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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 (as well as claims 2-17) of U.S. Patent No. 11555344. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because present claim 1 is original claim 1 from application 16468219 (now patent 11555344). Claim 1 of US 11555344 is original claim 1 of app 16468219 plus details of the interlocking block. As such, present claim 1 is anticipated by claim 1 of US 11555344. Dependent claims 2-17 of US 11555344 simply add further details to anticipatory independent claim 1.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 6, and 15 (as well as claims 2-5, 7-14, and 16-22) of U.S. Patent No. 12291912. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because present claim 1 is original claim 1 from application 16468219 (now patent 11555344). Claim 1 of US 12291912 is most of original claim 1 of app 16468219 plus the interlock block and the details of the lower pivot, claim 6 is most of original claim 1 plus details of the lower pivot and interlock block assembly, and claim 15 is most of original claim 1 plus details of the interlock block assembly. As such, present claim 1 is anticipated by claims 1, 6, and 15 of US 12291912. Dependent claims 2-5, 7-14, and 16-22 of US 12291912 simply add further details to anticipatory independent claims 1, 6, and 15.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the downwardly extending slot of claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). The term extension when applied to a slot with no further definitions (as in the current claims) is unclear as a slot could be considered to extend depth-wise from closed and to open end or depth-wise from open end to closed end (i.e. the depth doesn’t have a direction, unlike, for example, a downwardly or upwardly opening slot) or longitudinally along the length of the slot. See also below 112s, objection may be resolved by amending claim language. No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.84(h)(5) because Figure 5 show(s) modified forms of construction in the same view (appears to show view from below as well as view from the front of the pivot end corner 14-3 and adjacent door 16 area).
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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The description in paragraphs [0060] and [0061] makes the operation of the interlock unclear. Paragraph [0060] states that rotational member 74 of interlock block assembly 68 does achieve slide blocking position 90 until door panel 14 is pivoted away from the home position 56, however, it appears that the interlock does not achieve blocking position until the panel is pivoted. While likely a typo, “does” and “does not” are opposites so the missing word “not” should be present if the interlock block assembly does no achieve the blocking position until the panel is pivoted away from the home position.
Reference numeral 72-3 is described in the specification as a hole, however, it appears from at least figure 10D that the member is a trough or groove. As shown below, the hole 72-3 indicated in exploded perspective view in figure 10C is at an end and, when shown again in the end view of figure 10D, is unobstructed, which from an end of the block would mean and elongated slot or groove extending from one end of the block to the other.
Appropriate correction is required.
PNG
media_image1.png
687
705
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
Claim 1 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “the interlock plate including a downwardly extending guide slot”. As noted with the above drawing objection, the term extend when applied to a slot can mean a variety of things including longitudinal direction of extension, extension from a closed end to an open end, or extension from an open end to a closed end. Claims should be clarified to indicate more specifically how slot extends.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102)a)(1) as being anticipated by EP 2639391 to Schneider (hereinafter Schneider).
Regarding claim 1, the door system is shown in Schneider in figures 1-6 with
a door frame including a header member (1) having a guide rail (rail portion lower U shaped member with portion engaging rollers 33), the guide rail having a front surface, a rear surface, and a lower terminal edge (shown in figures 1 and 3), the guide rail having a central portion that has a notch (14) that extends upwardly from the lower terminal edge between the front surface and the rear surface;
a panel hanger member (portion with rollers 33 and support 32) slidably coupled to the header member (1);
a door panel (2) coupled to the panel hanger member, the door panel (2) having a handle end portion (left portion figure 1, with 5) releasably coupled to the panel hanger member and a pivot end portion (portion to right in figure 1 allowing pivoting) pivotably coupled to the panel hanger member, the panel hanger member and the door panel configured to slide in unison between a closed position and a fully open position along a longitudinal plane (panel is slidable between sliding closed position and open position allowing pivoting, i.e. position adjacent notch 14); and
an interlock plate (5) fixedly mounted to the handle end portion and positioned to extend upwardly from the door panel (2), the interlock plate (5) including a downwardly extending guide slot (as best understood space between 51 and 71) configured to slidably receive the guide rail of the header member, wherein when the door panel (2) is in the fully open position, the interlock plate (5) is aligned with the notch (14) of the guide rail of the header member in a direction orthogonal to the longitudinal plane to facilitate a pivoting of the door panel relative to the panel hanger member away from the longitudinal plane (shown in figure 1).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CATHERINE A KELLY whose telephone number is (571)270-3660. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30am-5:30pm.
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, Anita Coupe can be reached at 571-270-3614. 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.
/CATHERINE A KELLY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619