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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20240352769 to Romero.
Regarding claim 1, Romero discloses:
A cable arrangement structure (302), used in an electric lock (100), the electric lock comprising an inner lock body (158a), an outer lock body (158b), and a connection cable (318), the connection cable extending from the inner lock body to the outer lock body (fig 9), the cable arrangement structure comprising: a cable-accommodating portion (316), the cable-accommodating portion having a cable channel (320); and a structural fixing portion (S, see image produced below), the structural fixing portion being connected to the cable-accommodating portion (fig 8); wherein the cable arrangement structure is fixed to the inner lock body or the outer lock body through the structural fixing portion (fig 9), and the connection cable passes through and is fixed in the cable channel (fig 9).
PNG
media_image1.png
466
667
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Romero discloses:
The cable arrangement structure according to claim 1, wherein the cable channel extends along a direction (left to right as seen in fig 8), the structural fixing portion comprises a through hole (310), and the through hole extends along the direction (fig 9).
Regarding claim 3, Romero discloses:
The cable arrangement structure according to claim 2, wherein the cable channel has an open slot (opening of channel 320), the through hole has an open slot (opening of 310), the open slot of the cable channel and the open slot of the through hole both extend along the direction (both extend from left to right), and an orientation (extending in the y axis as seen in fig 7) of the open slot of the cable channel is opposite to an orientation (extending in the z axis as seen in fig 7) of the open slot of the through hole.
Regarding claim 4, Romero discloses:
The cable arrangement structure according to claim 1, wherein the cable channel extends along a direction (left to right), the structural fixing portion comprises an engagement structure (310), and the engagement structure protrudes along the direction relative to the cable channel (fig 8).
Regarding claim 5, Romero discloses:
The cable arrangement structure according to claim 1, wherein the cable channel extends along a direction (left to right), the structural fixing portion comprises a threaded hole (hole that holds the crew seen in fig 9 above 308), and the threaded hole extends along the direction (fig 9).
Regarding claim 6, Romero discloses:
The cable arrangement structure according to claim 1, wherein the cable channel extends along a direction (left to right as seen in fig 8), the cable-accommodating portion has a first entrance (right entrance of 320) and a second entrance (left entrance of 320), the first entrance and the second entrance are respectively connected to opposite sides of the cable channel (fig 8), the first entrance is parallel to the direction (extends from left to right), and the second entrance is non-parallel to the direction (extends in the up down direction).
Regarding claim 7, Romero discloses:
An electric lock (fig 1), comprising: an inner lock body (158a); an outer lock body (158b), the inner lock body and the outer lock body being disposed oppositely (see fig 3); a connection cable (318), the connection cable extending from the inner lock body to the outer lock body (see fig 9); and a cable arrangement structure (302), the cable arrangement structure being disposed between the inner lock body and the outer lock body (fig 9), the cable arrangement structure comprising: a cable-accommodating portion (316), the cable-accommodating portion having a cable channel (320); and a structural fixing portion (S, see image produced above), the structural fixing portion being connected to the cable-accommodating portion (fig 8); wherein the cable arrangement structure is fixed to the inner lock body or the outer lock body through the structural fixing portion (fig 8), and the connection cable passes through and is fixed in the cable channel (fig 9).
Regarding claim 8, Romero discloses:
The electric lock according to claim 7, wherein the inner lock body or the outer lock body comprises a connection post (C, see image produced above), the inner lock body and the outer lock body are connected through the connection post (fig 8), and the structural fixing portion is engaged to the connection post (fig 8).
Regarding claim 9, Romero discloses:
The electric lock according to claim 7, wherein the inner lock body or the outer lock body comprises a base plate (122), and the structural fixing portion is engaged to the base plate (see fig 3).
Regarding claim 10, Romero discloses:
The electric lock according to claim 7, further comprising a latch assembly (106), wherein the latch assembly is disposed between the inner lock body and is connected to the inner lock body and the outer lock body (148 of 106 is in 310, thereby disposing 106 between 158a/b), and the cable arrangement structure is located on one side of the latch assembly (bottom side) and is separate from the latch assembly (see at least figs 1 and 8).
Regarding claim 11, Romero discloses:
The electric lock according to claim 7, wherein the inner lock body or the outer lock body comprises a movable part (124), the movable part is movable along a moving direction (clockwise/counter clockwise), and the connection cable is located on one side (bottom side) of the movable part in the inner lock body in the moving direction and is separate from the movable part (see figs 1 and 8).
Regarding claim 12, Romero discloses:
The electric lock according to claim 7, wherein the cable channel extends along a direction (left to right as seen in fig 8), the structural fixing portion comprises a through hole (310), and the through hole extends along the direction (fig 9.
Regarding claim 13, Romero discloses:
The electric lock according to claim 12, wherein the cable channel has an open slot (opening of channel 320), the through hole has an open slot (opening of 310), the open slot of the cable channel and the open slot of the through hole both extend along the direction (both extend from left to right), and an orientation (extending in the y axis as seen in fig 7) of the open slot of the cable channel is opposite to an orientation (extending in the z axis as seen in fig 7) of the open slot of the through hole.
Regarding claim 14, Romero discloses:
The electric lock according to claim 7, wherein the cable channel extends along a direction (left to right), the structural fixing portion comprises an engagement structure (310), and the engagement structure protrudes along the direction relative to the cable channel (fig 8).
Regarding claim 15, Romero discloses:
The electric lock according to claim 7, wherein the cable channel extends along a direction (left to right), the structural fixing portion comprises a threaded hole (hole that holds the crew seen in fig 9 above 308), and the threaded hole extends along the direction (fig 9).
Regarding claim 16, Romero discloses:
The electric lock according to claim 7, wherein the cable channel extends along a direction (left to right as seen in fig 8), the cable-accommodating portion has a first entrance (right entrance of 320) and a second entrance (left entrance of 320), the first entrance and the second entrance are respectively connected to opposite sides of the cable channel (fig 8), the first entrance is parallel to the direction (extends from left to right), and the second entrance is non-parallel to the direction (extends in the up down direction).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding Applicant’s arguments that the connection cable does not extend to the outer lock body, Examiner respectfully disagrees. Figure 7 as mentioned by the Applicant is a figure where the outer lock body is removed. In the assembled configuration, the connection cable sits in 158a and is accommodated by 158b.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments that 302 is not equivalent to the cable management structure of the application, and that Romera fails to propose a solution to prevent the connection cable from being damaged by other moving parts, Examiner notes that while Romero does not propose a solution, the rejection is based only on what claims 1 and 7 recite. Examiner suggests adding more claim language to differentiate the claimed invention from the prior art. Therefore, rejection is maintained.
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 Yahya Sidky whose telephone number is (571)272-6237. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30-4:30.
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, Christine Mills can be reached at (571) 272-8322. 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.
/Y.S./Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675
/CHRISTINE M MILLS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights