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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 15 July 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-14 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the specification, and the claims have overcome each and every objection and rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. § 112 which were previously set forth in the Non-final Office Action mailed 19 Feb. 2026. Applicant’s amendments to claims 1-4 and 6-14 also overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102(a)(1) and 103.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lien, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Erpenbeck, GB 1559486 A.
Claim 5: An electric locking unit comprising a coupling device (Fig. 3), the coupling device comprising an electric motor (92), a spring member (94a), and a coupling member (97) the electric motor having a worm shaft (931a) with a helical winding (9311),
wherein the coupling member is mounted axially slidably in the direction of extension of the worm shaft (Figs. 12-13) and has a contour (9721) configured to mechanically couple with a locking member (982) in a coupled state (¶ 0046) and to uncouple from the locking member in a decoupled state (¶ 0046 (“sliders 974 are disengaged with the positioning grooves 981” which uncouples the contour 9721)), and
wherein the spring member is connected, at a distal end portion (942a), to the coupling member (¶ 0039) and, at an opposite proximal end portion (941a), is axially slidably coupled with the worm shaft of the electric motor to convert a rotation of the worm shaft into a linear motion of the proximal end portion of the spring member (¶ 0038; Figs. 12-13),
wherein the worm shaft is idling when the spring member that is compressed or extended into a bias position reaches one of the two end positions of the locking cylinder in the coupled or decoupled state (claim 1; the worm shaft is idling when the spring member is not engaged with the helical winding, which is when the spring member reaches the end positions to couple or uncouple the locking member (¶0034)),
wherein the proximal end portion of the spring member has a reduced diameter over at least one winding wrap over the worm shaft, such that the spring member is able to engage with the worm shaft via this at least one winding wrap (¶0039 (“can be formed as a spiral configuration, where the diameter gradually increases from the end of the engagement part 941 to the abutment part 942a”)), and
wherein the coupling member comprising a spring retaining core (971) and a coupling element (973),
wherein the coupling element comprises a receiving opening for receiving a spring retaining core that is installed in the receiving opening in a rotationally fixed manner (depicted in Figs. 11-12).
However, Lien is silent to the coupling element comprises a receiving opening for receiving a spring retaining core that is installed in the receiving opening in a rotationally fixed manner by press-fit, and wherein the spring retaining core comprises a support portion protruding towards the worm shaft and the distal end portion of the spring encloses the support portion with at least two winding wraps and is frictionally connected to the support portion.
Erpenbeck teaches a spring retaining core (20) and a coupling element (64) comprising a receiving opening for receiving the spring retaining core (Fig. 6) that is installed in a receiving opening in a rotationally fixed manner by press-fit (p. 4 ln. 10-15), and
wherein the spring retaining core comprises a support portion (21) protruding and a distal end portion of a spring member (41) encloses the support portion with at least two winding wraps (Fig. 4) and is frictionally connected to the support portion (p. 1 ln. 60-64; p. 3 ln. 80-104).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the spring retaining core disclosed by Lien such that the spring retaining core is installed in the receiving opening in a rotationally fixed manner by press fit and the spring retaining core comprises a support portion protruding and the distal end portion of the spring member encloses the support portion with at least two winding wraps and is frictionally connected to the support portion as taught by Erpenbeck, with a reasonable expectation of success, to reduce manufacturing time and labor by securing the spring member with a simple thrusting insertion (Erpenbeck p. 3 ln. 67-79). One of ordinary skill in the art would understand the resulting support portion protrudes towards the worm shaft to attach the spring member on the wall of the spring retaining core (Lien Fig. 12).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-4 and 6-14 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Although the references of record show some features similar to those of Applicant’s device, the prior art fails to teach or make obvious the invention of claims 1-4 and 6-14.
Regarding claims 1 and 10, the prior art fails to disclose an electric locking unit comprising a coupling member comprising a receiving opening defined by a wall that is configured to receive the distal end portion of the spring member and the receiving opening having at least one deformation region that is structured to deform into an interior space of the receiving opening to form-fittingly secure the distal end portion of the spring member. While the individual structural elements may be found in references of record, there is no motivation to make the combination required in the exact configuration as currently claimed, therefore the reference combination does not teach or fairly suggest the claimed invention.
Lien (US 2013/0305792 A1) discloses an end of the spring member is form-fittingly secured to a wall of a receiving member and another end of the spring member is fixed to a wall of a receiving opening but does not disclose the wall having at least one deformation deformed into an interior space of a receiving opening to form-fittingly secure the distal end portion of the spring member. Lien teaches the spring is form-fittingly secured because a tooth is shaped to spirally engage with shape of the distal end of the spring member. However, the examiner can find no motivation to modify the coupling member disclosed by Lien to comprise a receiving opening that receives the distal end portion of the spring member, the receiving opening being defined by a wall having at least one deformation region deformed into an interior space of the receiving opening to form-fittingly secure the distal end portion of the spring member without use of impermissible hindsight and/or destroying the intended structure.
Wong (US 2018/0258666 A1) discloses an end of a spring member is form-fittingly secured to a receiving member by a spiral thread crest that is shaped to engage the distal end of the spring to secure it and the other end of the spring is received by a receiving opening of the coupling member in a groove. However, the coupling member disclosed by Wong does not have at least one deformation region deformed into an interior space of the receiving opening to form-fittingly secure a distal end portion of the spring member. The examiner can find no motivation to modify the coupling member disclosed by Wong to include at least one deformation region deformed into an interior space of the receiving opening to form-fittingly secure a distal end portion of the spring member without use of impermissible hindsight and/or destroying the intended structure.
Regarding claims 2-4, 6-9, and 14, the prior art fails to disclose each and every limitation of claim 1 from which the claims depend.
Regarding claims 11-13, the prior art fails to disclose each and every limitation of claim 10 from which the claims depend.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-4 and 6-14 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of the claims has been withdrawn.
Regarding claim 5, Applicant argues the cited references do not teach or make obvious a spring retaining core is installed in a receiving opening by press-fit. Applicant contends Erpenbeck does not teach the spring retaining core installed in the receiving opening by press-fit. However, as shown above, Erpenbeck teaches a spring retaining core that is configured to be installed in a receiving opening and frictionally engages the walls of the opening, which correlates to the spring retaining core installed in a receiving opening with a press-fit.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Emily Gail Brown whose telephone number is (571)272-5463. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-6pm EST.
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.
/EGB/Examiner, Art Unit 3675 /KRISTINA R FULTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights