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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of species 2 in the reply filed on 3/26/2026 is acknowledged.
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.
Claim 13 is 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 13 recites the limitation "guide rail" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 10, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Laughton et al., US PGPub 2020/0317472.
PNG
media_image1.png
330
460
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Laughton et al. discloses a guide device (A) for an elevator system (see abstract), comprising: a bracket (B); a plurality of rollers (C,D) mounted onto the bracket (B); wherein, at least one of the plurality of rollers (C,D) is mounted onto the bracket (B) through a damping device (see fig 1-2), the damping device (as described above) comprising: an oscillating rod (50), wherein a first end (80) of the oscillating rod (50) is rotatably mounted (via 90) onto the bracket (B), a second end (opposite 80) of the oscillating rod (50) is provided with a first notch (110), and the roller (D) is mounted onto the oscillating rod (50); a guide pin (114), wherein the guide pin (114) is mounted (via 95) onto the bracket (B)and passes through the first notch (110) of the oscillating rod (50); and one or more friction members (112), mounted onto the oscillating rod (50) and in frictional contact (due to elastomeric / rubber surface) with the guide pin (114) during oscillation of the oscillating rod (50.
Regarding claim 10, Laughton et al. discloses the guide device according to claim 1, wherein the bracket (B) comprises a base (8) and one or more columns (12,14) extending from the base (8), the first end (80) of the oscillating rod (50) is rotatably mounted (via 90) onto the base (8), and the guide pin (114) is connected (via 95) to the column (12) in a manner substantially parallel (see fig 2) to the base (8).
Regarding claim 13, Laughton et al. discloses the guide device according to claim 10, wherein the guide device (A) further comprises a limit pin (100) connected to the column (12) in parallel with the guide pin (114), where the limit pin (100) passes through a second through-hole (93) on the oscillating rod (50), and the limit pin (110) comprises a stopper (106) that limits a maximum extent of the oscillating rod (50) oscillating away from the guide rail (see [0001]).
Regarding claim 14, Laughton et al. discloses the guide device according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of rollers (C,D) comprise a first roller and a second roller (D’s) arranged side by side (see fig 1), and a third roller (C) with a rotation plane perpendicular (see fig 1) to those of the first roller and the second roller (D’s), where all of the first roller (D on right in fig 5), the second roller (D on left in fig 5), and the third roller (C) are mounted onto the bracket (B) through the damping device (as described above).
Regarding claim 15, Laughton et al. discloses an elevator system, comprising: an elevator car (see [0002]) and the guide device (as described above) according to claim 1, connected to the elevator car for guiding the elevator car to move along the elevator guide rail (see [0002]).
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) 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laughton et al..
Regarding claim 11, Laughton et al. discloses the guide device according to claim 10, wherein the guide pin (114) comprises a first end (end in contact with 12) and a second end (end with 118) opposite to each other (see fig 2), and a guide pin body (column body of 114) between the first end (as described above) and the second end (as described above), where the first end (as described above) of the guide pin (114) is fixed (via 95) to the column (12). Laughton et al. disclose a spring (68) but not in the specified location. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to provide the spring in the specified location since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. One having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to align with spring (68) with the guide pin (114) in order to increase the leverage acting on the spring and damping precision of the oscillating rod.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6, 7-9, 12 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 2-6 are patentable over the prior art of record because the teachings of the references taken as a whole do not show or render obvious the combination set forth in claim 2, including every structural element recited in the claims, especially, the configuration wherein the guide pin comprises opposite surfaces parallel to each other, and the one or more friction members comprise two friction members that are in frictional contact with the opposite surfaces, respectively.
None of the references of the prior art teach or suggest the elements of the elevator system as advanced above and such do not provide the necessary motivation, absent applicant's specification, for modifying the system in the manner required by the claims.
Claims 7-9 are patentable over the prior art of record because the teachings of the references taken as a whole do not show or render obvious the combination set forth in claim 7, including every structural element recited in the claims, especially, the configuration wherein a groove is provided on the opposite surfaces of the guide pin, and the contact area where the friction member is in contact with the guide pin is located within the groove during the oscillation of the oscillating rod.
None of the references of the prior art teach or suggest the elements of the elevator system as advanced above and such do not provide the necessary motivation, absent applicant's specification, for modifying the system in the manner required by the claims.
Claim 12 is patentable over the prior art of record because the teachings of the references taken as a whole do not show or render obvious the combination set forth in claim 12, including every structural element recited in the claims, especially, the configuration wherein a cross section of the first notch is rectangular, a cross section of the guide pin body is rectangular, and the first end and the second end of the guide pin have external threads.
None of the references of the prior art teach or suggest the elements of the elevator system as advanced above and such do not provide the necessary motivation, absent applicant's specification, for modifying the system in the manner required by the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL A RIEGELMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7956. The examiner can normally be reached 8-6 EST Monday - Friday.
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, Robert Hodge can be reached at (571) 272-2097. 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.
MICHAEL A. RIEGELMAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3654
/MICHAEL A RIEGELMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights