DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-4 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,247,430. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all of the subject matter found in claims 1-4 of the instant application is found in claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,247,430.
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 4 recites “the coupling arm is arranged to transmit a mechanical force to the door gate and tend to pivotally open or close the door gate with respect to the external anchor”. This is objected to due to the phrase “tend to” (i.e. what exactly is being claimed by the phrase “tend to”?). Appropriate correction is required.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Hall (US 2,592,891).
Regarding claim 1, Hall discloses a gate opening apparatus for a door gate, comprising: a housing (considered combination of at least elements 20, 49, 36) having a supporting portion (at least elements 49 and 20) pivotally connected to an external anchor (element 14), and a mounting portion (at least element 36) extending toward the door gate, the housing having a receiving cavity (considered internal “cavity” of elements 49 and 36) and an engagement slot (element 39) communicating the receiving cavity with an exterior of the housing; a motor (element 19) received in the receiving cavity of the housing; and a gear assembly, which comprises: a gear rod (elements 24, 25, 27) having one end connected to the motor without connecting through any clutching device, and another end extending in the receiving cavity toward the mounting portion of the housing, the gear rod having a plurality of first teeth spirally formed thereon; and a driven member (element 29) having a plurality of second teeth engaging with the first teeth of the gear rod, in such a manner that when the gear rod is driven to rotate, the driven member is arranged to move along a longitudinal direction of the housing, the driven member being connected to the door gate; [wherein the gate opening apparatus is arranged to be selectively operated between a power mode and a manual mode (See at least column 3, lines 25-37), wherein in the power mode, the motor is electrically activated to drive the gear rod to rotate so as to drive the driven member to move along a longitudinal direction of the housing for driving the door gate to move in a pivotal manner with respect to the external anchor, wherein in the manual mode, the motor is cut off from electricity and is arranged to exert minimal mechanical resistance so that a user is able to manually move the door gate for opening or closing thereof]* (See column 3, lines 29-37. Examiner notes that “manual mode” is described as “In event of power failure, cotter key 35 may be removed from pin 32, the latter removed from bracket 33, after which the closure may be manually operated”. During this “manual mode”, the gate opening apparatus is considered to fully satisfy the functional limitation “the motor is cut off from electricity and is arranged to exert minimal mechanical resistance so that a user is able to manually move the door gate for opening or closing thereof”).
Examiner’s note: *The above/below statements in brackets are examples of an intended use statement that fails to further limit the structure of the claimed invention. Since the claimed invention is directed solely to the structure of a gate opening apparatus for a door gate, the prior art must only be capable of meeting the structural recitation in order to be applicable, and in this case, the examiner maintains that the gate opening apparatus for a door gate disclosed by Hall is entirely capable of the intended use statement. Note that it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987).
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Pedemonte (US 2003/0010142).
Regarding claim 1, Pedemonte discloses a gate opening apparatus for a door gate, comprising: a housing (See Figure 3, considered “housing” of element 1, shown but not labeled) having a supporting portion (portion of element 1 directly connected to element 14) pivotally connected to an external anchor (at least element 2), and a mounting portion (portion of element 1 containing at least elements 7-9) extending toward the door gate, the housing having a receiving cavity (internal portion of element 1, considered area in which element 11 is received) and an engagement slot (portion of element 1 through which element 20 extends) communicating the receiving cavity with an exterior of the housing; a motor (element 11) received in the receiving cavity of the housing; and a gear assembly, which comprises: a gear rod (element 7) having one end connected to the motor without connecting through any clutching device, and another end extending in the receiving cavity toward the mounting portion of the housing, the gear rod having a plurality of first teeth spirally formed thereon; and a driven member (considered combination of elements 8 and 18) having a plurality of second teeth engaging with the first teeth of the gear rod, in such a manner that when the gear rod is driven to rotate, the driven member is arranged to move along a longitudinal direction of the housing, the driven member being connected to the door gate; [wherein the gate opening apparatus is arranged to be selectively operated between a power mode and a manual mode, wherein in the power mode, the motor is electrically activated to drive the gear rod to rotate so as to drive the driven member to move along a longitudinal direction of the housing for driving the door gate to move in a pivotal manner with respect to the external anchor, wherein in the manual mode, the motor is cut off from electricity and is arranged to exert minimal mechanical resistance so that a user is able to manually move the door gate for opening or closing thereof]* (See at least paragraphs [0009], [0013], and [0027-0028]).
Examiner’s note: *The above/below statements in brackets are examples of an intended use statement that fails to further limit the structure of the claimed invention. Since the claimed invention is directed solely to the structure of a gate opening apparatus for a door gate, the prior art must only be capable of meeting the structural recitation in order to be applicable, and in this case, the examiner maintains that the gate opening apparatus for a door gate disclosed by Pedemonte is entirely capable of the intended use statement. Note that it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987).
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.
Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall (US 2,592,891) in view of Goto et al. (US 2019/0284861) (hereinafter Goto).
Regarding claim 2, Hall discloses [wherein the motor is arranged to drive the gear assembly to rotate, in such a manner that when the motor is connected to a power source, the motor is arranged to possess a predetermined amount of mechanical resistance so as to prevent users from manually actuating the motor for opening or closing the door gate]* (See column 3, lines 25-37, “Due to the irreversibility of screw 27 and tube 29, the closure will be locked at any position at which the motor stops”). Although Hall does not explicitly recite that the motor is configured as a synchronous motor, Goto teaches that it is known in the art to configure a screw-and-nut drive system for a swinging closure member that includes a motor (element 52) received in a receiving cavity of a housing (elements 30a and 30b); and a gear assembly, which comprises: a gear rod (element 32) having one end connected to the motor and another end extending in the receiving cavity, the gear rod having a plurality of first teeth spirally formed thereon; and a driven member (element 46) having a plurality of second teeth engaging with the first teeth of the gear rod, in such a manner that when the gear rod is driven to rotate, the driven member is arranged to move along a longitudinal direction of the housing, and wherein the motor is configured as a synchronous motor (paragraph [0027], “The motor 52 is configured as a permanent magnet synchronous motor”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the motor of Hall such that it is a synchronous motor, as taught by Goto, since a synchronous motor would function as intended for the purpose of Hall, and since synchronous motors are known in the art for providing steady, constant speed, and a high degree of operating efficiently, which would be desirable for the purpose of Hall. Additionally, all the claimed elements were known in the prior art as evidenced above, and one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed, or substituted one known element for another, using known methods with no change in their respective functions. Such a combination or substitution would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, since the elements perform as expected and thus the results would be expected. MPEP 2143
Regarding claim 3, Hall discloses wherein the driven member comprises an engagement body (body of element 29) having a through hole, wherein the second teeth are formed on a circumferential boundary of the through hole (See Figure 5), the gear rod being arranged to pass through the through hole, in such a manner that the first teeth are arranged to engage with the second teeth, so that when the gear rod is driven to rotate, the engagement body is driven to move along the longitudinal direction of the gear rod.
Regarding claim 4, Hall discloses wherein the driven member further comprises a coupling arm (elements 32-35) pivotally connecting the engagement body to the door gate so that when the engagement body is driven to move along the gear rod, the coupling arm is arranged to transmit a mechanical force to the door gate and tend to pivotally open or close the door gate with respect to the external anchor.
Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pedemonte (US 2003/0010142) in view of Goto et al. (US 2019/0284861) (hereinafter Goto).
Regarding claim 2, Pedemonte discloses wherein the motor is arranged to drive the gear assembly to rotate, in such a manner that when the motor is connected to a power source, the motor is arranged to possess a predetermined amount of mechanical resistance so as to prevent users from manually actuating the motor for opening or closing the door gate (see at least paragraphs [0020] and [0025-0028], also see claim 1). Although Pedemonte does not explicitly recite that the motor is configured as a synchronous motor, Goto teaches that it is known in the art to configure a screw-and-nut drive system for a swinging closure member that includes a motor (element 52) received in a receiving cavity of a housing (elements 30a and 30b); and a gear assembly, which comprises: a gear rod (element 32) having one end connected to the motor and another end extending in the receiving cavity, the gear rod having a plurality of first teeth spirally formed thereon; and a driven member (element 46) having a plurality of second teeth engaging with the first teeth of the gear rod, in such a manner that when the gear rod is driven to rotate, the driven member is arranged to move along a longitudinal direction of the housing, and wherein the motor is configured as a synchronous motor (paragraph [0027], “The motor 52 is configured as a permanent magnet synchronous motor”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the motor of Pedemonte such that it is a synchronous motor, as taught by Goto, since a synchronous motor would function as intended for the purpose of Pedemonte, and since synchronous motors are known in the art for providing steady, constant speed, and high degree of operating efficiently, which would be desirable for the purpose of Pedemonte. Additionally, all the claimed elements were known in the prior art as evidenced above, and one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed, or substituted one known element for another, using known methods with no change in their respective functions. Such a combination or substitution would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, since the elements perform as expected and thus the results would be expected. MPEP 2143
Regarding claim 3, Pedemonte discloses wherein the driven member comprises an engagement body (elements 8 and 18) having a through hole, wherein the second teeth are formed on a circumferential boundary of the through hole (See Figure 4), the gear rod being arranged to pass through the through hole, in such a manner that the first teeth are arranged to engage with the second teeth, so that when the gear rod is driven to rotate, the engagement body is driven to move along the longitudinal direction of the gear rod.
Regarding claim 4, Pedemonte discloses wherein the driven member further comprises a coupling arm (elements 20 and 4) pivotally connecting the engagement body to the door gate so that when the engagement body is driven to move along the gear rod, the coupling arm is arranged to transmit a mechanical force to the door gate and tend to pivotally open or close the door gate with respect to the external anchor.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN B REPHANN whose telephone number is (571)270-7318. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-4:30pm.
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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at 571-270-5616. 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.
/JUSTIN B REPHANN/Examiner, Art Unit 3634