DETAILED ACTION
This non-final Office action is in response to the claims filed on March 17, 2026.
Status of claims: claims 1-15 are hereby examined below.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on March 17, 2026 has been entered.
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 “an attachment” and “roller body part” recited in lines 27-28 of claim 14 (and recited in claim 8) and “fastening pin” recited in claim 15 (and recited in claim 9) should be identified in FIGS. 7a, 7b.
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 Objections
Claims 1, 14, and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 11 – shouldn’t “the direction” be amended to “a direction”
Claim 14, line 11 – shouldn’t “the direction” be amended to “a direction”
Claim 14, line 29 – shouldn’t “longitudinal direction” be amended to “longitudinal axis”?
Claim 15, line 11 – shouldn’t “the direction” be amended to “a direction”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-8 and 14 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 8-15 of copending Application No. 18941466 in view of US 11098513 to Liu et al. (hereinafter “Liu”).
Application No. 18941466 claims
a) a sill with a running rail;
b) a leaf that can be displaced in parallel with the running rail;
c) a carriage via which the leaf is supported downward on the running rail;
wherein the carriage comprises a roller part with a running roller having at least two rollers both rolling on the running rail and a control cam running at least in sections at an angle to the main plane of the leaf, wherein the roller part is designed to be movable transversely to the main plane of the leaf;
and the leaf comprises a driving bar with a control pin which is arranged or formed on the driving bar and protrudes into the control cam wherein a movement of the driving bar in the direction of its longitudinal axis causes a movement of the roller part transverse to the main plane of the leaf in order to move the leaf transversely to the running rail;
wherein the sill comprises a first guide groove opposite a second guide groove separated by the running rail and extending in parallel with the running rail, wherein a first projection rotatably connected to of the carriage extends down beyond the running roller into the first guide groove and not into the second guide groove, wherein the carriage can be supported via the first projection on a side wall of the first guide groove and/or a side of the running rail when the leaf is loaded transversely to an extension of the running rail, as recited in claim 1.
Application No. 18941466 fails to disclose a singular running rail, the carriage with a roller part with an inline running roller having at least two rollers both rolling on the same running rail and wherein the first projection is rotatably connected to the carriage.
Liu teaches of a sill 21 with a singular running rail 22,23; (see FIGS. 1 and 3; see annotated FIG. 1 below; note the running rail constitutes a singular element); wherein the carriage comprises a roller part 1222 with an inline running roller 12226 having at least two rollers both rolling on the running rail; and wherein a first projection 12215 rotatably connected to of the carriage.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Application No. 18941466 to claim a singular running rail, the carriage with a roller part with an inline running roller having at least two rollers both rolling on the same running rail and wherein the first projection is rotatably connected to the carriage, as taught by Liu with a reasonable expectation of success in order to facilitate assembly of the door and to further guide and smoothen movement of the door. (clam 1)
Application No. 18941466 discloses a door, wherein the door comprises:
a) a sill with a running rail;
b) a leaf that can be displaced in parallel with the running rail;
c) a carriage via which the leaf is supported downward on the running rail;
wherein the carriage comprises a roller part with a running roller rolling on the running rail and a control cam running at least in sections at an angle to the main plane of the leaf, wherein the roller part is designed to be movable transversely to the main plane of the leaf;
and the leaf comprises a driving bar with a control pin which is arranged or formed on the driving bar and protrudes into the control cam wherein a movement of the driving bar in the direction of its longitudinal axis causes a movement of the roller part transverse to the main plane of the leaf in order to move the leaf transversely to the running rail;
wherein the sill comprises a first guide groove opposite a second guide groove separated by the running rail and extending in parallel with the running rail, wherein a first projection of the carriage extends down beyond the running roller into the first guide groove and not into the second guide groove, wherein the carriage can be supported via the first projection on a side wall of the first guide groove and/or a side of the running rail when the leaf is loaded transversely to an extension of the running rail;
wherein the sill comprises a second guide groove extending in parallel with the running rail, wherein the running rail is arranged or formed between the first guide groove and the second guide groove when viewed horizontally, and wherein a further projection of the carriage extends down beyond the running roller into the second guide groove wherein the carriage can be supported via the further projection on the side wall of the second guide groove and/or the side of the running rail when the leaf is loaded transversely to the extension of the running rail;
wherein the first projection and the further projection are formed identically;
wherein the roller part comprises an attachment with the first projection, which is fastened to a roller part body, and wherein the attachment is formed mirror-symmetrically to a virtual plane extending vertically and in the longitudinal direction of the running rail in the middle of the running rail.
Liu teaches of a sill 21 with a singular running rail 22,23; (see FIGS. 1 and 3; see annotated FIG. 1 below; note the running rail constitutes a singular element); wherein the carriage comprises a roller part 1222 with an inline running roller 12226 having at least two rollers both rolling on the running rail.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Application No. 18941466 to claim a singular running rail, the carriage with a roller part with an inline running roller having at least two rollers both rolling on the same running rail, as taught by Liu with a reasonable expectation of success in order to facilitate assembly of the door and to further guide and smoothen movement of the door. (claim 14)
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
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 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.
Claims 1-3, 6, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liu.
Liu discloses a door, wherein the door comprises:
a) a sill 21 with a singular running rail 22,23; (see FIGS. 1 and 3; see annotated FIG. 1 below; note the running rail constitutes a singular element)
b) a leaf 11 that can be displaced in parallel with the running rail;
c) a carriage 122 via which the leaf is supported downward on the running rail;
wherein the carriage comprises a roller part 1222 with an inline running roller 12226 having at least two rollers both rolling on the running rail and a control cam 12221 running at least in sections at an angle to the main plane of the leaf, wherein the roller part is designed to be movable transversely to the main plane of the leaf; (see at least FIGS. 3 and 9)
and the leaf comprises a driving bar 1223 with a control pin 12233 which is arranged or formed on the driving bar and protrudes into the control cam wherein a movement of the driving bar in the direction of its longitudinal axis causes a movement of the roller part transverse to the main plane of the leaf in order to move the leaf transversely to the running rail;
wherein the sill comprises a first guide groove (see annotated FIG. 3 below) opposite a second guide groove separated by the running rail and extending in parallel with the running rail, wherein a first projection 12215 rotatably connected to of the carriage extends down beyond the running roller into the first guide groove and not into the second guide groove, (see annotated FIG. 3 below) wherein the carriage can be supported via the first projection on a side wall of the first guide groove and/or a side of the running rail when the leaf is loaded transversely to an extension of the running rail. (claim 1)
[AltContent: textbox (Running rail)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Further projection)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (2nd guide groove)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (1st guide groove)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
376
522
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Liu further discloses wherein the first projection comprises a bearing that can roll on the side wall of the first guide groove and/or the side of the running rail when the leaf is loaded transversely to the extension of the running rail. (see annotated figure above) (claim 2)
Liu further discloses wherein the roller part comprises an attachment 12214 with the first projection, which is fastened to a roller part body. (see FIG. 9) (claim 3)
Liu further discloses wherein the sill comprises a second guide groove (see annotated figure above) extending in parallel with the running rail, wherein the running rail is arranged or formed between the first guide groove and the second guide groove when viewed horizontally, and wherein a further projection (see annotated figure above) of the carriage extends down beyond the running roller into the second guide groove wherein the carriage can be supported via the further projection on the side wall of the second guide groove and/or the side of the running rail when the leaf is loaded transversely to the extension of the running rail. (claim 6)
Liu further discloses including a fastening pin extending vertically attached to the roller part, wherein an attachment 12214 is pivotally connected to the fastening pin, and wherein the first projection 12215 is rotatably attached to the attachment. (see annotated FIG. 11 below) (claim 10)
[AltContent: textbox (Fastening pin)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image2.png
240
506
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Liu further discloses wherein the fastening pin is disposed directly above and vertically aligned with the running rail. (see at least FIGS. 3 and 11) (claim 11)
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 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.
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu, as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of US 20180023332 to Okada.
Liu fails to disclose a second projection.
Okada teaches of a carriage 1 with a first and second projection 20a10a and 20b,10b; see FIGS. 2 and 3) which extend into a guide groove (see FIG. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Liu first projection with a first and second projection as taught in Okada with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide increased guiding support to the carriage when moving along the running rail, in order to provide a means of redundancy in case one of the projections fails as well as since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art.
Additionally, by combining the teachings of Okada with Liu, Liu, as applied above, discloses wherein the roller part comprises a second projection which extends down beyond the running roller into the first guide groove wherein the carriage can be supported via the second projection on the side wall of the first guide groove and/or the side of the running rail when the leaf is loaded transversely to the extension of the running rail. (claim 4)
Liu, as applied above, further discloses wherein the first projection and the second projection are formed identically. (see FIG. 3 of Okada) (claim 5)
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2009/0038228 to Lee.
Lee discloses a door, wherein the door comprises:
a) a sill 10 with a singular running rail 11b; (see FIG. 10)
b) a leaf 40 that can be displaced in parallel with the running rail;
c) a carriage (see FIGS. 10-12) via which the leaf is supported downward on the running rail;
wherein the carriage comprises a roller part with an inline running roller 41b having at least two rollers (see FIG. 8) both rolling on the running rail and a control cam 43b running at least in sections at an angle to the main plane of the leaf, wherein the roller part is designed to be movable transversely to the main plane of the leaf; (see at least FIG. 10)
and the leaf comprises a driving bar 45b with a control pin 44b which is arranged or formed on the driving bar and protrudes into the control cam wherein a movement of the driving bar in the direction of its longitudinal axis causes a movement of the roller part transverse to the main plane of the leaf in order to move the leaf transversely to the running rail; (see at least FIG. 10)
wherein the sill comprises a first guide groove opposite a second guide groove (see annotated figure below) separated by the running rail and extending in parallel with the running rail, wherein a first projection (one vertical side of element 47b; see FIGS. 9, 12 and 13) of the carriage extends down beyond the running roller (see FIG. 12) into the first guide groove and not into the second guide groove, wherein the carriage can be supported via the first projection on a side wall of the first guide groove and/or a side of the running rail when the leaf is loaded transversely to an extension of the running rail; (see the figure below and [0072],[0073])
wherein the sill comprises a second guide groove (see annotated figure above) extending in parallel with the running rail, wherein the running rail is arranged or formed between the first guide groove and the second guide groove when viewed horizontally, and wherein a further projection of the carriage (the other vertical side of element 47b; see FIGS. 9, 12 and 13) extends down beyond the running roller into the second guide groove (see Fig. 12) wherein the carriage can be supported via the further projection on the side wall of the second guide groove and/or the side of the running rail when the leaf is loaded transversely to the extension of the running rail;
wherein the first projection and the further projection are formed identically; (see FIG. 13)
wherein the roller part comprises an attachment 42b with the first projection, which is fastened to a roller part body (frame of the running roller), and wherein the attachment is formed mirror-symmetrically to a virtual plane extending vertically and in the longitudinal direction of the running rail in the middle of the running rail. (claim 14)
[AltContent: textbox (1st guide groove)][AltContent: textbox (2nd guide groove)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image3.png
232
224
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 12, 13 and 15 is allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed March 17, 2026 regarding the Liu rejection of claim 1 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. More specially, what constitutes the Liu running rail has been reinterpreted and now reads on applicant’s claim 1.
Applicant’s arguments filed March 17, 2026 regarding the Lee rejection of claim 1 have been fully considered and are deemed persuasive.
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 MARCUS MENEZES whose telephone number is (571)272-5225. The examiner can normally be reached on M - F 7:30 -4 PST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor Daniel Cahn can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Marcus Menezes/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights