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
2. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "120" and "120-1" have been used to designate safes but also refer to existing steel plates in para [0036]. 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. 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.
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 "existing steel horizontal plates of the safes 120 and 120-1" as discussed in para [0037] 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.
Specification
4. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: as discussed in the drawing objections above, in para [0037], the "existing steel horizontal plates of the safes 120 and 120-1" are not shown and therefore the configuration and disposition of these existing plates is not understood. Appropriate correction is required.
It is suggested that Applicant amend paragraph [0037] as was amended in the parent application 17/218,349, paragraph [0036], (amendment of 8/20/24).
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 2, 3, 6-10, 12-14, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Guinan et al US 6,907,830 (hereinafter Guinan).
Re Claim 2. (NEW)
Guinan discloses a safe door apparatus (Fig. 1-8), comprising: a safe door (1) having an inside surface (Fig.1); a locking mechanism (1a) on the inside surface; and a bolt assembly (8/12,13) on the inside surface operatively connected to the locking mechanism and configured to engage with a plate (2,3,4; Fig.4) within a safe body (ATM safe enclosure 18).
Re Claim 3. (NEW)
Guinan discloses the safe door apparatus of claim 2, wherein the bolt assembly (8) comprises two steel bolts (12/13) oriented vertically on the inside surface (Figs. 1-8; col. 1, line 48, discloses steel).
Re Claim 6. (NEW)
Guinan discloses the safe door apparatus of claim 2, wherein the plate (2) comprises a horizontal steel plate (2,3,4; col.1, line 48 discloses steel for the safe components) within the safe body (Figs. 2-8).
Re Claim 7. (NEW)
Guinan discloses the safe door apparatus of claim 6, wherein the horizontal steel plate (2) includes apertures (at 3,4) aligned with the bolt assembly (Figs. 2-8).
Re Claim 8. (NEW)
Guinan discloses the safe door apparatus of claim 7, wherein the bolt assembly (8,12,13) is configured to extend through the apertures (4,3) when the locking mechanism is engaged (Fig.6).
Re Claim 9. (NEW)
Guinan discloses the safe door apparatus of claim 2, wherein the bolt assembly (8,12,13) is connected to the locking mechanism (1a) via a connection plate (14/10).
Re Claim 10. (NEW)
Guinan discloses the safe door apparatus of claim 2, wherein the plate (2) defines compartments (see Fig. 1, left and right compartment on either side of the plate 2) within the safe body.
It is also noted that the plate affixed to the safe body is not considered part of the claimed “safe door apparatus” and as such is merely intended use of the safe door locking mechanism, and therefore is not accorded patentable weight.
Re Claim 12. (NEW)
Guinan discloses the safe door apparatus of claim 2, wherein the bolt assembly (8) is entirely contained within the safe door (1) when disengaged from the plate (Figs.1-3).
Re Claim 13. (NEW)
Guinan discloses a safe (Fig. 1; ATM safe enclosure 18), comprising: a safe body (18); a plate (2) within the safe body; a safe door (1); and a locking assembly (1a,8,12,13) on the safe door (Fig.1) configured to secure the safe door to the plate (Figs. 2-8).
Re Claim 14. (NEW)
Guinan discloses the safe of claim 13, wherein the plate (2) comprises a horizontal steel plate (2) and a vertical steel plate (3; Figs. 2-8) defining compartments within the safe body.
Re Claim 19. (NEW)
Guinan discloses the safe of claim 13, wherein the plate (2) comprises extended members (3,4) having apertures (4) aligned with the locking assembly (8,12,13).
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) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guinan.
Re Claim 5. (NEW)
Guinan discloses the safe door apparatus of claim 3, wherein each steel bolt has a thickness of approximately 30 millimeters.
With respect to claim 5, it is noted that Guinan discloses a steel construction for the safe/ATM enclosure but fails to specify dimensions of the safe structure. However, Official Notice is taken that it is old and well known to provide material and structure of an apparatus sufficient to effect the desired security and functionality of the apparatus. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the dimensions of the bolts and steel plate of Guinan with sufficient to provide the desired security as is well known.
Claim(s) 15, 16, 20, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guinan in view of WO2017/203276 (hereinafter WO276).
Re Claim 15. (NEW)
Guinan discloses the safe of claim 14, but fails to teach wherein the compartments comprise a media infeed compartment and a media cassette compartment.
WO276 discloses several steel plates within an ATM safe body, both horizontal (Fig.2; 14) and vertical (Fig.2; 30), wherein the compartments comprise a media infeed compartment (4) and a media cassette compartment (8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide various plate elements as taught by WO276 within the Guinan ATM safe body to create compartments and reinforce the structure against tampering as would be desired in the art.
Re Claim 16. (NEW)
Guinan as modified by WO276 discloses the safe of claim 13, further comprising a second safe door (WO276 – 16,42,44,46; Fig.3) providing access to a check compartment.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide various well known compartments and doors as taught by WO276 within the Guinan ATM safe body to enhance the security of the various compartments.
Re Claim 20. (NEW)
Guinan as modified by WO276 discloses a system, comprising: a media handling device (WO276-9); a safe body (Guinan ATM -18) having a media access opening (WO276); a plate (Guinan- 2) within the safe body defining compartments for media components; and a safe door (Guinan -1) having a locking mechanism (1a,8,12,13) configured to secure the safe door to the plate.
Re Claim 21. (NEW)
Guinan as modified by WO276 discloses the system of claim 20, wherein the media handling device comprises a media recycler (WO276- 9) interfaced with an automated teller machine (Guinan).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide various well known compartments and doors as taught by WO276 within the Guinan ATM safe body to enhance the security of the various compartments and well known ATM features.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 4 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 5 of U.S. Patent No.12,188,292. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they recite like elements including the two bolts which move in opposite vertical directions
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 11, 17, 18 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.
Pending the double patenting rejection, as in claim 4, Guinan discloses the safe door apparatus of claim 3, but fails to teach wherein the two steel bolts (12/13) are configured to move in opposite vertical directions during operation of the locking mechanism.
As in claim 11, Guinan discloses the safe door apparatus of claim 2, but fails to teach wherein the bolt assembly is configured to move vertically during operation of the locking mechanism.
As is claim 17, Guinan discloses the safe of claim 13, wherein the locking assembly comprises vertically movable bolts.
As in claim 18, Guinan discloses the safe of claim 17, wherein the plate includes apertures configured to receive the vertically movable bolts.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUZANNE DINO BARRETT whose telephone number is (571)272-7053. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 8AM-6:30PM.
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, Christine Mills can be reached at 571-272-8322. 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.
SUZANNE DINO BARRETT
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3675B
Sdb
/SUZANNE L BARRETT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights