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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Invention II in the reply filed on June 11, 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because based on the specification, reference character “400” in Figure 28 should be changed to “900.” 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 Interpretation
In regards to claim 47, the preamble recites a lockset kit for a lockset including a trim and a chassis with the lockset and its trim and chassis recited merely as an intended use, however, the body of the claim contains positive recitations of the lockset. Consequently, it cannot be determined whether applicant intends to claim the subcombination of the lockset kit or the lockset kit in combination with the lockset. In formulating an evaluation on the merits, the examiner is considering that the claims are drawn to the combination and the claims will be rejected accordingly. If applicant indicates by amendment that the combination claim is the intention, the language of the preamble should be made consistent with the language of the body of the claims. If the intent is to claim the subcombination, then the body of the claim must be amended to remove positive recitations of the combination. Applicant’s intention in regards to the scope of the claim must be clearly established by the claim language. See claim objections below.
Claim Objections
Claims 31-34, 37-41, and 44-54 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In regards to claim 31, line 2, the phrase “selecting a spindle from a spindle selection kit comprising a plurality of spindles” should be changed to “selecting a spindle from a plurality of spindles of a spindle selection kit,” in line 3, the phrase “each spindle” should be changed to “each spindle of the plurality of spindles,” in lines 3 and 4, the phrase “at least two of the spindles” should be changed to “at least two spindles of the plurality of spindles,” in line 6, the phrase “each spindle” should be changed to “each spindle of the plurality of spindles,” in line 8, the phrase “the trim” should be changed to “the chassis,” in line 10, the phrase “the chassis” should be changed to “the trim,” and in line 11, the phrase “the spindle” should be changed to “the selected spindle.” Most of the suggested language changes for claim 31 are to ensure a clear connection between the selected spindle and the plurality of spindles.
In regards to claim 32, line 2, the phrase “the spindle” should be changed to “the spindle of the plurality of spindles.”
In regards to claim 33, line 1, the phrase “each spindle” should be changed to “each spindle of the plurality of spindles,” and in line 3, the phrase “wherein selecting the spindle comprises selecting the spindle” should be changed to “wherein selecting the spindle from the plurality of spindles comprises selecting the spindle from the plurality of spindles.”
In regards to claim 37, line 1, the phrase “the spindle kit” should be changed to “the spindle selection kit,” and in line 2, the phrase “each of the spindles” should be changed to “each of the spindles of the plurality of spindles.”
In regards to claim 38, lines 1 and 2 should read as follows: “A spindle kit comprising,” in line 3, the phrase “each spindle” should be changed to “each spindle of the plurality of spindles,” in lines 4 and 5, the phrase “of the trim” should be removed, in line 7, the phrase “of the chassis” should be removed, and in line 8, the phrase “each spindle” should be changed to “each spindle of the plurality of spindles.”
In regards to claim 39, line 1, the phrase “the spindles” should be changed to “the plurality of spindles,” and in line 3, the phrase “the spindles” should be changed to “the plurality of spindles.”
In regards to claim 40, line 2, the phrase “the spindles” should be changed to “the spindles of the plurality of spindles.”
In regards to claim 41, line 1, the phrase “each spindle” should be changed to “each spindle of the plurality of spindles.”
In regards to claim 44, the claim should read as follows: “A lockset kit comprising the spindle kit of claim 38, the lockset kit comprising: a chassis, wherein the chassis comprises the cam; and a trim, wherein the trim comprises the rotatable component.”
In regards to claims 45 and 46, line 2 of each claim, the word “separately” should be inserted after the phrase “the plurality of spindles.”
In regards to claim 47, line 1, the phrase “A lockset kit for a lockset” should be changed to “A lockset kit in combination a lockset,” in line 3, the phrase “each spindle” should be changed to “each spindle of the plurality of spindles,” and in line 8, the phrase “each spindle” should be changed to “each spindle of the plurality of spindles.”
In regards to claim 48, line 1, the phrase “The lockset kit” should be changed to “The combination,” and in line 2, the word “separately” should be inserted after the phrase “the plurality of spindles.”
In regards to claim 49, the claim should read as follows: “The combination of claim 47, wherein the chassis comprises the cam; and wherein the trim comprises the rotatable component.”
In regards to claim 50, line 1, the phrase “The lockset kit” should be changed to “The combination” and the phrase “the spindles” should be changed to “the plurality of spindles,” and in line 3, the phrase “the spindles” should be changed to “the plurality of spindles.”
In regards to claim 51, line 1, the phrase “The lockset kit” should be changed to “The combination,” and in line 2, the phrase “each of the spindles” should be changed to “each of the spindles of the plurality of spindles.”
In regards to claim 52, line 1, the phrase “The lockset kit” should be changed to “The combination” and the phrase “each spindle” should be changed to “each spindle of the plurality of spindles.”
In regard to claims 53 and 54, line 1 of each claim, the phrase “The lockset kit” should be changed to “The combination.”
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 31-46 and 48 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 31, the relationship between the selected spindle and the plurality of spindles of the spindle selection kit is unclear from the claim language. The current claim language suggests that the spindle could be selected from the spindle selection kit, but not necessarily selected from the plurality of spindles of the spindle selection kit. It is understood from the specification that the spindle is selected from the plurality of spindles of the spindle selection kit, and will be examined as such. See claim objections above.
In regards to claim 31, it is unclear how the cam is part of the trim and how the rotatable component or handle is part of the chassis. As is understood from the drawings, the chassis is sized to house the cam and the rotatable component or handle is coupled to the trim. The trim is not of a size that it would accommodate the cam. For examination purposes, the claim will be examined as reciting that the cam is part of the chassis and that the rotatable component or handle is part of the trim. See claim objections above.
In regards to claim 31, the relationship between the “spindle” recited in line 11 and the “selected spindle” recited in line 5 is unclear from the claim language. It is understood from the specification that the “spindle” of line 11 is equivalent to the “selected spindle” of line 5, and will be examined as such. See claim objections above.
In regards to claim 37, the relationship between the “spindle kit” of claim 37 and the “spindle selection kit” of claim 31 is unclear from the claim language. It is understood from the specification that the “spindle kit” of claim 37 is equivalent to the “spindle selection kit” of claim 31, and will be examined as such. See claim objections above.
In regards to claim 38, based on claim 44, it appears that claim 38 is meant to be drawn to the spindle kit alone, however, the body of claim 38 recites the trim and the chassis in the body of the claim to provide the structure of which the cam and the rotatable component are a part of. For examination purposes, the claim will be examined as not reciting the chassis and the trim within the body of the claim. See claim objections above.
In regards to claim 44, it is unclear how the cam is part of the trim and how the rotatable component or handle is part of the chassis. As is understood from the drawings, the chassis is sized to house the cam and the rotatable component or handle is coupled to the trim. The trim is not of a size that it would accommodate the cam. For examination purposes, the claim will be examined as reciting that the cam is part of the chassis and that the rotatable component or handle is part of the trim. See claim objections above.
In regards to claims 45, 46, and 48, the claim language suggests that all of the spindles of the plurality of spindles are coupled with the rotatable component simultaneously, when it is understood from the specification that each spindle is separately coupled with the rotatable component and will be examined as such. See claim objections above.
In regards to claims 32-36 and 39-43, these claims are rejected because they depend from claims 31 and 38.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
17. 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.
18. Claim(s) 31, 32, 38, 39, and 44-50 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rossall (GB 2616059 A).
19. In regards to claim 31, Rossall discloses a method comprising: selecting a spindle 4 from a plurality of spindles within a spindle selection kit (Page 5, lines 27-30), wherein each spindle of the plurality of spindles has a corresponding and respective length (different or respective lengths for each spindle of the plurality of spindles, Page 5, lines 27-30), and wherein lengths of at least two spindles of the plurality of spindles are different from one another (since Rossall discloses that all the lengths are different, then at least two of the lengths are different, Page 5, lines 27-30); and installing the selected spindle to a lockset (Figure 1a) comprising a trim 7 and a chassis 916; wherein each spindle of the plurality of spindles comprises: a corresponding and respective first portion sized and shaped to engage a cam 918 of the chassis (Page 18, lines 29 and 30); and a corresponding and respective second portion sized and shaped to engage a rotatable component (handle 12 or 13) of the trim; and wherein installing the selected spindle to the lockset comprises: engaging a first portion of the selected spindle with the cam (Page 18, lines 29 and 30); and engaging the second portion of the selected spindle with the rotatable component (Figure 1a).
20. In regards to claim 32, Rossall discloses that selecting the spindle comprises selecting the spindle of the plurality of spindles based at least in part upon a thickness of a door to which the lockset is to be installed (the length of the spindle spans the thickness of the door when installed, and therefore, the spindle is selected based its length which is directly related to the thickness of the door).
21. In regards to claim 38, Rossall discloses a spindle kit comprising: a plurality of spindles (Page 5, lines 27-30), wherein each spindle of the plurality of spindles comprises: a corresponding and respective first portion sized and shaped to engage a cam 918 (Page 18, lines 29 and 30); and a corresponding and respective second portion sized and shaped to engage a rotatable component (handle 12 or 13); wherein each spindle of the plurality of spindles has a corresponding and respective length (different or respective lengths for each spindle of the plurality of spindles, Page 5, lines 27-30); and wherein the lengths of at least two spindles of the plurality of spindles are different from one another (since Rossall discloses that all the lengths are different, then at least two of the lengths are different, Page 5, lines 27-30).
22. In regards to claims 39 and 50, Rossall discloses that the first portions of the plurality of spindles differ in length (differ in length because the overall length of the spindles are different, and the first portion is part of each spindle); and wherein the second portions of the plurality of spindles are of a single configuration (single configuration being the configuration that allows each spindle to cooperate with handle 12 or 13).
23. In regards to claim 44, Rossall discloses a lockset kit comprising the spindle kit of claim 38, the lockset kit comprising: a chassis 916, wherein the chassis comprises the cam; and a trim 7, wherein the trim comprises the rotatable component.
24. In regards to claims 45, 46, and 48, Rossall discloses that the cam is operable to be coupled with the rotatable component via each individual spindle of the plurality of spindles separately (Figure 1a and Page 18, lines 29 and 30).
25. In regards to claim 47, Rossall discloses a lockset kit in combination with a lockset 900 including a trim 7 and a chassis 916, the lockset kit comprising: a plurality of spindles (Page 5, lines 27-30), wherein each spindle of the plurality of spindles comprises: a corresponding and respective first portion sized and shaped to engage a cam 918 of the lockset (Page 18, lines 29 and 30); and a corresponding and respective second portion sized and shaped to engage a rotatable component of the lockset (handle 12 or 13); wherein each spindle of the plurality of spindles has a corresponding and respective length (different or respective lengths for each spindle of the plurality of spindles, Page 5, lines 27-30); and wherein the lengths of at least two spindles of the plurality of spindles are different from one another (since Rossall discloses that all the lengths are different, then at least two of the lengths are different, Page 5, lines 27-30).
26. In regards to claim 49, Rossall discloses that the chassis comprises the cam (Figure 9); and wherein the trim comprises the rotatable component (Figure 1a).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
27. 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.
28. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
29. Claim(s) 31, 32, 34-36, 38, 39, 41-50, and 52-54 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bantle (DE 10123315 A) in view of Rossall (GB 2616059 A).
30. In regards to claim 31, Bantle discloses a method comprising: selecting a spindle 30, wherein the spindle has a corresponding and respective length (Figure 1); and installing the spindle to a lockset comprising a trim 10 and a chassis 17; wherein the spindle comprises: a corresponding and respective first portion sized and shaped to engage a cam 20 of the chassis (Figure 1, with the cam having at least a portion engaging the chassis); and a corresponding and respective second portion sized and shaped to engage a rotatable component 33 of the trim (the rotatable component being of the trim because it is coupled to the trim, Figure 1); and wherein installing the spindle to the lockset comprises: engaging the first portion of the spindle with the cam; and engaging the second portion of the spindle with the rotatable component (Figure 1). Bantle fails to disclose that the spindle was selected from a plurality of spindles of a spindle selection kit, with the lengths of at least two of the spindles of the plurality of spindles being different from one another. Rossall teaches a method comprising: selecting a spindle 4 from a plurality of spindles within a spindle selection kit (Page 5, lines 27-30), wherein each spindle of the plurality of spindles has a corresponding and respective length (different or respective lengths for each spindle of the plurality of spindles, Page 5, lines 27-30), and wherein lengths of at least two spindles of the plurality of spindles are different from one another (since Rossall discloses that all the lengths are different, then at least two of the lengths are different, Page 5, lines 27-30). 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 plurality of spindles within a spindle selection kit from which the spindle is selected, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to enhance the adaptability of the device to doors of different thicknesses.
31. In regards to claim 32, Rossall discloses that selecting the spindle comprises selecting the spindle of the plurality of spindles based at least in part upon a thickness of a door to which the lockset is to be installed (the length of the spindle spans the thickness of the door when installed, and therefore, the spindle is selected based its length which is directly related to the thickness of the door).
32. In regards to claims 34, 41, and 52, Bantle in view of Rossall teaches that the first portion of each spindle of the plurality of spindles comprises a fork (Figures 2 and 4 of Bantle) including two flexible arms 31 that are biased from one another (biased such that portions 31.2 engage behind surface 23 of the cam when the fork is inserted into the cam, Figure 5 of Bantle).
33. In regards to claims 35, 42, and 53, Bantle discloses that each flexible arm comprises an inner ridge facing toward the other flexible arm (see Figure 5 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
432
614
media_image1.png
Greyscale
34. In regards to claims 36, 43, and 54, Bantle discloses that each flexible arm comprises an outer ridge 31.2 facing away from the other flexible arm (Figures 4 and 5).
35. In regards to claim 38, Bantle discloses a spindle 30 comprising: a corresponding and respective first portion sized and shaped to engage a cam 20 (Figure 1); and a corresponding and respective second portion sized and shaped to engage a rotatable component 33 (Figure 1); wherein the spindle has a corresponding and respective length (Figure 1). Bantle fails to disclose that the spindle is one spindle of a plurality of spindles within a spindle kit, with lengths of at least two spindles of the plurality of spindles being different from one another. Rossall teaches a plurality of spindles from which a spindle 4 is chosen, with the plurality of spindles being part of a spindle kit (Page 5, lines 27-30), wherein each spindle of the plurality of spindles has a corresponding and respective length (different or respective lengths for each spindle of the plurality of spindles, Page 5, lines 27-30), and wherein lengths of at least two spindles of the plurality of spindles are different from one another (since Rossall discloses that all the lengths are different, then at least two of the lengths are different, Page 5, lines 27-30). 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 plurality of spindles within a spindle kit from which the spindle is selected, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to enhance the adaptability of the device to doors of different thicknesses.
36. In regards to claims 39 and 50, Rossall teaches that the first portions of the plurality of spindles differ in length (differ in length because the overall length of the spindles are different, and the first portion is part of each spindle); and wherein the second portions of the plurality of spindles are of a single configuration (single configuration being the configuration that allows each spindle to cooperate with handle 12 or 13).
37. In regards to claim 44, Bantle in view of Rossall teaches a lockset kit comprising the spindle kit of claim 38, the lockset kit comprising: a chassis 17 (Bantle), wherein the chassis comprises the cam (Figure 1, with the cam having at least a portion engaging the chassis); and a trim 10, wherein the trim comprises the rotatable component (the rotatable component being of the trim because it is coupled to the trim, Figure 1).
38. In regards to claims 45, 46, and 48, Bantle in view of Rossall teaches that the cam is operable to be coupled with the rotatable component via each individual spindle of the plurality of spindles separately (Figure 1 of Bantle).
39. In regards to claim 47, Bantle discloses a lockset (Figure 1) including a trim 10 and a chassis 17, the lockset comprising: a spindle 30 comprising a corresponding and respective first portion sized and shaped to engage a cam 20 (Figure 1); and a corresponding and respective second portion sized and shaped to engage a rotatable component 33; wherein the spindle has a corresponding and respective length (Figure 1). Bantle fails to disclose a lockset kit with the lockset, with the lockset kit including a plurality of spindles from which the spindle is selected, with the lengths of at least two spindles of the plurality of spindles being different from one another. Rossall teaches a plurality of spindles from which a spindle 4 is chosen, with the plurality of spindles being part of a lockset kit (Page 5, lines 27-30), wherein each spindle of the plurality of spindles has a corresponding and respective length (different or respective lengths for each spindle of the plurality of spindles, Page 5, lines 27-30), and wherein lengths of at least two spindles of the plurality of spindles are different from one another (since Rossall discloses that all the lengths are different, then at least two of the lengths are different, Page 5, lines 27-30). 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 plurality of spindles within a lockset kit from which the spindle is selected, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to enhance the adaptability of the device to doors of different thicknesses.
40. In regards to claim 49, Bantle discloses that the chassis comprises the cam (Figure 1, with the cam having at least a portion engaging the chassis); and wherein the trim comprises the rotatable component (the rotatable component being of the trim because it is coupled to the trim, Figure 1).
41. Claim(s) 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rossall (GB 2616059 A) in view of Bousso (US Pub. No. 2017/0335600). Rossall fails to specify that each spindle of the plurality of spindles comprises a corresponding and respective indicium; and wherein selecting the spindle from the plurality of spindles comprises selecting the spindle from the plurality of spindles based at least in part upon the corresponding and respective indicium. Bousso teaches a plurality of components 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, each including a corresponding and respective indicium (Figures 2A-2E), such that a user can easily distinguish the components from one another. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s invention to include indicium on the plurality of spindles, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to aid a user in distinguishing the spindles from one another.
42. Claim(s) 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bantle (DE 10123315 A) in view of Rossall (GB 2616059 A) as applied to claims 31, 32, 34-36, 38, 39, 41-50, and 52-54 above, and further in view of Bousso (US Pub. No. 2017/0335600). Bantle in view of Rossall fails to specify that each spindle of the plurality of spindles comprises a corresponding and respective indicium; and wherein selecting the spindle from the plurality of spindles comprises selecting the spindle from the plurality of spindles based at least in part upon the corresponding and respective indicium. Bousso teaches a plurality of components 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, each including a corresponding and respective indicium (Figures 2A-2E), such that a user can easily distinguish the components from one another. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s invention to include indicium on the plurality of spindles, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to aid a user in distinguishing the spindles from one another.
43. Claim(s) 37, 40, and 51 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rossall (GB 2616059 A) in view of Kato (GB 2103274).
44. In regards to claim 37, Rossall fails to disclose that the spindle selection kit includes a base portion to which each of the spindles of the plurality of spindles is frangibly coupled; and wherein the method further comprises breaking the selected spindle from the base portion. Kato teaches a plurality of objects 1 frangibly coupled to a base portion 48 or 49, such that one of the objects can be selected and then broken from the base portion for use (Page 6, lines 94-100). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s invention to frangibly couple the plurality of spindles to a base portion, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to aid in manufacturing and in order to keep the plurality of spindles together until use.
45. In regards to claims 40 and 51, Rossall fails to disclose that the spindle/lockset kit further comprises a base portion; and wherein each of the spindles of the plurality of spindles is frangibly coupled to the base portion. Kato teaches a plurality of objects 1 frangibly coupled to a base portion 48 or 49, such that one of the objects can be selected and then broken from the base portion for use (Page 6, lines 94-100). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s invention to frangibly couple the plurality of spindles to a base portion, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to aid in manufacturing and in order to keep the plurality of spindles together until use.
46. Claim(s) 37, 40, and 51 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bantle (DE 10123315 A) in view of Rossall (GB 2616059 A) as applied to claims 31, 32, 34-36, 38, 39, 41-50, and 52-54 above, and further in view of Kato (GB 2103274).
47. In regards to claim 37, Bantle in view of Rossall fails to teach that the spindle selection kit includes a base portion to which each of the spindles of the plurality of spindles is frangibly coupled; and wherein the method further comprises breaking the selected spindle from the base portion. Kato teaches a plurality of objects 1 frangibly coupled to a base portion 48 or 49, such that one of the objects can be selected and then broken from the base portion for use (Page 6, lines 94-100). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s invention to frangibly couple the plurality of spindles to a base portion, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to aid in manufacturing and in order to keep the plurality of spindles together until use.
48. In regards to claims 40 and 51, Bantle in view of Rossall fails to teach that the spindle/lockset kit further comprises a base portion; and wherein each of the spindles of the plurality of spindles is frangibly coupled to the base portion. Kato teaches a plurality of objects 1 frangibly coupled to a base portion 48 or 49, such that one of the objects can be selected and then broken from the base portion for use (Page 6, lines 94-100). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s invention to frangibly couple the plurality of spindles to a base portion, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to aid in manufacturing and in order to keep the plurality of spindles together until use.
Conclusion
49. 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 July 1, 2026
Prosecution Insights