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 .
This Office Action is in response to applicant’s amendment filed on 7/9/26.
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 1st and 2nd stage locking, see 112 2nd paragraph rejection below, 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 § 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.
Claims 1, 3-9, and 11-19 are 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 requires that the pawls are rotated by the release lever, to then contact and operate the claws so that the claws rotate and cinch. At the instant, the limitation is indefinite.
First, according to the specification, the 1st stage locking state is illustrated in fig 7 and the 2nd state locking state, which corresponds to the cinch, is illustrated in fig 9. Here are the figures:
PNG
media_image1.png
747
1295
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As clearly shown, the claws and the pawl are in the same position, so what is the difference between both stage positions? Both figures are the same.
PNG
media_image2.png
606
924
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It appears that the intention is to claim that the 1st stage locking position is what is well known in the art as a “half locked position” or “pre-locked position”, when the pawl engages the claw in a 1st surface; and the 2nd stage locking position corresponds to a “fully locked position” or “main locked position”, wherein the pawl engages the claw in 2nd surface, as shown above by the examiner.
With that in mind, the claim requires that after the 1st stage locking position is performed, the motor will lower the lead lever/release lever, so as to rotate the pawls and then the pawls contact with the claws and operate so that the claws rotates and cinch.
At the instant, the specification poorly discloses how that is possible, so it is unclear how it works. Here is the invention:
PNG
media_image3.png
825
1329
media_image3.png
Greyscale
As shown, the release lever defines a slot that receives a protrusion on the pawl. However, the movement claimed, lowering the load lever/release lever will not make the pawl to rotate and contact with the claws and operate so that the claws rotates and cinch.
As illustrated, movement of the release lever will not do anything to the pawl since there is a lost motion between the slot and the protrusion.
The only way possible, as illustrated, is that the lowering movement of the release lever, when the claw is in the 1st stage position (half locked), will engage the claws so as to cinch the claws to move them to the 2nd stage position (fully locked).
Then, to open, the release lever is moved upwardly, so the slot engage and move the pawls, releasing the claws.
Claim 1 now requires the following:
PNG
media_image4.png
61
682
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The limitation is indefinite. Here is what is described:
PNG
media_image5.png
100
659
media_image5.png
Greyscale
As described, it is the lead lever 130 the one that is coupled to the center portion of the release lever.
Therefore, in order to continue with the examination, the claim will be interpreted and examined as follows:
-A dual locking door latch structure of a vehicle, which is provided on a vehicle body to open or close a door configured to open or close a door opening of the vehicle, and is provided to be coupled to or decoupled from the door, the dual locking door latch structure comprising:
a pair of claws rotating to be coupled to or decoupled from a striker provided on the door;
a pair of door pawls configured to contacting or releasing the claws
a release lever claws a down slidable movement of the release lever and to rotate the pair of pawls by an up slidable movement
a lead lever coupled to the release lever and slidably moving the release lever in up and down directions;
a motor providing driving force to the lead lever for the up and down movement of the lead lever; and
a gear assembly engaged between the motor and the lead lever and transmitting the driving force provided by the motor to the lead lever,
wherein the pair of claws and the pair of door pawls are provided first and second sides of the lead lever, respectively, and operate simultaneously,
wherein the lead lever is attached to a center portion of the release lever, the release lever extends to the first and second sides of the lead lever, and is operationally connected to the pair of door pawls, and
wherein, in response that the door is closed, the striker is coupled to the claws to be in 1- stage locking, the lead lever is lowered by operation of the motor and the release lever contact the pair of claws
Correction is required.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1, as interpreted above, would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
Response to Arguments
With respect to the previous drawing objection, the current amendment overcomes the previous issue.
However, in view of the amendment, a new objection has been made on the record.
With respect to the 112 2nd paragraph rejection to claim 1, some were withdrawn in view of the amendment.
However, one is maintained, as explained above. The new one is basically previous 112 2nd paragraph rejection to claim 2, which was incorporated into claim 1.
Furthermore, in view of the amendment, a new issue has ben made on the record.
Also, the examiner provides an amendment to claim 1 to overcomes all 112 issues presented.
Prosecution has been closed.
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 CARLOS LUGO whose telephone number is (571)272-7058. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6pm.
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.
/Carlos Lugo/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3675
August 13, 2026
Prosecution Insights