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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: “M” on line 4 of paragraph 58. 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. 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.
The drawings are objected to because figures 2, 3B, 3C, 4, 4A-4C, 5, 5A-5D, 15B-15C all require the proper cross sectional shading as set forth in MPEP 608.02 IX.
The drawings are objected to because they contain two figures 15B. See sheet 17 of the drawings.
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 paragraph 38 refers to figure 15D, however, figure 15D does not appear in the drawings.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because “first door magnetic element disposed on one of the top end and the bottom end” on line 2 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is unclear how the first door magnetic element can be disposed on the top end when the at least one door magnetic element is secured to the latch side as set forth on line 2 of claim 2. It would appear that the first door magnetic element and the at least one door magnetic element would have to be disposed on the same element of the door. Also see “a second door magnetic element” on line 3 which raises the same clarity issue.
Claim 5 is objected to because “corresponding one” on line 2 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is not entirely clear to what the upper head and the lower sill correspond.
Claim 5 is objected to because “corresponding one” on line 4 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is not entirely clear to what the upper head, the lower sill, and the latch-side jamb correspond.
Claim 9 is objected to because “corresponding one” on line 2 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is not entirely clear to what the top end and the bottom end correspond.
Claim 9 is objected to because “corresponding one” on line 4 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is not entirely clear to what the top end, the bottom end, and the latch side correspond.
Claim 15 is objected to because “a flange portion” on line 2 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is unclear what element of the invention has the flange portion.
Claim 17 is objected to because “a transverse direction” on line 2 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is unclear what the transverse direction is transverse to.
Claim 18 is objected to because “a longitudinal direction and a lateral direction” on lines 2-3 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is unclear what element of the invention defines the longitudinal and lateral directions.
Claim 20 is objected to because “at least first and second door magnetic element” on line 12 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is grammatically incorrect and confusing. Is the applicant setting forth two magnetic elements? If so, it is suggested the applicant change “element” to --elements-- to avoid confusion.
Claim 20 is objected to because “at least first and second frame magnetic element” on lines 14-15 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is grammatically incorrect and confusing. Is the applicant setting forth two magnetic elements? If so, it is suggested the applicant change “element” to --elements-- to avoid confusion.
Claim 20 is objected to because it improperly includes an additional period on line 15.
Claim 20 is objected to because “frame magnetic elements” on lines 18-19 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is unclear to which one of the plurality of frame magnetic elements the applicant is referring.
Claim 20 is objected to because “frame magnetic elements” on line 22 brings the clarity of the claim into question because it is unclear to which one of the plurality of frame magnetic elements the applicant is referring.
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 1-20 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.
Recitations such as “nearly” on line 12 of claim 1 render the claims indefinite because they are relative terms whose meaning cannot be readily ascertained by one with ordinary skill in the art and is not defined by the specification.
Recitations such as “the corresponding” on line 3 of claim 16 render the claims indefinite because they lack antecedent basis.
Recitations such as “the open position” on line 4 of claim 17 render the claims indefinite because they lack antecedent basis.
Recitations such as “the open position” on line 5 of claim 18 render the claims indefinite because they lack antecedent basis.
Recitations such as “smaller first and greater second lateral distances” on lines 13-14 of claim 20 render the claims indefinite because it is unclear what the applicant is attempting to set forth. What defines the first and second distances?
Recitations such as “nearly” on line 20 of claim 20 render the claims indefinite because they are relative terms whose meaning cannot be readily ascertained by one with ordinary skill in the art and is not defined by the specification.
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.
Claims 1-4, 11-16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Napier et al. (US 2024/0068283) in view of Wermers et al. (US 11035169). Napier et al. discloses a door system comprising:
a door frame 12 (fig. 1A) including a vertically extending hinge-side jamb (labeled below), a vertically extending latch-side jamb (labeled below), a horizontally extending upper head (labeled below);
a door 14 (fig. 1A) having a vertically extending hinge side (labeled below) hingedly attached to the hinge-side jamb, a vertically extending latch side (labeled below) abutting the latch-side jamb when the door 14 is in a closed position, a horizontally extending top end (labeled below) abutting the upper head when the door 14 is in the closed position, and a horizontally extending bottom end (labeled below); and
wherein when the door 14 is in an unlatched nearly closed position, the door 14 is subjected to a closure resisting force (at least created by the opposing magnet 20, see lines 1-4 of paragraph 21) to resist movement of the door 14 to the closed position;
wherein the door 14 includes at least one door magnetic element 18 (fig. 1C) and the door frame 12 includes at least one frame magnetic element 16 (fig. 1E) for alignment with the at least one door magnetic element 18 when the door 14 is in the unlatched nearly closed position, such that the at least one door magnetic element 18 and the at least one frame magnetic element 16 provide an attractive force sufficient to overcome the closure resisting force to move the door 14 from the nearly closed position to the closed position.
Although Napier et al. discloses what appears to be a latch element but is silent concerning the type of latch element. Additionally, Napier et al. is silent concerning a lower sill.
However, Wermers et al. discloses a door frame 28 (fig. 3) comprising a horizontally extending lower sill 122 (fig. 3) and a door 24 (fig. 3) having a horizontally extending bottom end (labeled below) abutting the lower sill 122 when the door 24 is in the closed position.
Wermers et al. further discloses a latch element 91 (fig. 9) assembled with the door 24 and extendable from the latch side (labeled below) of the door 24 for latching engagement with a latch recess 93 in the latch-side jamb 32 (fig. 3) when the door 14 is in the closed position.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide Napier et al. with a lower sill, a latch element and a latch recess, all taught by Wermers et al., with a reasonable expectation of success to aid in preventing the intrusion of water at the bottom of the door and to enable the door to be latched in a closed position so that the door can only be opened through the manipulation of the door handles. It should be noted that the door magnetic element 18 of Napier et al., as modified above, would have sufficient strength to move the door 14 from an unlatched nearly closed position to the closed position for latching engagement of the latch element with the latch recess provided by Wermers et al.
With respect to claim 2, the at least one door magnetic element 18 is secured to one of the latch side, the top end (see figures 1A and 1C of Napier et al.), and the bottom end of the door, and the at least one frame magnetic element 16 is secured to a corresponding one of the latch-side jamb, the upper head (see figure 1B Napier et al.), and the lower sill.
With respect to claim 3, the at least one door magnetic element 18 comprises a first door magnetic element 18 disposed on one of the top end (see figures 1A and 1C of Napier et al.) and the bottom end and spaced apart from the hinge side at a first lateral distance (labeled below) and a second door magnetic element 20 disposed on one of the top end (see figures 1A and 1C of Napier et al.), the bottom end, and the latch side and spaced apart from the hinge side at a second lateral distance (labeled below) greater than the first lateral distance.
With respect to claim 4, Napier et al. discloses that a lateral distance between the first 18 and second 20 door magnetic elements is at least 50% of a lateral width of the door 14 as shown in figure 1A.
With respect to claim 11, the at least one door magnetic element 18 is disposed in a cavity within the door as set forth on line 3 of paragraph 18. Note that the embedding of the at least one door magnetic element 18 in the door would require the use of a cavity in the door 14.
With respect to claim 12, the at least one door magnetic element 18 is secured to one of an edge surface, i.e., the top edge surface as shown in figures 1A and 1C, of the door and a rear surface of the door.
With respect to claim 13, the at least one frame magnetic element 16 is disposed in an internal channel within the door frame 12. Note that the embedding of the at least one frame magnetic element 16 in the door frame would require the use of a cavity in the door frame 12.
With respect to claim 14, the at least one frame magnetic element 16 is secured to an exterior surface of the frame 12 since the at least one frame magnetic element 16 is secured to at least a portion of the frame 12 that includes an exterior surface.
With respect to claim 15, the at least one frame magnetic element 16 is disposed on a flange portion (labeled below) extending into alignment with the door 14 as shown in figure 2D.
With respect to claim 16, at least one of the at least one door magnetic element 18 and the at least one frame magnetic element comprises a housing 28 (fig. 2D) secured to a mounting surface (labeled below) of the corresponding one of the door 14 and the door frame and enclosing an interior magnet 24.
With respect to claim 18, the at least one door magnetic element 18 and the at least one frame magnetic element 16 include attractive surfaces, as shown in figures 1B and 1C, that extend in at least one of a longitudinal direction and a lateral direction, such that the attractive surfaces of the at least one door 18 and frame 16 magnetic elements move into facing abutment with each other as the door 14 is transversely rotated from the open position to the nearly closed position. See figure 2D which shows said facing abutment.
Claims 5-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Napier et al. in view of Wermers et al. as applied to claims 1-4, 11-16 and 18 above. Napier et al. discloses the use of one pair of magnets 18 and 20, but is silent concerning additional pairs of magnets.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide Napier et al., as modified above, with additional pairs of magnets 18, 20 and magnet plates 16 with a reasonable expectation of success to ensure the proper operation of doors that are heavy or wide and because it has been held that the mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
With respect to claim 5, the at least one frame magnetic element 16 comprises a first frame magnetic element disposed on a corresponding one of the upper head (as shown in figure 1B of Napier et al.) and the lower sill for alignment with the first door magnetic element 18, and a second frame magnetic element 16 disposed on a corresponding one of the upper head (see annotated figure 1B below), the lower sill, and the latch-side jamb for alignment with the second door magnetic element 18.
With respect to claim 6, the at least one door magnetic element 18 further comprises at least one additional door magnetic element (see annotated figure 1C below) laterally positioned between the first and second door magnetic elements.
With respect to claim 7, the at least one frame magnetic element 16 comprises a first frame magnetic element disposed on one of the upper head (see figure 1B of Napier et al. below) and the lower sill and spaced apart from the hinge side at a first lateral distance (labeled below) and a second frame magnetic element (see annotated figure 1B below) disposed on one of the upper head, the lower sill, and the latch-side jamb and spaced apart from the hinge side at a second lateral distance greater than the first lateral distance.
With respect to claim 8, a lateral distance between the first and second frame magnetic elements is at least 50% of a lateral width of the door as shown in figures 1A and 1B of Napier et al.
With respect to claim 9, the at least one door magnetic element 18 comprises a first door magnetic element 18 disposed on a corresponding one of the top end (as shown in figure 1A of Napier et al.) and the bottom end for alignment with the first frame magnetic element 16, and a second door magnetic element 18 (note that the second magnetic element is from the duplication of parts) disposed on a corresponding one of the top end (as shown in figure 1A of Napier et al.), the bottom end, and the latch side for alignment with the second frame magnetic element (as shown in the annotated figure 1B of Napier et al. below).
With respect to claim 10, the duplication of the additional pairs of magnets 18, 20 and magnet plates 16 would include the provision of at least one additional frame magnetic element laterally positioned between the first and second frame magnetic elements.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Napier et al. in view of Wermers et al. as applied to claims 1-4, 11-16 and 18 above and further in view of Kennon (US 4155576). Napier et al. discloses that the at least one door magnetic element 18 and the at least one frame magnetic element 16 include attractive surfaces, as shown in figures 1B and 1C, that extend in a transverse direction, such that the attractive surfaces of the at least one door 18 and frame 16 magnetic elements move into a position facing each other as the door 14 is transversely rotated from the open position to the nearly closed position.
Napier et al., as modified above, is silent concerning the attractive surfaces of the at least one door 18 and frame 16 magnetic elements moving into sliding abutment with each other as the door is transversely rotated from the open position to the nearly closed position.
However, Kennon discloses at least one door magnetic element 30 and the at least one frame magnetic element 20 include attractive surfaces (not numbered, but shown in figure 2) that extend in a transverse direction, such that the attractive surfaces of the at least one door 30 and frame 20 magnetic elements move into sliding abutment with each other, as shown in figure 2, as a door 11 is transversely rotated from the open position to the nearly closed position.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide Napier et al., as modified above, with magnetic elements, as taught by Kennon, with a reasonable expectation of success to increase attractive forces between the magnets when the door is in the closed position.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Napier et al. in view of Wermers et al. as applied to claims 1-4, 11-16 and 18 above. Napier et al., as modified above, discloses that the at least one door magnetic element 18 and the at least one frame magnetic element 16 provide an attractive force when the at least one door magnetic element 18 and the at least one frame magnetic element 16 are spaced apart by a distance as shown in figure 2D, but is silent concerning the specific distance the at least one door magnetic element 18 and the at least one frame magnetic element 16 are spaced apart.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art is expected to routinely experiment with parameters so as to ascertain the optimum or workable ranges for a particular use. Accordingly, it would have been no more than an obvious matter of engineering design choice, as determined through routine experimentation and optimization, for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to space the at least one door magnetic element 18 and the at least one frame magnetic element 16 apart by a distance of between about 1 inch and about 2 inches with a reasonable expectation of success to accommodate the use of weatherstripping between the door and the door frame and to allow for manufacturing tolerances.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Napier et al. (US 2024/0068283) in view of Wermers et al. (US 11035169). Napier et al. discloses a door system comprising:
a door frame 12 (fig. 1A) including a vertically extending hinge-side jamb (labeled below), a vertically extending latch-side jamb (labeled below), a horizontally extending upper head (labeled below);
a door 14 (fig. 1A) having a vertically extending hinge side (labeled below) hingedly attached to the hinge-side jamb, a vertically extending latch side (labeled below) abutting the latch-side jamb when the door is in a closed position, a horizontally extending top end (labeled below) abutting the upper head when the door 14 is in the closed position, and a horizontally extending bottom end (labeled below); and
wherein the door 14 includes at least a first door magnetic element 18 (fig. 1C) disposed on at least one of the top end (as shown in figures 1A and 1C), the bottom end, and the latch side, and the door frame 12 includes at least a first frame magnetic element 16 disposed on corresponding ones of the upper head (as shown in figure 1B), the lower sill, and the latch-side jamb for alignment with the first door magnetic element 18 at least when the door 14 is in the closed position;
wherein when the door 14 is in a first, partially open position, the first door 18 and frame 16 magnetic elements apply a first magnetic attractive force to assist rotation of the door 14 towards an unlatched, nearly closed position; and
wherein when the door is in the unlatched, nearly closed position, each of the door 18 and frame 16 magnetic elements apply a combined magnetic attractive force to cause the door 14 to move from the unlatched, nearly closed position to the closed position.
Although Napier et al. discloses what appears to be a latch element but is silent concerning the type of latch element. Additionally, Napier et al. is silent concerning a lower sill, first and second door magnetic elements, and first and second frame magnetic elements.
However, Wermers et al. discloses a door frame 28 (fig. 3) comprising a horizontally extending lower sill 122 (fig. 3) and a door 24 (fig. 3) having a horizontally extending bottom end (labeled below) abutting the lower sill 122 when the door 24 is in the closed position.
Wermers et al. further discloses a latch element 91 (fig. 9) assembled with the door 24 and extendable from the latch side (labeled below) of the door 24 for latching engagement with a latch recess 93 in the latch-side jamb 32 (fig. 3) when the door 14 is in the closed position.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide Napier et al. with a lower sill, a latch element and a latch recess, all taught by Wermers et al., with a reasonable expectation of success to aid in preventing the intrusion of water at the bottom of the door and to enable the door to be latched in a closed position so that the door can only be opened through the manipulation of the door handles. It should be noted that the door magnetic element 18 of Napier et al., as modified above, would have sufficient strength to move the door 14 from an unlatched nearly closed position to the closed position for latching engagement of the latch element with the latch recess provided by Wermers et al.
Additionally, Napier et al. discloses the use of one pair of magnets 18 and 20, but is silent concerning additional pairs of magnets.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide Napier et al., as modified above, with additional pairs of magnets 18, 20 and magnet plates 16 with a reasonable expectation of success to ensure the proper operation of doors that are heavy or wide and because it has been held that the mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. It should be noted that the first and second door magnetic elements and the first and second frame magnetic elements will be at smaller first and greater second lateral distances from the hinge side as illustrated in annotated figure 1B below.
PNG
media_image1.png
1656
1114
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
1662
1118
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
1658
1114
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
1648
1112
media_image4.png
Greyscale
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 GREGORY J STRIMBU whose telephone number is (571)272-6836. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-4:30 Monday-Friday.
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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at 571-270-5616. 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.
/GREGORY J STRIMBU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights