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 .
Applicant’s filed name is incorrectly misspelled as “Otls Elevator Company”. Please fix this typo.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. CN 202510037763.1, filed on January 9, 2025.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because drawings are too faded and hard to read. 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 Objections
Claim1 objected to because of the following informalities: "in" should be corrected to "is" in the line "the rolling body in configured to engage in rolling friction" . Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao et al. (US 2023/0033794 A1) in view of Macareno et al. (US 10,793,396 B1) . Mao et al. discloses:
Re claim 1,
a lock hook assembly (Fig. 1) for a door hanging plate assembly of a hall door lock device of an elevator system (Fig. 5, Par. [0024])
wherein the lock hook assembly (Fig. 1) comprises a lock hook (130) configured to move along with the movement of a first hall door (Par. [0009], Claim 1) of the elevator system and a latch (140) fixedly arranged or configured to move along with the movement of a second hall door of the elevator system (Claim 2)
and the latch comprises a main body portion (140) and an inclined portion inclined relative to the main body portion (Fig. 3), inclined portion seen to the right of 140), wherein the main body portion has an accommodating space (141) formed therein
Mao et al. (US 2023/ 0033794) does not disclose:
Re claim 1,
a rolling body disposed on the hook portion
during the closing process of the first hall door and the second hall door, the rolling body in configured to engage in rolling friction with the inclined portion, and in the closed state of the first hall door and the second hall door, the hook portion is configured to engage with the accommodating space.
However, Macareno et al. (US 10,793,396 B1) does disclose:
Re claim 1,
Macareno discloses a lock hook assembly wherein the lock hook is configured with a hook portion and a rolling body (Fig. 6, 200) disposed on the hook portion
The lock hook assembly of Macareno during the closing process of the first hall door and the second hall door, the rolling body in configured to engage in rolling friction with the inclined portion, and in the closed state of the first hall door and the second hall door, the hook portion is configured to engage with the accommodating space (Fig. 11).
Regarding claim 1, Mao et al. modified by Macareno et al. it would have been obvious to include the addition of a rolling body disposed on the hook portion of the assembly to guide the movement of the hook into the latch when closing as taught by Macareno et al. This prevents friction between two flat surfaces of the original hook and latch allowing for a smoother closing function and reduces the wear on the hook itself allowing for less maintenance over time. The roller moving along the latch body would have been obvious as a variation of where the roller is located as the function of the roller allowing for smoother closing and less wear on the parts is the same. Additionally, the roller can be used to prevent further rotation than what is necessary and safe for the assembly (Macareno Col. 6, Lines 23-26).
Mao et al. as modified by Macareno et al. as discussed above, is incorporated herein. Mao further discloses:
Re claim 2, the lock hook assembly according to claim 1, wherein the lock hook is configured as a rotatable lock hook (Claim 2, Par. [0007]); during the closing process of the first hall door and the second hall door, the inclined portion engages in rolling friction with the rolling body, causing the lock hook to rotate, and causing the hook portion to engage with the accommodating space via one side of the main body portion (Par. [0007]).
Re claim 4, the lock hook assembly according to claim 1, wherein the accommodating space (141) is configured to be open toward one side of the main body portion (Fig. 3)
Re claim 5, the lock hook assembly according to claim 1, wherein the lock hook is provided with an operating device for disengaging the lock hook from the latch (Par. [0017]).
Re claim 7, a door hanging plate assembly for a hall door lock device of an elevator system, wherein the door hanging plate assembly comprises a first door hanging plate (110) and a second door hanging plate (180), wherein the first door hanging plate is used for fixed connection with the first hall door, and the second door hanging plate is used for fixed connection with the second hall door (Fig. 5); the door hanging plate assembly further comprises the lock hook assembly according to claim 1, wherein the lock hook is connected to the first door hanging plate, and the latch is connected to a guide rail assembly of the hall door lock device or the second door hanging plate (Fig. 5, Par. [0035]).
Re claim 8, The door hanging plate assembly according to claim 7, wherein the lock hook is provided with a through-hole, wherein a second rolling bearing is arranged inside the through-hole, and the lock hook is rotatably connected to the first door hanging plate via the second rolling bearing.
Re claim 9, the door hanging plate assembly according to claim 7, wherein the latch comprises a support portion (Fig. 3, 172, 176, the support portion is what the bracket is being connected to) bent and extended relative to the main body portion, wherein the support portion is fixedly connected with the guide rail assembly or the second door hanging plate (Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 2, Mao et al. teaches a rotatable lock hook rotating to engage with a latch space to lock and unlock elevator doors, Mao et al. in view of Macareno et al. explains the use of a roller or rolling body disposed on the hook portion to allow for smoother transitions between unlocked and lock and reducing wear as explained in regard to claim 1.
Mao et al. does not disclose:
Re claim 6, the lock hook assembly according to claim 1, wherein the rolling body is a roller, a rolling pin, or a first rolling bearing.
However, Macareno et al. does disclose:
Re claim 6, the lock hook assembly according to claim 1, wherein the rolling body is a roller, a rolling pin, or a first rolling bearing (Fig. 6, 200). See motivation for claim 1 above.
Claim(s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao et al. (US 2023/0033794 A1) and Macareno et al. (US 1079339 B1) in further view of Arai et al. (US 2014/0158470 A1).
Mao et al. as modified by Macareno does disclose:
Re claim 10, a hall door lock device for an elevator system, wherein the hall door lock device comprises the door hanging plate assembly according to claim 7 and, wherein the first door hanging plate and the second door hanging plate can be rollably connected with the guide rail assembly (Par. [0040], door rollers being rollably connected to the assembly)
Re claim 11, an elevator system (Abstract)
Mao et al. as modified by Macareno does not disclose:
Re claim 10, a spring and a guide rail assembly, where one end of the spring is fixed to the guide rail assembly and the other end is connected to the second door hanging plate, and the spring is configured to provide a spring force to the closing of the first hall door and the second hall door.
However, Arai et al. discloses:
Re claim 10, a spring (Fig. 4, 20) and a guide rail assembly (8, guide rail assembly is what holds the doors and spring), one end of the spring is fixed to the guide rail assembly and the other end is connected to the second door hanging plate, and the spring is configured to provide a spring force to the closing of the first hall door and the second hall door (Par. [0035]).
Re claim 11,wherein the elevator system comprises the hall door lock device according to claim 10.
Regarding claim 10, while Fig. 5 in Mao et al. does not distinctly point out a spring, Mao et al. modified by Macareno et al. further modified by Arai et al. describes the use of a spring serves to function as a force that helps facilitate an opposite force to either the opening or closing of a door (Par. [0037]), wherein it is compressed when opening providing a force to help in closing the door. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated a spring to aid in the opening and closing of doors, as taught by Arai et al., as it is a simple and common way of providing force in a single planal direction resulting from movement in said direction.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of claim 10 with the elevator system taught by Mao modified by Macareno teaches the use of a spring in a hall door lock device operating in an elevator system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AUSTIN ZIJIAN XU whose telephone number is (571)270-7755. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday (8:00 am - 5:00 pm), Every Odd Friday (8:00 am - 4:00 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, Robert Hodge can be reached at 571-272-2097. 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.
/A.Z.X./Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/ROBERT W HODGE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights