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 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 17-19 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.
Regarding claim 17, It is unclear whether the applicant is claiming a door latch or a door latch in combination with a pair of side-by-side sliding doors. If the applicant intends to claim only the door latch, all recitation of the doors should be referred to with language such as "configured to". For example from line 5, “secure the door latch assembly to a first door” should be changed to “configured to secure”. If the applicant intends to clam the combination, the preamble should be amended to the reflect that the combination is being claimed.
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) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent 6,601,413 to Vito in view of US Patent US Patent 4,408,789 to Miller.
Vito teaches
17. A door latch assembly configured to provide a locked condition and an unlocked condition for a pair of side-by- side sliding doors, the door latching assembly comprising: a hinge plate (22), a back plate (50) and a pivot latch (20); wherein the hinge plate, back plate, and the pivot latch secure the door latch assembly to a first door of the pair of side-by-side sliding doors (as best seen in figure 1 and 6); wherein the pivot latch is pivotably attached to the hinge plate and is operable to both rotate about a pivot axis (16) between the locked condition and the unlocked condition; wherein, in the locked condition, the pivot latch is pivoted to be co-operable with a wire loop (12) fixedly attached to a second door of the pair of side-by-side sliding doors (as best seen in figure 1); and wherein, in the unlocked condition, the pivot latch is pivotable to a position generally parallel to the hinge plate to enable the side-by-side sliding doors to bypass one another (not shown, but as seen in figure 3, there is no structure that would prevent the pivot latch from rotating 180 degrees to be parallel in both configurations).
Vito does not expressly disclose the pivot latch slides along the pivot axis.
Miller teaches a door latch assembly with a hinge plate (13) and a pivot latch (19) connected via a pivot axis (23) to pivot and slide. The spring (29) allows for sliding along the pivot axis. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify door latch assembly of Vito by adding space and a spring between the hinge knuckles as taught by Miller to bias the pivot latch onto the wire loop and have adjustment.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent 6,601,413 to Vito in view of US Patent US Patent 4,408,789 to Miller as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of US Patent 2023/0212895 to Hodge.
Vito in view of Miller discloses every element as claimed and discussed above including a single yoke on the hinge with a double pivot bar and does not expressly disclose the hinge plate having a double yoke. A lower flange (116) has a corner notch as best seen in figure 2A. Hodge teaches a hinge plate (110) with a yoke bracket. The yoke has upper and lower flanges that surround a pivot bar (120). The upper and lower flanges have an aperture to receive the hinge pin (230). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the yoke of Vito in view of Miller by swapping to a double yoke with a single pivot bar as taught by Hodge as a functional equivalent hinge setup.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent 5,462,320 to Davis in view of US Patent US Patent 4,408,789 to Miller.
Davis teaches
17. A door latch assembly configured to provide a locked condition and an unlocked condition for a pair of side-by- side sliding doors, the door latching assembly comprising: a hinge plate (25), a back plate (33, 42) and a pivot latch (17); wherein the hinge plate, back plate, and the pivot latch secure the door latch assembly to a first door of the pair of side-by-side sliding doors (as best seen in figure 1); wherein the pivot latch is pivotably attached to the hinge plate and is operable to both rotate about a pivot axis (21) between the locked condition and the unlocked condition; wherein, in the locked condition, the pivot latch is pivoted to be co-operable with a wire loop (28) fixedly attached to a second door of the pair of side-by-side sliding doors (as best seen in figure 1); and wherein, in the unlocked condition, the pivot latch is pivotable to a position generally parallel to the hinge plate to enable the side-by-side sliding doors to bypass one another (not shown, but as seen in figure 1, there is no structure that would prevent the pivot latch from rotating 180 degrees to be parallel in both configurations).
Davis does not expressly disclose the pivot latch slides along the pivot axis.
Miller teaches a door latch assembly with a hinge plate (13) and a pivot latch (19) connected via a pivot axis (23) to pivot and slide. The spring (29) allows for sliding along the pivot axis. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify door latch assembly of Davis by adding space and a spring between the hinge knuckles as taught by Miller to bias the pivot latch onto the wire loop and have adjustment.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent 5,462,320 to Davis in view of US Patent US Patent 4,408,789 to Miller as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of US Patent 2023/0212895 to Hodge.
Davis in view of Miller discloses every element as claimed and discussed above including a single yoke on the hinge with a double pivot bar and does not expressly disclose the hinge plate having a double yoke. A lower flange (116) has a corner notch as best seen in figure 2A. Hodge teaches a hinge plate (110) with a yoke bracket. The yoke has upper and lower flanges that surround a pivot bar (120). The upper and lower flanges have an aperture to receive the hinge pin (230). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the yoke of Davis in view of Miller by swapping to a double yoke with a single pivot bar as taught by Hodge as a functional equivalent hinge setup.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-16 and 20 allowed.
Claim 19 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 7/07/2026 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY MICHAEL AYRES whose telephone number is (571)272-8299. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 11:30-8.
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, Dan Troy can be reached at (571) 270-3742. 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.
/T.M.A/Examiner, Art Unit 3637 /DANIEL J TROY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights