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 .
The examiner acknowledges applicant’s amendments to claims 1 and 4-20 and the cancellation of claims 2 and 3 filed July 30, 2026.
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 11 and 12 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.
In regards to claim 11, the relationship between the limitations recited in lines 3-12 of claim 11 and the limitations recited in lines 9-19 of claim 1, which is incorporated into claim 11, is unclear from the claim language since the limitations of claim 11 recite the same features as the limitations of claim 1. For examination purposes, claim 11 will be examined without the limitations of lines 3-12 since these limitations are already recited in claim 1, which is incorporated into claim 11.
In regards to claim 12, this claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) because the claim depends from claim 11.
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(s) 13-16 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Velcover (US-3844591).
In regards to claim 13, Velcover discloses a bar lock assembly comprising: a generally U-shaped keeper 62 and 68 (as a unit) comprising a base (see Figure 4 below), a pair of laterally spaced side walls extending transversely from the base (see Figure 3 below), and a shaft 66 extending between and connected to the side walls, and a generally U-shaped cam 36 comprising a base (wall at reference character 42, Figure 3) and a pair of laterally spaced side walls extending transversely from the base (see Figure 3 below), wherein the cam opens toward and is nested between the side walls of the generally U-shaped keeper (Figures 3 and 4), wherein each side wall of the cam comprises an engagement member (hook shaped portion in each side wall engaging shaft 66, Figures 3 and 4), wherein the cam is rotatable about a rotation axis (axis through center of component 20 into the page in Figures 4 and 5) between an engaged position (Figure 4), in which the engagement members are engaged with the shaft, and a disengaged position (position shown with dashed lines in Figure 5), in which the engagement members are disengaged from the shaft.
PNG
media_image1.png
536
732
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
447
1184
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 14, Velcover discloses that the shaft comprises a first shaft (Figure 3), and further comprising a second shaft 60 longitudinally spaced from the first shaft (Figures 3 and 4), wherein the second shaft extends between and is connected to the side walls of the keeper (Figure 3), and wherein the engagement members comprises first engagement members (Figure 4), and wherein each side wall of the cam further comprises a second engagement member (portion 58 of the slot 54 in each side wall that engages with the second shaft, Figures 3 and 4) engaged with the second shaft when the cam is rotated to the engaged position (Figure 4) and wherein the second engagement member is disengaged with the second shaft when the cam is rotated to the disengaged position (portion 58 of the slot 54 is disengaged from the second shaft when the cam is in the disengaged position, Figure 5).
In regards to claim 15, Velcover discloses that the first engagement members are disposed under the first shaft (the first engagement members having at least a portion 48 located under the first shaft, Figure 4) and the second engagement members are disposed over the second shaft when the cam is in the engaged position (the second engagement member or slot portion 58 includes at least a surface disposed over the second shaft, Figure 4).
In regards to claim 16, Velcover discloses that the side walls of the cam comprise laterally aligned openings (see Figure 3 on Page 4 of the current Office Action), and further comprising an actuator shaft 20 disposed in the openings in the side walls of the cam (Figures 3 and 4), wherein the actuator shaft defines the rotation axis (Figures 4 and 5).
In regards to claim 20, Velcover discloses that the first and second engagement members comprise first and second hooks (first engagement members having a hook shape, Figures 4 and 5, and the second engagement members creating a hook shape with portion 56 of the slot 54, Figures 4 and 5) with first and second engagement surfaces facing opposite directions (the engagement surface of portion 48 of the first engagement members faces downwardly or toward shaft 66 in Figure 4 and the engagement surface of slot portion 58 located opposite to the location of reference character 58 in Figure 4 faces upwardly in Figure 4 or towards shaft 60).
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) 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Velcover (US-3844591) in view of Bakula (US-4768816).
In regards to claim 18, Velcover discloses the bar lock assembly as applied to claim 13 above, but fails to disclose that the cam comprises a lock receiving opening formed in the base, wherein the lock receiving opening is positioned and configured to receive a locking member. Bakula teaches a bar lock assembly having a cam 24 with a base 26 through which a lock receiving opening 37 is formed (Figure 2), with the lock receiving opening being positioned and configured to receive a locking member 39 (Figure 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s invention to include a lock receiving opening in the base of the cam of Velcover, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to receive a locking member of a padlock so as to enhance the security of the device.
In regards to claim 19, Bakula teaches a lock 38 comprising a shackle, forming the locking member that is disposed through the lock receiving opening (Figure 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to locate the shackle around the shaft of Velcover, since Bakula teaches the shackle extending through at least one opening in a keeper 20 receiving the cam and the at least one opening in the keeper through which the shackle is received is capable of being located adjacent the shaft of Velcover, such that the shackle is located around the shaft in a similar manner that the shackle is located around portions 29 and 30 extending from the keeper in Figure 3 of Bakula.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 4-10 are allowed.
Claims 11 and 12 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
Claim 17 is 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 1, 11, and 17.
In regards to claims 1 and 11, Chambers (US-3464729) fails to disclose that the first engagement member is disposed under the first shaft and the second engagement member is disposed over the second shaft when the cam is in the engaged position. The first and second engagement members of Chambers are both located on the same sides of the first and second shafts in the engaged position in Figure 9. The examiner can find no motivation to modify the device of Chambers without employing improper hindsight reasoning and without destroying the intended structure and operation of the device.
In regards to claim 17, Velcover (US-3844591) fails to disclose that the actuator shaft is welded to the side walls of the cam, wherein a weld connecting the actuator shaft and one of the side walls extends less than 300 degrees around the periphery of the actuator shaft. The actuator shaft of Velcover is free to move relative to the side walls of the cam, as shown in Figures 4 and 5, and therefore, welding the actuator shaft in place to the side walls of the cam would destroy the intended structure and operation of the device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 30, 2026 regarding the rejections of claims 13-16 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) with Velcover (US-3844591) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In regards to applicant’s remarks, it is clear that the cam is generally U-shaped in cross-section because the cam has side walls and a base forming a generally U-shape, with the generally U-shaped cross-section shown with dashed lines in annotated Figure 2 of Velcover for clarification. Furthermore, the cam opens toward at least the base of the generally U-shaped keeper because the general U-shape of the cam opens to the left in Figure 2 of Velcover towards the base of the keeper, and the cam is shown nested between the side walls of the keeper, as shown in Figure 3 of Velcover. Therefore, the limitations of claim 13 are met.
PNG
media_image3.png
385
259
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In regards to claims 18 and 19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103, applicant is referred to the remarks concerning claim 13 and the Velcover reference in Paragraph 24 above.
The examiner appreciates applicant’s amendments to the drawings, and therefore, the drawing objections set forth in the previous Office Action are withdrawn.
In light of applicant’s amendments to the claims, the claim objections and rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in the previous Office Action are withdrawn, however, new rejections of claims 11 and 12 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) are set forth in the current Office Action based on applicant’s amendments to claims 1 and 11.
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 ALYSON MERLINO whose telephone number is (571)272-2219. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7 AM to 3 PM.
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.
/ALYSON M MERLINO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675 September 28, 2026
