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: reference characters 3200 in Figure 37 and 3100 in Figure 39 are not placed on a surface, so the reference characters should have a lead line (37 CFR 1.84(q)-(r)); the bearing is identified with reference character “400” in Fig. 26, it should be reference character “4000.”
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.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: “clutch member” and “top plate” should be identified in the descriptive portion of the specification by reference to the drawing, designating the part or parts therein to which the terms apply.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 4, 13, and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 4 of claim 4, “a operating” should be --an operating--
in line 9 of claim 13, “arms,” should likely be --arms of the torsion spring-- for clarity
in line 15 of claim 13, “the end” should be --an end--
in line 7 of claim 14, “a clutch structure” should likely be --the clutch structure-- because it is previously recited
Appropriate correction is required.
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 7 and 13-20 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.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the clutch" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as: the clutch member previously recited in line 2 of claim 2.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the accommodating cavity" in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the button" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the clutch" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the connecting part" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the connecting portion" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim(s) 14-20 is/are rejected as being dependent on claim 13 and therefore including the indefinite language of claim 13
Claim(s) 15-20 is/are rejected as being dependent on claim 14 and therefore including the indefinite language of claim 14.
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) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Whitworth, WO 2018/076052 A1.
Claim 1: Whitworth discloses a lock, comprising:
a bolt (432);
an action part (450) configured to drive the bolt to move ([0099]); and
an operation part (310, 320, 470 form an operation part), wherein the operation part includes an elastic component (320, 470 form an elastic component), when the elastic component is in a pressed state (Fig. 4c), the operation part has a transmission connection to the action part ([0053]), and when the elastic component is in a rebound state (Fig. 4b), the transmission connection between the operation part and the action part is blocked ([0052]).
Claim 2: Whitworth discloses the lock of claim 1, wherein
the lock further comprises a clutch member (426, 428 form a clutch member) and a transmission member (450);
the operation part includes an accommodating cavity (shown in Fig. 4a), the clutch member is cooperated with the elastic component in the accommodating cavity (Fig. 4b), the elastic component is at least partially located outside the accommodating cavity (shown in Fig. 4b);
the clutch member has a transmission connection to the operation part ([0103]);
the transmission member has a transmission connection to the action part ([0098]); and
the clutch member has a transmission connection to the transmission member or is separated from the transmission member under the action of the elastic component ([0102]).
Claim 3: Whitworth discloses the lock of claim 2, wherein the elastic component comprises a button (320) at least partially located outside the accommodating cavity (Fig. 4b) and a return spring (470) located in the accommodating cavity (Fig. 4b),
a spring baffle is fixed in the accommodating cavity (460),
the clutch member includes a top plate (424) fixedly connected to the button and at least one extension part (426 and 428 form an extension part) fixedly connected to the top plate (Fig. 4b), and
the extension part passes through the spring baffle to face the transmission member (Fig. 4b), and
the return spring is located between the spring baffle and the top plate of the clutch member (Fig. 4b).
Claim(s) 1, 13-17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liu et al., CN 108005476 A, reference attached machine translation.
Claim 1: Liu discloses a lock, comprising:
a bolt ([0004], [0050] (a bolt is moved for opening and locking functions));
an action part (5, 6, 8 form an action part) configured to drive the bolt to move ([0050]); and
an operation part (2, 3, 4 form an operation part), wherein the operation part includes an elastic component (3, 4 form an elastic component), when the elastic component is in a pressed state (Fig. 7), the operation part has a transmission connection to the action part ([0050]), and when the elastic component is in a rebound state (Fig. 8), the transmission connection between the operation part and the action part is blocked ([0050-51]).
PNG
media_image1.png
832
470
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 13: Liu discloses the lock of claim 1, further comprising a panel (1), the panel includes a fixing hole (11), and the operation part and the action part are respectively arranged at both ends of the fixing hole (Fig. 1);
the panel includes a limiting plate (Fig. 2 annotated above) and a limiting block (7) along the circumference of the fixing hole (Fig. 1), the limiting plate includes a gap, the limiting block is located at a middle position of the gap (depicted in Fig. 2, above);
the action part further includes a connecting cylinder (6) and a torsion spring (5), the connecting cylinder includes a limiting cover (61) and a rotating cylinder (62), the limiting cover includes a first stucking member (63) located between the two torsion arms ([0047]), the rotating cylinder passes through the fixing hole (Fig. 8) and is fixed with the operation part ([0047]), the rotating cylinder includes a cavity (depicted in Fig. 8), the cavity is connected to the accommodating cavity to form a clutch cavity (Fig. 8 depicts the cavity connected to an accommodating cavity (Fig. 10)); and
the torsion spring is located inside the limiting plate (Fig. 1) and two torsion arms of the torsion spring abut on both sides of the limiting block ([0047]), respectively, the torsion arm moves between the limiting block and the end of the limiting plate ([0049]).
Claim 14: Liu discloses the lock of claim 13, wherein the action part includes a driving member (8) including a clutch structure (811), and a rotation of the driving member drives the bolt to eject or retract ([0050]); and
the driving member includes a blocking plate (82) and a clutch sleeve (81), the blocking plate includes a second stucking member (822) located between the two torsion arms ([0048]), the clutch sleeve passes through the cavity of the rotating cylinder (Fig. 8), an end of the clutch sleeve includes a clutch structure (Fig. 5), and when the button is pressed, the clutch cooperates with the clutch structure in the clutch cavity ([0050]).
Claim 15: Liu discloses the lock of claim 14, wherein the limiting cover includes a first blocker (9; [0046]), the blocking plate includes a second blocker (821) that cooperates with the first blocker ([0048]), when the clutch and the clutch structure are in a separated state (button 3 is not pressed), a rotation of the operation part in a reverse-locking direction ([0049] “handle 2 is lifted”) drives the driving member to rotate through the first blocker and the second blocker, so that the lock is reverse locked ([0049]).
Claim 16: Liu discloses the lock of claim 15, further including a compression cover (91), wherein the limiting cover includes a mounting groove on a side away from the rotating cylinder (Fig. 4), the compression cover is fixed with the limiting cover ([0054]), and the blocking plate is rotatably located in the mounting groove (Fig. 1; [0054-55]).
Claim 17: Liu discloses the lock of claim 16, further including a bearing (93), wherein a side of the fixing hole facing the action part includes a flange along a circumference of the fixing hole (depicted in Fig. 3), an outer ring of the bearing is fixedly connected to the flange ([0060]), and the limiting cover and the connecting part (the portion of the handle with cavity 22 is a connecting part) abut against an inner ring of the bearing at two ends, respectively ([0059-60]; Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
470
806
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 20: Liu discloses the lock of claim 17, wherein the connecting portion includes a first convex plate on a side facing the driving member (Fig. 1; Fig. 9 annotated above), the limiting cover (61) includes a second convex plate on a side facing the operation part (Fig. 9, annotated above), and the first convex plate and the second convex plate abut against the inner ring of the bearing from both ends (Fig. 1; [0060]).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whitworth, as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Kwak, KR 100961878 B1.
Claim 4: Whitworth discloses the lock of claim 3.
However, Whitworth is silent to an opening-closing mechanism cooperated with the elastic component to restrict the elastic component from rebounding after being pressed, the opening-closing mechanism includes an operating member protruding from the operation part and a limiting structure located in the operation part, the operating member drives the limiting structure to move in the operation part to be in contact with the elastic component or separated from the elastic component, and when the limiting structure is in contact with the elastic component, the elastic component is in a pressed state.
Kwak teaches a lock comprising an opening-closing mechanism (70) cooperated with an elastic component (60 and 66 form an elastic component) to restrict the elastic component from rebounding after being pressed (Fig. 5),
the opening-closing mechanism includes an operating member (73) protruding from the operation part and a limiting structure (72) located in an operation part (40),
the operating member drives the limiting structure to move in the operation part to be in contact with the elastic component or separated from the elastic component (movement in Figs. 5 and 7; [0037]), and
when the limiting structure is in contact with the elastic component, the elastic component is in a pressed state (shown in Fig. 5; [0037]).
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 lock disclosed by Whitworth to include an opening-closing mechanism cooperated with the elastic component to restrict the elastic component from rebounding after being pressed, the opening-closing mechanism including an operating member and a limiting structure located in an operation part as taught by Kwak, in order to maintain the elastic component and prevent it from releasing the clutch while the user rotates the operation part (Kwak [0037]).
Claim 5: Whitworth, in view of Kwak, teaches the lock of claim 4, wherein the limiting structure is located within the accommodating cavity (as modified, Kwak Fig. 4), and a side wall of the accommodating cavity includes a first strip hole (as modified, Kwak 83), the operating member extends through the first strip hole (the accommodating cavity has a first strip hole to accommodate the operating member), a movement of the operating member along a length direction of the first strip hole drives the limiting structure to slide to be cooperated with the button or separated from the button (movement between Kwak Figs. 5 and 7).
Claim 6: Whitworth, in view of Kwak, teaches the lock of claim 5, wherein the opening-closing mechanism further includes a slider located in the accommodating cavity (Kwak Fig. 4 illustrates the hole 71 in a slider), and a movement of the operating member drives the slider to slide (movement between Kwak Figs. 5 and 7).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-12, 18, and 19 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: 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 7-12, 18, and 19.
Regarding claim 7, Whitworth, in view of Kwak, teaches the lock of claim 6, including a slot (Kwak 71) cooperating with the button and a side wall of the slot is attached to a side wall of the button (Kwak Fig. 5). However, Whitworth, as modified by Kwak, is silent to an end surface of the slot configured to abut against the clutch to form the limiting structure.
Regarding claim 8, Whitworth, in view of Kwak, lock of claim 6, but is silent to wherein the slider includes a second strip hole, the slider is fixed to the operation part through a limiting screw and the second strip hole. The examiner can find no motivation to modify the slider taught by Whitworth, in view of Kwak, to include a second strip hole, the slider fixed to the operation part through a limiting screw and the second strip hole, without use of impermissible hindsight and/or destroying the intended structure of the device.
In regards to claims 9-12, the prior art fails to disclose each and every limitation of claim 8 from which the claims depend.
Regarding claim 18, Liu discloses the lock of claim 17, but is silent to wherein an inner wall of the flange includes at least three convex ribs uniformly along an axial direction, a length direction of each convex rib is parallel to an axial direction of the flange, and the outer ring of the bearing has an interference cooperation with the convex ribs. The examiner can find no motivation to modify the flange and bearing disclosed by Liu to have the above-mentioned features without use of impermissible hindsight and/or destroying the intended structure.
Regarding claim 19, Liu discloses the lock of claim 17, but does not teach a bearing pressure plate connected to the panel, wherein a diameter of the flange is greater than that of the fixing hole, and the bearing pressure plate and the edge of the fixing hole abut against the outer ring of the bearing from two ends. The examiner can find no motivation to modify the lock disclosed by Liu to further include a bearing pressure plate as claimed without use of impermissible hindsight and/or destroying the intended structure.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Huang et al. (CN 107724785 A) is related to a lock comprising a button biased by a spring between a spring baffle and a clutch.
Ko (KR 10-2011-0008878 A) is related to a lock comprising a bearing in a flange of the panel and an operation part comprising a button biased by a spring for engaging a clutch in a cavity.
Huzard (FR 2881163 A1) is related to a lock comprising a button in a cavity of an operation part with a spring biased against a spring baffle and a clutch member with a transmission connection to the operation part.
Li (CN 108487781 A) is related to a lock comprising an operation part and a clutch, and a panel comprising a limiting plate and a limiting block that engages the ends of a torsion spring.
Lei (CN 106481146 A) is related to a lock comprising a button biased by a spring between a spring baffle and clutch member, a plate with a stucking member between the arms of a torsion spring, and a panel with a limiting plate and limiting block between the arms of the torsion spring.
Chen et al. (CN 106437296 A) is related to a lock comprising a connecting cylinder with a limiting cover and a rotating cylinder, wherein a stucking member of the limiting cover is between the arms of a torsion spring and an operation part including a spring biased button that engages a clutch.
Jethwa (US 2019/0368222 A1) is related to a lock comprising an operation part with a slider that cooperates with a button to prevent the button from resetting so the clutch is engaged.
Shin et al. (KR 10-2009-0090025 A) is related to a lock comprising a slider and operating member, the slider having a slot with a pin engaging a slot of the operation part to maintain a button in a pressed state.
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