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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicants’ election of Group II (claims 8-11) in the reply filed 04/09/2026 is acknowledged along with Applicant’s filing of the supplemental amendment on 05/07/2025. Claims 8-11 and 22-37 will be examined, all drawn to Group II.
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) 8-10, 22-23, 25-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sweeney et al. US 11486163.
Claim 8. Sweeney discloses an access control device having a locked state and an unlocked state, the access control device comprising:
a housing (24) comprising a window (30);
an input device (23) movably mounted to the housing, the input device operable to transition the access control device between a first state (fig2 – locked state) and a second state (fig1 – unlocked state), wherein one of the first state or the second state is the locked state, and wherein the other of the first state or the second state is the unlocked state;
an indicator (32,33) comprising a first indicium (32b “locked”) corresponding to the first state, wherein the indicator has a first position (fig2) in which the first indicium is aligned with the window, and wherein the indicator has a second position (fig1) in which the first indicium is misaligned not aligned with the window; and
a detent mechanism (16) configured to resist movement (NOTE: 16 is an over center spring configured to resist movement toward first and second position via bias of movement either position via biasing of locking mechanism cam (14) which affects movement of indicator – note if spring (16) biases to one position, it is “resisting” movement to the other position at that moment – col. 14 lines 6-34) of the indicator toward the second position when the indicator is in the first position; and
wherein the input device is operably connected with the indicator such that the indicator is in the first position when the access control device is in the first state (fig2), and such that the indicator is in the second position when the access control device is in the second state (fig1). (fig1,2, col. 6 lines 3-63, col.14 lines 6-34)
Claim 9. Sweeney discloses the access control device of claim 8, wherein the detent mechanism is further configured to resist movement of the indicator toward the first position when the indicator is in the second position. (16 is an over center spring configured to resist movement toward first and second position via bias of movement either position via biasing of locking mechanism cam (14) which affects movement of indicator – note if spring (16) biases to one position, it is “resisting” movement to the other position at that moment – col. 14 lines 6-34)
Claim 10. Sweeney discloses the access control device of claim 8, wherein the indicator further comprises a second indicium (32a “unlocked”) corresponding to the second state; and wherein the second indicium is aligned with the window when the indicator is in the second position. (fig 1, 15a)
Claim 22. Sweeney discloses an access control device having a locked state and an unlocked state, the access control device comprising:
a housing (24) comprising a window (30);
an input device (23,12,14,70) mounted for movement relative to the housing, the input device operable to transition the access control device between the locked state and the unlocked state;
an indicator (32,33,60) comprising a locked indicium (32b) and an unlocked indicium (32a), wherein the indicator has a lock-indicating position (fig2,16) in which the locked indicium is visible via the window and the unlocked indicium is obscured from view, and wherein the indicator has an unlock- indicating position (fig1,15) in which the unlocked indicium is visible via the window and the locked indicium is obscured from view; and
a detent mechanism (16,14,72+73 of 70, 62 of 60; NOTE: A mechanism is a combination of different parts that work mechanically together. In this instance, 60 is part of the indicator, 14 and 72+73 are part of the input device, but these parts work together as part of the detent mechanism) configured to selectively resist movement of the indicator from one of the lock-indicating position or the unlock-indicating position toward the other of the lock- indication position or the unlock-indicating position (NOTE: 16 is an over center spring configured to resist movement toward first and second position via bias of movement either position via biasing of locking mechanism cam (14) which affects movement of indicator – note if spring (16) biases to one position, it is “resisting” movement to the other position at that moment – col. 14 lines 6-34); and
wherein the input device is operably connected with the indicator and configured to move the indicator between the lock-indicating position and the unlock-indicating position as the input device transitions the access control device between the locked state and the unlocked state. (fig1,2, 15-16, col. 6 lines 3-63, col.14 lines 6-34.)
Claim 23. Sweeney discloses the access control device of claim 22, wherein the detent mechanism comprises a protrusion (72+73 of 70), a recess (62a on 60), and a bias member (16) configured to urge the protrusion and the recess into engagement with one another when the indicator is in the one of the lock-indicating position or the unlock-indicating position. (fig1,2, col. 6 lines 3-63, col.14 lines 6-67)
Claim 25. Sweeney discloses the access control device of claim 23, wherein the indicator comprises one of the protrusion or the recess (62a is a recess which part of the indicator, fig15-16) such that the one of the protrusion or the recess moves jointly with the indicator. (fig1,2, 15-16, col. 6 lines 3-63, col.14 lines 6-67)
Claim 26. Sweeney discloses the access control device of claim 23, wherein the input device comprises one of the protrusion (72+73 is a protrusion of 70 which is part of the input device) or the recess such that the one of the protrusion or the recess moves jointly with the input device. (fig1,2, 15-16, col. 6 lines 3-63, col.14 lines 6-67)
Claim 27. Sweeney discloses the access control device of claim 26, wherein the input device comprises a ring (round cylindrical part of 70 is considered the ring, see fig. 13); and wherein the one of the protrusion (72+73 is formed on the ring) or the recess is formed on the ring. (fig13, 15-16)
Claim 28. Sweeney discloses the access control device of claim 22, wherein the detent mechanism is further configured to selectively resist movement of the indicator from the other of the lock-indicating position or the unlock-indicating position toward the one of the lock- indicating position or the unlock-indicating position. (NOTE: 16 is an over center spring configured to resist movement toward first and second position via bias of movement either position via biasing of locking mechanism cam (14) which affects movement of indicator – note if spring (16) biases to one position, it is “resisting” movement to the other position at that moment – col. 14 lines 6-34)
Claim 29. Sweeney discloses the access control device of claim 28, wherein the detent mechanism comprises:
a bias member (16);
a first engagement feature (72+73 of 70);
a locked engagement feature (end of recess 62a, where 73 is in contact in fig16), wherein the bias member is configured to urge the first engagement feature and the locked engagement feature into engagement with one another when the indicator is in the lock-indicating position, and to resist disengagement of the first engagement feature and the locked engagement feature to thereby resist movement of the indicator from the lock-indicating position toward the unlock-indicating position; and
an unlocked engagement feature (top of recess of 62a, where 73 is in contact in fig15), wherein the bias member is configured to urge the first engagement feature and the unlocked engagement feature into engagement with one another when the indicator is in the unlock-indicating position, and to resist disengagement of the first engagement feature and the unlocked engagement feature to thereby resist movement of the indicator from the unlock-indicating position toward the lock-indicating position.
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.
Claim(s) 31, 35-37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sweeney et al. US 11486163, and further in view of Woodley et al. US 12152408.
Claim 31. Sweeney discloses an exit device, comprising:
a mounting assembly (24) comprising a channel member (created by sides 26 and 28, fig15 and a header case (24) positioned at one end of the channel member, the header case comprising a window (30);
an input device (23,12,14,70) operable to transition the exit device between a locked state and an unlocked state;
an indicator (32,33,60) mounted in the header case, wherein the indicator is operable to be moved by the input device between
(a) a lock-indicating position (fig2, 16), in which a locked indicium (32b) is visible via the window, and
(b) an unlocked position (fig1, 15), in which an unlocked indicium (32a) is visible via the window; and
a detent mechanism (16,14,72+73 of 70, 62a of 60; NOTE: A mechanism is a combination of different parts that work mechanically together. In this instance, 60 is part of the indicator, 14 and 72+73 are part of the input device, but these parts work together as part of the detent mechanism.) configured to selectively resist movement of the indicator from one of the lock-indicating position or the unlock-indicating position toward the other of the lock-indication position or the unlock-indicating position (NOTE: 16 is an over center spring configured to resist movement toward lock indicating position and unlock indicating position via bias of movement either position via biasing of locking mechanism cam (14) which affects movement of indicator – note if spring (16) biases to one position, it is “resisting” movement to the other position at that moment – col. 14 lines 6-34). (fig1,2, 15-16, col. 6 lines 3-63, col.14 lines 6-34)
Sweeney does not teach a pushbar and therefore does not explicitly teach a pushbar movably mounted to the mounting assembly.
Woodley teaches the concept of a pushbar (shown in fig1a, not labeled) that is movably mounted to a mounting assembly (36) of an exit device (fig1, see background).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Sweeney with a pushbar, a concept as taught by Woodley in order to provide a visual indicator to an exit door (Woodley, see background).
Claim 35. Sweeney in view of Woodley further teaches the exit device of claim 31, wherein the detent mechanism comprises a protrusion (Sweeney, 72+73 of 70), a recess (Sweeney, 62a of 60), and a bias member (Sweeney, 16) configured to urge the protrusion and the recess into engagement with one another when the indicator is in the one of the lock-indicating position or the unlock-indicating position. (Sweeney, fig1,2, col. 6 lines 3-63, col.14 lines 6-67)
Claim 36. Sweeney in view of Woodley further teaches the exit device of claim 31, wherein the detent mechanism is further configured to selectively resist movement of the indicator from the other of the lock- indicating position or the unlock-indicating position toward the one of the lock-indicating position or the unlock-indicating position. (Sweeney, fig1,2, col. 6 lines 3-63, col.14 lines 6-67)
Claim 37. Sweeney in view of Woodley further teaches the exit device of claim 36, wherein the detent mechanism comprises a bias mechanism (16), a locked detent feature (end of recess 62a, where 72 of 70 is in contact, fig16), an unlocked detent feature (top of recess 62a, where 72 of 70 is in contact, fig15) and an additional detent feature (72+73 of 70);
wherein, with the indicator in the lock-indicating position, the additional detent feature is engaged with the locked detent feature and the bias mechanism resists disengagement of the additional detent feature and the locked detent feature to thereby resist movement of the indicator from the lock-indicating position; and
wherein, with the indicator in the unlock-indicating position, the additional detent feature is engaged with the unlocked detent feature and the bias mechanism resists disengagement of the additional detent feature and the unlocked detent feature to thereby resist movement of the indicator from the unlock-indicating position. (NOTE: 16 is an over center spring configured to resist movement toward lock indicating position and unlock indicating position via bias of movement either position via biasing of locking mechanism cam (14) which affects movement of indicator – note if spring (16) biases to one position, it is “resisting” movement to the other position at that moment – col. 14 lines 6-34)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11, 24, 30, 32-34 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.
Regarding claims 11, 30, 32, Sweeney does not disclose an additional indicator. Although other indicators exist in the prior art, Examiner can find no reason to combine or modify references of record without the use of impermissible hindsight.
Regarding claim 24, Sweeney although does teach the bias member (16) can be any type of spring, therefore is capable of teaching it to be a leaf spring, Sweeney does not teach that the spring defines one of the protrusion or recess. The protrusion and recess are on other components, not on spring (16). Examiner can find no reason to combine or modify references of record without the use of impermissible hindsight.
Regarding claim 34, Sweeney does not teach an explicit intermediate position of the indicator. Examiner can find no reason to combine or modify references of record without the use of impermissible hindsight.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Prior art is related to access control devices.
Related but not relied upon prior art: US 0689429, US D906084, US 12006729.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARIA F. AHMAD whose telephone number is (571)270-1334. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5:30 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 M. 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.
/F.F.A./
Examiner
Art Unit 3675
/CHRISTINE M MILLS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights