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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Each instance of the word “forend” should be changed to “fore-end,” on Page 1, line 17, and Page 3, line 12, the reference to a US publication “2021131144” should be changed to “2021/0131144,” and on Page 2, lines 5 and 6, the reference to the claims should be removed.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 16, 18, 25-28, 30, and 32 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In regards to claim 16, line 10, the phrase “a deactivated position where” should be changed to “a deactivated position, in which,” and in line 11, the phrase “an activated position where” should be changed to “an activated position, in which.”
In regards to claim 18, line 2, the word “for” should be removed.
In regards to claim 25, line 2, the phrase “between the extended auxiliary position and the retracted auxiliary position” should be inserted after the phrase “relative to the base structure.”
In regards to claim 26, lines 1 and 2, the phrase “a forend” should be changed to “a fore-end.”
In regards to claim 27, line 2, the phrase “the base structure” should be changed to “the fore-end.”
In regards to claim 28, the claim should read as follows after the preamble: “wherein the activation of the sensor by the trigger member occurs when the trigger member contacts the sensor in the activated position.”
In regards to claim 30, lines 1 and 2, the phrase “at least one of” should be removed.
In regards to claim 32, line 1, the phrase “a frame including” should be changed to “the system comprising a frame including.”
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 16-32 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 16, it is unclear whether the engagement of the bolt and the auxiliary member with the strike plate is required by the claim, since the claim recites “for engagement.” For examination purposes, the claim will be examined as requiring the strike plate.
In regards to claim 18, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear. Specifically, it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase “for being engaged” is required by the claim. The prevention of movement of the bolt is positively recited in claim 16, and therefore, without the positive recitation of the blocking bolt surface being engaged by the trigger member, the prevention of movement of the bolt cannot occur. For examination purposes, the claim has been examined without the word “for.” See claim objections above.
In regards to claim 25, the relationship between the movement of the auxiliary member relative to the base member, as recited in claim 25, and the movement of the auxiliary member between the extended auxiliary position and the retracted auxiliary position, as recited in claim 16, is unclear from the claim language. It is understood from the specification that the movement of the auxiliary member relative to the base member is movement of the auxiliary member between the extended auxiliary position and the retracted auxiliary position, and will be examined as such. See claim objections above.
In regards to claim 26, it appears that the word “forend” is meant to refer to the term “fore-end” defined by Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary as “the anterior end or part,” and therefore, the claim will be examined as reciting “a fore-end.” See claim objections above.
In regards to claim 27, since claim 26 defines the base structure as “a fore-end” and claim 27 depends from claim 26, then claim 26 should refer to the fore-end and not the base structure and will be examined as such. See claim objections above.
In regards to claim 28, the relationship between the sensor being contacted by the trigger member, as recited in claim 28, and the activation of the sensor by the trigger member, as recited in claim 16, is unclear from the claim language. It is understood from the specification that the activation of the sensor by the trigger member occurs when the trigger member contacts the sensor in the activated position, and will be examined as such. See claim objections above.
In regards to claim 30, the phrase “the at least one spring comprises at least one of” suggests that the device includes more springs than the recited bolt spring and auxiliary spring, when it is understood from the specification that the device only includes the bolt spring and the auxiliary spring. For examination purposes, the claim will be examined without the phrase “at least one of.” See claim objections above.
In regards to claims 17, 19, 20-24, 29, 31, and 32, these claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) because the claims depend from claim 16.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 16-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (US-6186562) in view of Peterson (US-3890608).
In regards to claim 16, Huang discloses a lock device for installation in an access member 1, the lock device comprising: a base structure 15; a bolt 31 movable relative to the base structure between an extended bolt position (Figure 2) for engagement with a frame 41 and a retracted bolt position for disengagement from the strike opening (Col. 2, lines 41-56), the bolt having a bolt structure (structure having surface against which trigger member 22 abuts in Figure 3 and portion 321, as a unit); an auxiliary member 24 movable relative to the base structure between an extended auxiliary position (Figure 2) and a retracted auxiliary position (Figure 3) for engagement with the frame, the auxiliary member having an auxiliary structure 232; and a trigger member 22 movable between a deactivated position (Figure 2) and an activated position (Figure 3), the trigger member being forced towards the activated position (forced by spring 25, Col. 2, line 57 – Col. 3, line 15); wherein the bolt structure and the auxiliary structure are arranged to allow the trigger member to move from the deactivated position to the activated position when the bolt adopts the extended bolt position and the auxiliary member adopts the retracted auxiliary position (Figure 3); wherein the bolt structure is arranged to prevent the trigger member from moving from the deactivated position to the activated position when the bolt adopts the retracted bolt position (the bolt moves relative to the trigger member from the position in Figure 2 to the right in Figure 2 when retracted, and therefore, the bolt structure is designed to prevent or avoid actuation of the trigger member from its state in Figure 3); and wherein the auxiliary structure is arranged to prevent the trigger member from moving from the deactivated position to the activated position when the auxiliary member adopts the extended auxiliary position (the auxiliary structure prevents the trigger member from pivoting to the position in Figure 3 by interacting with elements 222 of the trigger member, as shown in Figure 2).
Huang fails to disclose that the frame includes a strike having a strike opening and a strike plate with which the bolt and the auxiliary member engage, and Huang fails to disclose a sensor, which is not activated by the trigger member when the trigger member is in the deactivated position, and which is activated by the trigger member when the trigger member is in the activated position. Peterson teaches a lock device having a bolt 34, an auxiliary member 38, and a trigger member 44, with the bolt engaging with a strike opening (Figure 3) of a strike 12 on a frame 4 when the bolt is in an extended position (Figure 3) and the auxiliary member engaging with a strike plate (plate at reference character 12 in Figure 3) of the strike when in a retracted auxiliary position (Figure 3). Peterson further teaches a sensor 82, which is not activated by the trigger member when the trigger member is in a deactivated position (the sensor is considered to be not activated since the sensor is held in its open position, Figure 4 and Col. 5, lines 7-16), and which is activated by the trigger member when the trigger member is in an activated position (the sensor is considered to be activated since the sensor is closed, Figure 3 and Col. 5, lines 7-16). 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 strike with a strike plate and a strike opening and a sensor, with reasonable expectation of success, since it is known in the art to utilize strikes on frames cooperating with bolts on doors and since the use of a sensor would provide a means for monitoring the position of the bolt.
In regards to claim 17, Huang discloses that the trigger member and the bolt structure are arranged to cooperate to prevent movement of the bolt from the extended bolt position to the retracted bolt position when the trigger member is in the activated position (Figure 3).
In regards to claim 18, Huang discloses that the bolt structure comprises a blocking bolt surface (surface against which the trigger member abuts in Figure 3) substantially transverse to a movement direction of the bolt (movement of the bolt to the left and right in Figure 3) being engaged by the trigger member in the activated position to prevent movement of the bolt from the extended bolt position to the retracted bolt position (Figure 3).
In regards to claim 19, Huang discloses that the trigger member comprises a blocking trigger surface (surface of end of trigger member that abuts against the blocking bolt surface in Figure 3) oriented substantially transverse to the movement direction and arranged to be engaged by the blocking bolt surface when the trigger member adopts the activated position (Figure 3).
In regards to claim 20, Huang discloses that the bolt comprises a bolt plate 32 including the bolt structure (Figures 2 and 3), wherein the auxiliary member comprises an auxiliary plate 23 including the auxiliary structure (Figure 1), and wherein the auxiliary plate is substantially parallel with the bolt plate (Figures 2 and 3).
In regards to claim 21, Huang discloses the bolt plate and the auxiliary plate are parallel with a movement direction of the bolt (movement left to right in Figures 2 and 3).
In regards to claim 22, Huang discloses that the trigger member is pivotable between the deactivated position and the activated position (Figures 2 and 3).
In regards to claim 23, Huang discloses that the lock device comprises a bolt retractor 21 arranged to be driven by manual actuation of an actuation member 13 and arranged such that movement of the bolt retractor causes the bolt to move from the extended bolt position to the retracted bolt position (Col. 2, lines 21-56 and Col. 3, lines 16-40), wherein the bolt retractor comprises a detrigger surface (surface of portion 211 that cooperates with plate 32 coupled to the bolt) arranged to transmit a movement of the bolt retractor to a movement of the trigger member from the activated position to the deactivated position (the detrigger surface causes movement of the bolt to the right in Figure 3 to the retracted position when the actuation member is rotated, after rotation of the actuation member, the bolt and the auxiliary member return to their extended positions in Figure 2, thereby causing movement of the trigger member from the activated position in Figure 3 to the deactivated position in Figure 2).
In regards to claim 24, Huang discloses that the trigger member comprises a trigger edge arranged to cooperate with the bolt structure, the auxiliary structure, and the detrigger surface (the trigger edge being the edge or point facing upward in Figures 2 and 3 of portions 222 of the trigger member that either directly or indirectly cooperate with the bolt structure, the auxiliary structure, and the detrigger surface).
In regards to claim 25, Huang discloses that the auxiliary member is movable relative to the base structure between the extended auxiliary position and the retracted auxiliary position in parallel with movements of the bolt between the extended bolt position and the retracted bolt position (Figures 2 and 3).
In regards to claim 26, Huang discloses that the base structure comprises a fore-end (Figures 1-3).
In regards to claim 27, Huang discloses that the bolt and the auxiliary member protrude from the fore-end in the extended bolt position and in the extended auxiliary position, respectively (Figure 2).
In regards to claim 28, Peterson teaches that the activation of the sensor by the trigger member occurs when the trigger member contacts the sensor in the activated position (the sensor is contacted by the trigger member to close the sensor, Figure 3 and Col. 5, lines 7-16).
In regards to claim 29, Huang discloses at least one spring 25 arranged to force the trigger member towards the activated position (Col. 3, lines 3-15).
In regards to claim 30, Huang discloses that the at least one spring comprises an auxiliary spring, arranged to force the auxiliary member from the retracted auxiliary position to the extended auxiliary position (Figures 2 and 3). The examiner would like to note that since the bolt spring and the auxiliary spring were recited in the alternative, i.e. using the term “or,” then the claim only requires one of the springs.
In regards to claim 31, Huang discloses that the bolt and the auxiliary member are configured such the auxiliary member is forced by the bolt from the extended auxiliary position to the retracted auxiliary position by movement of the bolt from the extended bolt position to the retracted bolt position (the bolt forces the auxiliary member from the extended position in Figure 2 by pushing against hook 231 of plate 23 coupled to the auxiliary member when the bolt is moved to the retracted position by the actuation of elements 21 and 13).
In regards to claim 32, Huang in view of Peterson teaches a system comprising a lock device according to Claim 16, a frame including the strike (frame 41 of Huang and frame 4 of Peterson), and the access member movable relative to the frame, wherein the lock device is installed in the access member (access member 1 of Huang and Figure 1 of Peterson).
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 September 24, 2026
