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 .
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1 and 8-11 objected to because of the following informalities: claim(s) recite “the aircraft galley”. However, claim 1 recites only “A latching mechanism for an aircraft galley”, whereas claim 14 positively claims “An aircraft galley comprising . . . the latching system”. Therefore, “for an aircraft galley” in claim 1 is interpreted as a statement of intended use, and further references to “the aircraft galley” in claims 1 and 8-11 should be removed. Appropriate correction or clarification is required.
Claim(s) 5 objected to because of the following informalities: claim(s) should be amended to recite “[[A]] The latching mechanism according to claim 4”. Appropriate correction or clarification is required.
Claim(s) 9 objected to because of the following informalities: claim(s) should be amended to recite “wherein the handle is substantially flush with [[an]] the outer surface of the aircraft galley”. Appropriate correction or clarification is required.
Claim(s) 12 objected to because of the following informalities: claim(s) should be amended to recite “comprising a bias element configured to bias the latch bolt towards the [[retracted]] extended position”, as is consistent with Para. 0048, Para. 0049 and Figure 3 of the instant specification. Appropriate correction or clarification is required of claim 12 and Para. 0024 of the instant specification.
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) 1-6 and 8-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Andrews (US-2416889-A).
With regards to claim 1, Andrews discloses a latching mechanism (Figures 1-3) for an aircraft galley (interpreted as a statement of intended use, Andrews’s device is suitable for use with an aircraft galley), the aircraft galley (1 Figure 1) comprising a door (3 Figure 1) and a frame (2 Figure 1), the latching mechanism comprising:
a latch bolt (8 Figure 3) movable between a retracted position (Figure 2) and an extended position (Figure 3), wherein the latch bolt is receivable by a latch striker (25 Figure 2) to latch the aircraft galley door when the door is closed and the latch bolt is in the extended position (Col. 3 Lines 40-56);
an actuator (22 Figure 2) configured to move the latch bolt from the extended position to the retracted position (Col. 3 Lines 33-39); and
a handle (7 Figure 1), wherein the handle is movable from a closed position (Figure 1) to an open position (Figure 2) to cause the actuator to move the latch bolt from the extended position to the retracted position, wherein the handle is configured to be pushed (downwards, as shown Figure 2) to move from the closed position to the open position (Col. 1 Lines 26-32).
With regards to claim 2, Andrews discloses the latching mechanism according to claim 1 and comprising a grip (6b Figure 2), the grip configured to be pulled by a user to open the door (interpreted as a statement of intended use, Andrews’s grip is capable of being pulled by a user to open the door 3), wherein the grip is concealed when the handle is in the closed position (as shown Figure 1), wherein the grip is exposed when the handle is in the open position (as shown Figure 2).
With regards to claim 3, Andrews discloses the latching mechanism according to claim 2, and comprising a housing (6 Figure 2) surrounding the handle (7 Figure 2), wherein the grip comprises a lip (6b Figure 2), wherein the lip is comprised in the housing (as shown Figure 2).
With regards to claim 4, Andrews discloses the latching mechanism according to claim 2, wherein the handle (7 Figure 1) comprises a paddle (15 Figure 2) and a pivot (18 Figure 2), the paddle rotatable about the pivot to move from the closed position (Figure 1) to the open position (Figure 2).
With regards to claim 5, Andrews discloses a latching mechanism according to claim 4, wherein the grip (6b Figure 2) is positioned adjacent to a first portion of the paddle (right portion of paddle 15, Figure 2), the first portion on a first side of the pivot (right side of 18, Figure 2) and configured to move inwardly (downwards, Figure 2) when the handle (7 Figure 2) is pushed (as shown Figure 2).
With regards to claim 6, Andrews discloses the latching mechanism according to claim 4, wherein the actuator (22 Figure 2) is configured to connect to a second portion of the paddle (left portion of paddle 15, Figure 2), the second portion of the paddle on second side of the pivot (left side of 18, Figure 2) and configured to move outwardly (upwards, Figure 2) when the handle (7 Figure 2) is pushed (As shown Figure 2).
With regards to claim 8, Andrews discloses the latching mechanism according to claim 1, wherein the handle (7 Figure 1) is not configured to project outwardly (Col. 1 Lines 20-26) of an outer surface of the aircraft galley (1 Figure 1).
With regards to claim 9, Andrews discloses the latching mechanism according to claim 8, wherein the handle (7 Figure 1) is substantially flush (Col. 1 Lines 20-26) with an outer surface of the aircraft galley (1 Figure 1).
With regards to claim 10, Andrews discloses the latching mechanism according to claim 8, wherein the outer surface (1 Figure 1) comprises a front face of a housing (6 Figure 2) of the latching mechanism.
With regards to claim 11, Andrews discloses the latching mechanism according to claim 8, wherein the outer surface (1 Figure 1) comprises a front face of the door (3 Figure 1).
With regards to claim 12, Andrews discloses the latching mechanism according to claim 1 and comprising a bias element (30 Figure 3) configured to bias (Col. 3 Line 70 – Col. 4 Line 5) the latch bolt (8 Figure 3) towards the retracted position (interpreted as intending to recite ‘the extended position’, Figure 3 [see Claim Objections above]).
With regards to claim 13, Andrews discloses the latching system (Figures 1-3) comprising the latching mechanism according claim 1 and the latch striker (25 Figure 2), wherein the latching mechanism is configured to be mounted to the door (3 Figure 1) and the latch striker is configured to be mounted to the frame (2 Figure 1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andrews in view of Saccon (US-20120074714-A1).
With regards to claim 7, Andrews discloses the latching mechanism according to claim 1, wherein the actuator (22 Figure 2) is configured to transmit a force (Col. 3 Lines 33-39) from the handle (7 Figure 1) to the latch bolt (8 Figure 3) to move the latch bolt from the extended position (Figure 3) to the retracted position (Figure 2) when the handle moves from the closed position (Figure 1) to the open position (Figure 2).
Andrews does not disclose that the actuator comprises a Bowden cable.
However, Saccon discloses a latching mechanism (10 Figure 1) wherein a handle (11 Figure 1) and a sliding latch bolt (16 Figure 1) are connected by means of an actuator (15 Figure 1), wherein the actuator can be a tension member comprising either a cable or rigid member (Para. 0044). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace Andrews’s semi-rigid with a Bowden cable, as taught by Saccon, with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to use a Bowden cable for its higher durability and wear resistance over the lifespan of the latching mechanism, in comparison with Andrews’s bent metal.
Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andrews in view of LaConte (US-8616621-B2).
With regards to claim 14, Andrews discloses the door (3 Figure 1), the frame (2 Figure 1) and the latching system (Figures 1-3) of claim 13.
Andrews does not disclose an aircraft galley comprising the door, the frame and the latching system.
However, LaConte discloses a desire for a similar flush-mounted latching system (10 Figures 8-9) in an aircraft galley of an aircraft (Col. 1 Lines 13-23). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to Andrews’s latching system with LaConte’s aircraft galley, with a reasonable expectation of success. One would have been motivated to use Andrews’s latching system for its flush-mounted aesthetic and lightweight construction (Col. 1 Lines 42-50 – Andrews)
With regards to claim 15, Andrews in view of LaConte teaches an aircraft comprising the aircraft galley of claim 14 (Col. 1 Lines 13-23 – LaConte).
Additional Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US-12209444-B2: A related latching system.
US-10557293-B2: A related latching system.
US-20160052231-A1: A related latching system.
US-20050284199-A1: A related latching system.
US-3743336-A: A related latching system.
US-3514979-A: A related latching system.
US-3201161-A: A related latching system.
US-2862749-A: A related latching system.
US-2497624-A: A related latching system.
US-2461393-A: A related latching system.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Noah Horowitz, whose telephone number is (571)272-5532. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 11:00AM - 7:00 PM.
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.
/NOAH HOROWITZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3675