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 .
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.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 80 and α. 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. 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.
The drawings are objected to because reference character “34” in Figure 12 should be changed to “134” and the instance of reference character “34” located next to reference character “78” in Figure 13 should be changed to “134.” 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.
Claim Objections
Claims 7, 9, 12-14, and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In regards to claim 7, line 3, the phrase “the inner surfaces” should be changed to “inner surfaces.”
In regards to claim 9, the claim should read as follows after the preamble: “further comprising a lock comprising a shackle, forming the locking member that is disposed through the lock receiving opening and is located around one of the first and second shafts proximate to the lock receiving opening.”
In regards to claim 12, lines 1 and 2, the phrase “a U-shaped cross section” should be changed to “a generally U-shaped cross section.”
In regards to claim 13, line 2, the phrase “a U-shaped keeper” should be changed to “a generally U-shaped keeper,” in line 5, the phrase “a U-shaped cam” should be changed to “a generally U-shaped cam,” in line 6, the phrase “the U-shaped cam” should be changed to “the cam” so as to be consistent with the language used in lines 7-11, in line 7, the phrase “the U-shaped keeper” should be changed to “the generally U-shaped keeper,” in line 9, the phrase “an engaged position wherein” should be changed to “an engaged position, in which,” and in line 10, a comma should be inserted after the phrase “engaged with the shaft” and the phrase “a disengaged position wherein” should be changed to “a disengaged position, in which” such that it is clear that the limitations following the phrases “an engaged position” and “a disengaged position” refer to these phrases, respectively.
In regards to claim 14, line 3, the phrase “connected to the side walls” should be changed to “connected to the side walls of the keeper.”
In regards to claim 19, the claim should read as follows after the preamble: “further comprising a lock comprising a shackle, forming the locking member that is disposed through the lock receiving opening and is located around the shaft.”
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, 9, and 12-20 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 inner surfaces" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. See claim objections above.
In regards to claim 9, the relationship between the shackle of the lock, as recited in claim 9, and the locking member, as recited in claim 8, is unclear from the claim language. It is understood from the specification that the shackle is equivalent to the locking member, and will be examined as such. See claim objections above.
In regards to claim 12, it is unclear how the cross section of the cam is exactly U-shaped, as suggested by the phrase “a U-shaped cross section,” when it is understood from the specification that the cross section is approximately or generally U-shaped and will be examined as such. See claim objections above.
In regards to claim 13, it is unclear how the keeper and the cam are both exactly U-shaped, as suggested by the phrases “a U-shaped keeper” and “a U-shaped cam,” when it is understood from the specification that the keeper and cam are approximately or generally U-shaped and will be examined as such. See claim objections above.
In regards to claim 14, line 3, it is unclear to which side walls the phrase “is connected to the side walls” refers. It is understood from the specification that the “side walls” must refer to the side walls of the keeper, and will be examined as such. See claim objections above.
In regards to claim 19, the relationship between the shackle of the lock, as recited in claim 9, and the locking member, as recited in claim 18, is unclear from the claim language. It is understood from the specification that the shackle is equivalent to the locking member, and will be examined as such. See claim objections above.
In regards to claims 15-18 and 20, these claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) because they depend from claim 13.
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) 1 and 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chambers (US-3464729).
In regards to claim 1, Chambers discloses a bar lock assembly comprising: a keeper 3 comprising: a base (see Figure 1a below); a pair of laterally spaced side walls 10 and 11 extending transversely from the base, wherein the side walls comprise laterally aligned openings (see Figure 1a below, with the opening at reference character 6 extending from the point shown in Figure 1a to the location of reference character 6); and first and second longitudinally spaced shafts 4 and 5 extending between and connected to the side walls on opposite sides of the openings (Figure 1a); an actuator shaft 8 rotatable about a rotation axis aligned with the openings (axis extending along the length and through the center of the shaft, Figure 1); and a cam 2 coupled to and rotatable with the actuator shaft about the rotation axis between an engaged position (Figure 9) and a disengaged position (Figure 12), wherein the cam comprises an engagement member (end with surface 18, Figure 9) engaged with the first shaft when rotated to the engaged position (Figure 9) and wherein the engagement member is disengaged with the first shaft when rotated to the disengaged position (Figure 12).
PNG
media_image1.png
596
783
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 2, Chambers discloses that the engagement member comprises a first engagement member engaged with the first shaft when the cam is in the engaged position (Figure 9) and disengaged from the first shaft when the cam is in the disengaged position (Figure 12), and further comprising a second engagement member (end with surface 18’, Figure 9) engaged with the second shaft when the cam is rotated to the engaged position (Figure 9) and wherein the second engagement member is disengaged with the second shaft when the cam is rotated to the disengaged position (Figure 12).
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_image2.png
536
732
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
447
1184
media_image3.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 9 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) 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chambers (US-3464729) in view of NPL “What is Roll Forming” (hereinafter referred to as NMC).
In regards to claim 11, Chambers discloses the bar lock assembly as applied to claim 1, with the keeper being formed of a metal (apparent from cross-hatching in figures), but fails to specify a method of manufacturing the keeper by roll-forming the keeper from a piece of flat sheet metal. NMC teaches the use of a roll-forming method to form a component from a piece of flat sheet metal (see Paragraphs before and under the heading “The Forming Process). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s invention to specify that the keeper be manufactured using roll-forming, with reasonable expectation of success, since roll-forming the keeper would result in the same final product as Chambers and roll-forming is a known manufacturing method and within the skill of one in the art to choose to manufacture a piece, such as the keeper of Chambers.
In regards to claim 12, Chambers discloses that the cam comprises a generally U-shaped cross section (see Figure 9 below, with the general U-shape shown with dashed lines), with the cam being formed of a metal (apparent from cross-hatching in figures), but fails to specify that the cam is roll-formed from a piece of flat sheet metal. NMC teaches the use of a roll-forming method to form a component from a piece of flat sheet metal (see Paragraphs before and under the heading “The Forming Process). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s invention to specify that the cam be manufactured using roll-forming, with reasonable expectation of success, since roll-forming the cam would result in the same final product as Chambers and roll-forming is a known manufacturing method and within the skill of one in the art to choose to manufacture a piece, such as the cam of Chambers.
PNG
media_image4.png
253
326
media_image4.png
Greyscale
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 3-6, 8, and 10 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.
Claims 7, 9, and 17 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include 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 3, 4, 10, and 17.
In regards to claim 3, 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 4, Chambers (US-3464729) fails to disclose that the cam comprises a base and a pair of a pair of laterally spaced side walls extending transversely from the base, wherein each side wall comprises the first and second engagement members. 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.
Conclusion
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 January 27, 2026