Gehrie discloses the combination lock according to Claim 10, but does not disclose wherein the RFID tag is formed on the combination lock itself or on the suitcase in which the particular combination lock is installed.
Minsley et al. teaches a lock system with RFID technology to operate the lock (Para. [0060]), thus providing a secured and user-friendly lock system. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gehrie with a RFID technology such that the RFID tag is formed on the combination lock itself or on the suitcase in which the particular combination lock is installed, as taught by Minsley et al. with a reasonable expectation of success of having a secured and user-friendly lock system.
For claim 20, Gehrie discloses the suitcase according to Claim 11, but does not disclose wherein the receiving space can be closed by the combination lock; wherein the coding angles are paired with the serial number of the particular combination lock or with a serial number of a suitcase in which the combination lock is installed, such that, based on the serial number, the associated coding angles can be retrieved from a database; or wherein the coding angle is applied, as an alphanumeric code in encrypted form and so as to be identifiable from the outside, to the combination lock or to a suitcase in which the particular combination lock is installed; or wherein the coding angles are stored in an RFID tag and can be read out by means of a corresponding RFID reader.
Minsley et al. teaches a lock system with unlock code, including alphanumeric code, stored in a database, and the customer can retrieve the unlock code with proper identification (Para. [0011-0013, 0036, 0044, and 0054]), thus providing a secured and user-friendly lock system. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gehrie with a method of storing the coding angles in a database and retrieving when needed such that the coding angles are paired with the serial number of the particular combination lock or with a serial number of a suitcase in which the combination lock is installed, such that, based on the serial number, the associated coding angles can be retrieved from a database, as taught by Minsley et al. with a reasonable expectation of success of having a secured and user-friendly lock system.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gehrie (U.S. Patent No. 3,416,338) in view of Bolotin et al. (U.S. Pub. App. 2008-0215841).
For claim 13, Gehrie discloses the combination lock according to Claim 2, but does not disclose wherein the visually identifiable coding is a colored label.
Bolotin et al. teaches a lock system with color labels buttons (coding) providing a secured and user-friendly locking system (Para. [038].) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gehrie to have colored labels for visually identifiable coding, as taught by Bolotin et al. with a reasonable expectation of success of having a secured and user-friendly locking system.
Conclusion
Prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and provides examples of similar inventions. There are no suggestions in the prior art of record for combining any of the references to arrive at as claimed. A few of the prior art cited but not applied includes Eller et al. (U.S. Pub. App. 2010-0319416); Ma (U.S. Patent No. 7,437,899); and Xiao (U.S. Pub. App. 2007-0012075).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN CUMAR whose telephone number is (571)270-3112. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, 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.
/NATHAN CUMAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675