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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/303/2026 have been fully considered but they are not all persuasive.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the arguments that the amendments to claim 21 prevent Chang (US 20170051536 A1) from reading on the claim. It’s the examiner’s position the mechanical connection between 30 and 12 reads on the amendments. The limitation does not require strictly only mechanical connections.
The examiner agrees that the amendments to claim 30 prevent Chang from reading on the claim.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the arguments that Chang does not read on claim 38. It’s the position of the examiner that as long as mechanical movement is at least partially involved due to depression of the pushbar (11), the limitation “mechanically moving the exit device assembly from the secured state to the unsecured state, comprising moving the blocking member from the blocking position to the unblocking position in response to depression of the pushbar” is considered met. The limitation does not require strictly only mechanical connections.
Drawings
The previous drawing objections no longer apply as the claimed subject matter not shown was cancelled in a preliminary amendment.
Double Patenting
The previous double patenting rejections have been overcome by the present terminal disclaimer.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 21-26 and 38-39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chang US 20170051536 A1 (hereinafter Chang).
In regards to claim 21, Chang teaches a pushbar assembly, comprising: a housing (10 and/or 14); a latchbolt (41) movably mounted to the housing for movement between an extended position (see fig 2) and a retracted position (see fig 1); a blocking member (46) movably mounted to the housing for movement between a blocking position (see fig 2) in which the blocking blocks movement of the latchbolt to the retracted position to thereby retain the latchbolt in the extended position (see para 39), and an unblocking position in which the blocking member permits movement of the latchbolt to the retracted position (see fig 1); a pushbar (11) operably connected with the blocking member via a mechanical connection (mechanical connection between 30 and 12) configured to move the blocking member between the blocking position and the unblocking position in response to movement of the pushbar (para 40); an electronic driver (45) configured to move the blocking member from the blocking position to the unblocking position in response to an electronic unlock signal (para 40); and a control system (31) in communication with the electronic driver, the control system configured to transmit the electronic unlock signal based on information received from a credential reader (34 see para 40).
In regards to claim 22, Chang teaches the pushbar assembly of claim 21, wherein the housing comprises a channel member (10) and a header case (14) positioned at an end of the channel member (see fig 3); and wherein each of the latchbolt and the blocking member is positioned in the header case (see fig 1).
In regards to claim 23, Chang teaches the pushbar assembly of claim 21, wherein the electronic driver comprises one of a motor or a solenoid (see fig 1).
In regards to claim 24, Chang teaches the pushbar assembly of claim 21, wherein the control system is positioned within the housing (para 33).
In regards to claim 25, Chang teaches the pushbar assembly of claim 21, wherein the electronic driver is operable to convert electrical energy to mechanical energy in response to the electronic unlock signal (para 40).
In regards to claim 26, Chang teaches the pushbar assembly of claim 21, further comprising a cam (50) connected with the electronic driver such that the electronic driver is operable to move the cam between a locking position and an unlocking position (see figs 1-2); wherein the cam is configured to move the blocking member between the blocking position and the unblocking position as the cam moves between the locking position and the unlocking position (see figs 1-2).
In regards to claim 38, Chang teaches a method of operating an exit device assembly mounted to a door (see fig 1), wherein the exit device assembly comprises a latchbolt (41), a blocking member (46), a pushbar (11), and an electronic driver (45), the method comprising: operating the exit device assembly in a secured state (see fig 2), comprising maintaining the blocking member in a blocking position in which the blocking member blocks movement of the latchbolt from an extended position to a retracted position to thereby prevent opening of the door (see fig 2 and para 40); operating the exit device assembly in an unsecured state (see fig 1), comprising maintaining the blocking member in an unblocking position in which the blocking member permits movement of the latchbolt from the extended position to the retracted position to thereby permit opening of the door (see para 40); mechanically moving (as mechanical movement is at least partially involved; i.e. between 46 and 50) the exit device assembly from the secured state to the unsecured state, comprising moving the blocking member from the blocking position to the unblocking position in response to depression of the pushbar (para 40); and electronically moving (as electronic moment is at least partially involved) the exit device assembly from the secured state to the unsecured state, comprising supplying the electronic driver with an electronic unlock signal based on information generated by a credential reader (34), wherein the electronic driver moves the blocking member from the blocking position to the unblocking position as a result of the electronic unlock signal (see para 40).
In regards to claim 39, Chang teaches the method of claim 38, wherein the electronic driver moves the blocking member from the blocking position to the unblocking position by moving a cam (50) from a locking position to an unlocking position (see figs 1-2).
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) 30-33, 38 and 41 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arlinghaus et al. US 20070246946 A1 (hereinafter US ‘946) in view of Slaybuagh et al. US 5340171 A (hereinafter Slaybuagh) and Frolov US 5823582 A (hereinafter Frolov).
In regards to claim 30, US ‘946 teaches a pushbar assembly (see fig 1) having a secured state (see fig 3) and an unsecured state (see fig 8), the pushbar assembly comprising: a blocking member (32) having a blocking position in the secured state and an unblocking position in the unsecured state (see figs 3 and 8), the blocking member configured to block retraction of a latchbolt when in the blocking position (see fig 3) and configured to permit retraction of the latchbolt when in the unblocking position (see fig 8); a pushbar (24) operable to move the blocking member from the blocking position to the unblocking position upon depression of the pushbar (see paras 19-20).
However, US ‘946 does not teach an electronic driver configured to move the blocking member from the blocking position to the unblocking position in response to receipt of an electronic unlock signal; wherein each of the electronic driver and the pushbar is independently operable to move the blocking member from the blocking position to the unblocking position.
Slaybuagh teaches an electronic driver (6) configured to move a blocking member (28) from the blocking position to the unblocking position in response to receipt of an electronic unlock signal (Col 2 lines 10-24); wherein each of the electronic driver and the pushbar is independently operable to move the blocking member from the blocking position to the unblocking position (see abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have an electronic driver configured to move the blocking member from the blocking position to the unblocking position in response to receipt of an electronic unlock signal; wherein each of the electronic driver and the pushbar is independently operable to move the blocking member from the blocking position to the unblocking position in order to allow convenient unlocking from remote locations (Col 1 lines 5-20).
Additionally, US ‘946 does not teach (and Slaybuagh is silent on) a control system operable to transmit the electronic unlock signal based on information received from a credential reader.
Frolov teaches a control system (118) operable to transmit the electronic unlock signal based on information received from a credential reader (160 and 161; Col 12 lines 8-21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have a control system operable to transmit the electronic unlock signal based on information received from a credential reader in US ‘946 in order to provide the user with the convenience of unlatching the door with a keypad.
In regards to claim 31, US ‘946 in view of Slaybuagh and Frolov teaches the pushbar assembly of claim 30, further comprising a housing configured for mounting to a door (US ‘946: see fig 1), the housing including a channel member (US ‘946: portion around 24) and a header case (US ‘946: 22) positioned at an end of the channel member (US ‘946: see fig 2); wherein the blocking member and the latchbolt are positioned in the header case (see US ‘946 fig 3).
In regards to claim 32, US ‘946 in view of Slaybuagh and Frolov teaches the pushbar assembly of claim 31, wherein the control system is positioned in the housing (Frolov, see fig 1).
In regards to claim 33, US ‘946 in view of Slaybuagh and Frolov teaches the pushbar assembly of claim 30, further comprising a cam (Slaybuagh: 48) connected with the electronic driver such that the electronic driver is operable to move the cam between a locking position and an unlocking position (see Slaybuagh figs 3-5); wherein the cam is configured to move the blocking member between the blocking position and the unblocking position as the cam moves between the locking position and the unlocking position (Slaybuagh: abstract).
In regards to claim 38, US ‘946 teaches a method of operating an exit device assembly mounted to a door (see fig 1), wherein the exit device assembly comprises a latchbolt (36), a blocking member (32), a pushbar (24), the method comprising: operating the exit device assembly in a secured state (see fig 3), comprising maintaining the blocking member in a blocking position in which the blocking member blocks movement of the latchbolt from an extended position to a retracted position to thereby prevent opening of the door (see fig 3); operating the exit device assembly in an unsecured state (see fig 8), comprising maintaining the blocking member in an unblocking position in which the blocking member permits movement of the latchbolt from the extended position to the retracted position to thereby permit opening of the door (see fig 8); mechanically moving the exit device assembly from the secured state to the unsecured state (para 31), comprising moving the blocking member from the blocking position to the unblocking position in response to depression of the pushbar (para 31).
However, US ‘946 does not teach an electronic driver and electronically moving the exit device assembly from the secured state to the unsecured state, wherein the electronic driver moves the blocking member from the blocking position to the unblocking position as a result of the electronic unlock signal.
Slaybuagh teaches an electronic driver (6) and electronically moving the exit device assembly from the secured state to the unsecured state (abstract), , wherein the electronic driver moves a blocking member (28) from the blocking position to the unblocking position as a result of an electronic unlock signal (abstract and figs 3-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have an electronic driver and electronically moving the exit device assembly from the secured state to the unsecured state wherein the electronic driver moves the blocking member from the blocking position to the unblocking position as a result of the electronic unlock signal in order to allow convenient unlocking from remote locations (Col 1 lines 5-20).
Still US ‘946 does not teach comprising supplying the electronic driver with an electronic unlock signal based on information generated by a credential reader.
Frolov teaches supplying an electronic driver (64) with an electronic unlock signal based on information generated by a credential reader (160 or 161; Col 12 lines 8-21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have supplying the electronic driver with an electronic unlock signal based on information generated by a credential reader in US ‘946 in order to provide the user with the convenience of unlatching the door with a keypad.
In regards to claim 41, US ‘946 in view of Slaybuagh and Frolov teaches the method of claim 38, further comprising operating the pushbar and the electronic driver independently such that each is individually operable to move the exit device assembly from the secured state to the unsecured state (Slaybuagh abstract).
Claim(s) 27 and 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang as applied to claims 21-26 and 38-39 above, and further in view of Arlinghaus et al. US 20180245375 A1 (hereinafter US ‘375).
In regards to claim 27, Chang teaches the pushbar assembly of claim 26.
However, Chang does not teach further comprising a position sensor in communication with the control system such that the control system is operable to distinguish between the locking position and the unlocking position based on information generated by the position sensor.
US ‘375 teaches a position sensor (332) in communication with a control system such that the control system is operable to distinguish between the locking position and the unlocking position based on information generated by the position sensor (para 72).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided Chang with a position sensor in communication with the control system such that the control system is operable to distinguish between the locking position and the unlocking position based on information generated by the position sensor in order to evaluate and communicate the security state of the exit device (US ‘375: para 52).
In regards to claim 40, Chang teaches the method of claim 39.
However, Chang does not teach further comprising distinguishing between the locking position and the unlocking position based upon information generated by a position sensor associated with the cam.
US ‘375 teaches distinguishing between the locking position and the unlocking position based upon information generated by a position sensor (332) associated with a similar cam (230; see para 72).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided Chang comprising distinguishing between the locking position and the unlocking position based upon information generated by a position sensor associated with the cam in order to evaluate and communicate the security state of the exit device (US ‘375: para 52).
Claim(s) 28-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang as applied to claims 21-26 and 38-39 above, and further in view of Evans US 4961330 A (hereinafter Evans) and Hickman US 20140165677 A1 (hereinafter Hickman).
In regards to claim 28, Chang teaches an exit device system comprising the pushbar assembly of
claim 21.
However, Chang does not teach the exit device system further comprising a trim assembly including an escutcheon, a handle mounted to the escutcheon, and the credential reader.
Evans teaches a trim assembly (at least 20 and 20h) including an escutcheon (20), a handle (20h) mounted to the escutcheon (see fig 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have a trim assembly including an escutcheon, a handle mounted to the escutcheon, in Chang, in order to provide for a well-known and conventional way of opening a door from an exterior of the door.
Additionally, Chang does not teach a trim associated with his credential reader and therefore the examiner does not consider it a part of a trim assembly. This is very common, however.
Hickman teaches a similar credential reader 24 with a trim (26).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the credential reader comprise a trim such as in Hickman in order to provide for a well-known and conventional way of attaching a credential reader to a door.
In regards to claim 29, Chang in view of Evans and Hickman teaches the exit device system of claim 28, wherein the handle has a fixed rotational orientation relative to the escutcheon (see Evans fig 4).
Claim(s) 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US ‘946 in view of Slaybuagh and Frolov as applied to claims 30-33, 38 and 41 above, and further in view of US ‘375.
In regards to claim 34, US ‘946 in view of Slaybuagh and Frolov teaches the pushbar assembly of claim 33.
However, US ‘946 does not teach further comprising a position sensor in communication with the control system such that the control system is operable to distinguish between the locking position and the unlocking position based on information generated by the position sensor.
US ‘375 teaches a position sensor (332) in communication with a control system such that the control system is operable to distinguish between the locking position and the unlocking position based on information generated by the position sensor (para 72).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided US ‘946 comprising distinguishing between the locking position and the unlocking position based upon information generated by a position sensor associated with the cam in order to evaluate and communicate the security state of the exit device (US ‘375: para 52).
Claim(s) 36-37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US ‘946 in view of Slaybuagh and Frolov as applied to claims 30-33, 38 and 41 above, and further in view of Hickman.
In regards to claim 36, US ‘946 in view of Slaybuagh and Frolov teaches an exit device system comprising the pushbar assembly of claim 30, the exit device system further comprising a trim assembly (see US ‘946 fig 3) including an escutcheon (US ‘946: seen around 26), a handle (US ‘946: 26) mounted to the escutcheon, and the credential reader.
However, US ‘946 does not teach a trim associated with a credential reader and therefore the examiner does not consider it’s a part of a trim assembly. This is very common, however.
Hickman teaches a similar credential reader 24 with a trim (26).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have a credential reader comprise a trim, in US ‘946, such as in Hickman in order to provide for a well-known and conventional way of attaching a credential reader to a door.
In regards to claim 37, US ‘946 in view of Slaybuagh, Frolov and Hickman teaches the exit device system of claim 36, wherein the handle has a fixed rotational orientation relative to the escutcheon (US ‘946 para 19).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER H WATSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5393. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 - 5.
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.
/PETER H WATSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3675
