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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figures 5A-5D are not black and white line drawings as required. Additionally, Figures 5A-5D do not utilize reference characters as required. 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 1-11 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.
Where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The terms “gear” in claim 1 is used by the claim to mean “dog clutch,” while the accepted meaning is “a toothed wheel for transmitting rotation” The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term.
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.
Claims 1-4, and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Metivier et al. EP 3,018,268.
Metivier discloses:
Claim 1 (as best understood)- a first gear (50) including engagement teeth (60); a release cam (38) positioned upon a tail insert (24) and sheathed within the first gear, the release cam including one or more projections (34, 42) in abutment with the first gear; and a second gear (46) including engagement pockets (spaces between 62), the engagement teeth of the first gear detachably coupled with the engagement pockets of the second gear (see figures 1 and 4), with the second gear being directly coupled to the motor (“not shown” see English translation of EP 3,018,268); wherein the first gear retracts and disconnects from the second gear via rotation of the one or more projections on the release cam in a mechanical mode of operation thereby disengaging the motor from the first gear (the device performs this function).
Claim 2- wherein a first amount of force retracts the first gear from the second gear (the device performs this function).
Claim 3- wherein a second amount of force engages the first gear with the second gear (the device performs this function).
Claim 4- wherein a deadbolt is positioned in the mechanical mode of operation or in an electromechanical mode of operation (see “locking bolt” in para 44).
Claim 7- a first gear (50) including engagement teeth (66); a release cam (32, 38) positioned upon a tail insert (24) and sheathed within the first gear, the release cam including one or more projections (56) in abutment with the first gear; and a second gear (46) including engagement pockets (spaces between 62), the engagement teeth of the first gear detachably coupled with the engagement pockets of the second gear, with the second gear being directly coupled to the motor (unnumbered); wherein the first gear retracts and disconnects from the second gear via rotation of the one or more projections on the release cam when a throw arm (22) is rotated thereby disengaging the motor from the first gear (the device performs this function).
Claim 8- wherein a first amount of force retracts the first gear from the second gear (the device performs this function).
Claim 9- wherein a second amount of force engages the first gear with the second gear (the device performs this function).
Claim 10- a gear train (30, 46, 50), the gear train comprising the second gear(46), the gear train coupled to the motor.
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.
Claims 5-6 and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Metivier EP 3,018,268 in view of Gautama US 2015/0028995 A1 (hereinafter Gautama).
In regards to claim 5, Metivier teaches the apparatus of claim 1. However, Metivier does not teach wherein the motor operates due to instructions received from a smart device.
Gautama teaches remote actuation of a lock via a smart device (paras 17-18). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing of the invention, to have provided Metivier with the functionality of being operable by a smart device to achieve the well-known result of convenient remote locking/unlocking.
In regards to claim 6, Metivier in view of Gautama teaches the apparatus of claim 5, wherein the smart device comprises a smartphone, a tablet, a smartwatch, or an electronic device capable of giving instructions (Gautama para 17-18).
In regards to claim 11, Metivier teaches the apparatus of claim 7. However, Metivier does not teach wherein the motor operates due to instructions received from a smart device.
Gautama teaches remote actuation of a lock via a smart device (paras 17-18). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing of the invention, to have provided Metivier with the functionality of being operable by a smart device to achieve the well-known result of convenient remote locking/unlocking.
In regards to claim 12, Metivier in view of Gautama teaches the apparatus of claim 11, wherein the smart device comprises a smartphone, a tablet, a smartwatch, or an electronic device capable of giving instructions (Gautama para 17-18).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20030209043 A1 discloses a similar device including a worm gear.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TERENCE BOES whose telephone number is (571)272-4898. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10-6:30.
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, Minnah Seoh can be reached at (571) 270-7778. 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.
TERENCE BOES
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3618
/TERENCE BOES/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights