Ex Parte Nguyen et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Dec 29, 2017

13962597 (P.T.A.B. Dec. 29, 2017)

United States Patent and Trademark Office
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O.Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
13/962,597 08/08/2013 David T. Nguyen 021873-000208 2891
24239 7590 01/03/2018
MOORE & VAN AT .TEN PLLC
P.O. BOX 13706
3015 Carrington Mill Boulevard, Suite 400
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
EXAMINER
GALL, LLOYD A
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3673
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
01/03/2018 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address(es):
iplaw @ mvalaw. com
u sptomail @ m valaw. com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte DAVID T. NGUYEN and DAMON J. LENK
Appeal 2017-004163
Application 13/962,5971
Technology Center 3600
Before JOSEPH A. FISCHETTI, MICHAEL C. ASTORINO, and
TARA L. HUTCHINGS, Administrative Patent Judges.
ASTORINO, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
The Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Examiner’s
decision rejecting claims 1-8. We have jurisdiction over the appeal under
35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We AFFIRM.
1 According to the Appellants, “[t]he real party in interest is Corbin
Russwin, Inc.” Br. 1.
Appeal 2017-004163
Application 13/962,5971
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Claimed Subject Matter
Claim 1, the sole independent claim, is representative of the subject
matter on appeal and is reproduced below with added emphasis.
1. A locking mechanism for use in a lock assembly including a
lock body having an inner surface defining a bore having a
longitudinal axis and a longitudinal slot extending along at least
a portion of the inner surface, and a key plug defining a keyway
extending longitudinally from one end, a plurality of
longitudinally spaced pin bores extending from an outer surface
of the key plug and opening into the keyway, a longitudinal
groove defined in the outer surface of the key plug contiguous
with the plurality of pin bores, and a longitudinal slot defined in
the outer surface of the key plug and opening into the plurality
of pin bores, the key plug rotatably disposed in the bore of the
lock body, the locking mechanism comprising:
a plurality of pins, each of the plurality of pins having a
recess formed therein and adapted to be disposed in one of the
plurality of pin bores in the key plug for reciprocal movement
along their axes and rotational movement about their axes
relative to the key plug;
an elongated spring member for simultaneously engaging
and biasing the plurality of pins toward the keyway, the spring
member adapted to be disposed in the longitudinal groove
defined in the outer surface of the key plug;
a locking bar adapted to be disposed in the longitudinal
slot in the key plug for movement between a first position where
the locking bar is adapted to be received in the longitudinal slot
in the lock body and a second position where at least a portion of
the locking bar is received in the recesses in the plurality of pins,
the locking bar prevented from moving to the second position
unless the plurality of pins are in a predetermined position where
the recesses are aligned for receiving the at least a portion of the
locking bar; and
means for biasing the locking bar to the first position,
wherein upon insertion of a proper key in the keyway the
plurality of pins are moved axially along or rotated about their
2
Appeal 2017-004163
Application 13/962,5971
axes for aligning the recesses in the plurality of pins with the
locking bar so the key can rotate the key plug and the locking bar
cams against the longitudinal slot in the lock body to move the
locking bar into the longitudinal slot in the key plug and allow
rotation of the key plug.
Rejections
I. Claims 1-8 stand rejected on the ground of non-statutory
double patenting as unpatentable over claims 1-14 of Nguyen et al.
(US 8,635,022 B2; issued Jan. 21, 2014) (“Nguyen”).
II. Claims 1—4, 6, and 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Widen (SE 432277 B, published Mar. 26, 1984)
(“Widen ’277”), Widen (US 7,810,364 B2, issued Oct. 12, 2010)
(“Widen 364”), Johnstone (US 2,949,762, issued Aug. 23, 1960), and
Quillen (US 2,739,473, issued Mar. 27, 1956).
III. Claim 5 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Widen ’277, Widen 364, Johnstone, Quillen, and Dolev
(US 5,682,779, issued Nov. 4, 1997).
IV. Claim 7 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Widen ’277, Widen 364, Johnstone, Quillen, and Spain et
al. (US 3,722,240, issued Mar. 27, 1973) (“Spain”).
ANALYSIS
Rejection I
The Appellants assert that the rejection of claims 1-8 on the ground of
non-statutory double patenting is overcome because a terminal disclaimer
was filed on August 14, 2004. Br. 4. However, the Examiner explains that a
terminal disclaimer filed on August 14, 2004 was not received and that a
3
Appeal 2017-004163
Application 13/962,5971
terminal disclaimer filed on August 4, 2014 was not approved. Ans. 6; see
Advisory Action, mailed on August 20, 2014. Thereafter, the Examiner has
maintained the non-statutory double patenting rejection. See Ans. 6.
Thus, we sustain the Examiner’s rejection of claims 1-8 on the ground
of non-statutory double patenting.
Rejections II IV
The Appellants argue that Johnstone and Quillen fail to “disclose[]
spring member disposed in the key plug for simultaneously engaging and
biasing a plurality of pins in the key plug toward a keyway as presently
claimed.” Br. 5. In response, the Examiner explains that the Appellants’
argument does not specifically address the teachings of Johnstone and
Quillen as applied in the rejection of claim 1. Ans. 7. The rejection is based
on the conclusion that:
it would have been obvious to modify the pin bores 6 of
[Widen ’277], such that they are closed by a one-piece spring
mounted within an elongated slot in the key plug for biasing the
tumbler pins, in view of the respective teachings of Johnstone
and Quillen, to simplify assembly of the lock components of
[Widen ’277],
Ans. 7; see Final Act. 4-5; Widen ’277, Figs. 1, 4. We agree with the
Examiner and adopt the Examiner’s response at pages 6-8 of the Answer as
our own.
The Appellants’ argument appears to be based on an assertion that
Johnstone and Quillen do not disclose a spring member, rather a spring plate
which “functions to close the outer end of the bore openings in the lock body
and to retain the pins and springs in the lock body and key plug,” which is
similar to the spring plate 56 as described in the Appellants’ Specification.
4
Appeal 2017-004163
Application 13/962,5971
Br. 4. To the extent that the Appellants elaborate on this assertion, the
Appellants appear to focus on Johnstone. See Br. 4-5. Specifically, the
Appellants assert that Johnstone’s spring member 84 “functions as a
retaining means for the tumbler springs 94.” Br. 4-5. This assertion is not
persuasive of Examiner error, because it fails to explain why one of ordinary
skill in the art would not understand Johnstone’s spring portion 84 to be an
elongated spring “mounted within a longitudinal slot in the outside surface
of the key plug,” as found by the Examiner. Final Act. 4 (citing Johnstone,
Fig. 9).
As for Quillen, the Appellants appear to assert that “Quillen[’s] spring
member [33] only functions to hold the pins 23 in their bores” and do not
bias pins 23 inwardly because “lock body 10 holds the fingers 34 of the
spring 33 from advancing inwardly” and pins 23 are drawn inwardly by
spring 21. Br. 5 (citing Quillen Fig. 6). This assertion is not persuasive of
Examiner error. We fail to understand from Quillen that lock body 10 holds
fingers 34 of the spring 33 from advancing inwardly. And, although pins 23
are drawn inwardly by spring 21 that does not suggest that spring 33, 34
does not also bias pins 23 inwardly. See Quillen, Fig. 6, col. 2,11. 31^18.
As such, we determine that the one of ordinary skill in the art would
understand that projections 34 of Quillen’s spring 33 bias tumbler pins 23 —
and dogs 27-31 — inwardly (i.e., downwardly) towards the keyway of the
lock. See Ans. 7.
Thus, we sustain the Examiner’s rejection of independent claim 1 and
dependent claims 2—4, 6, and 8. We also sustain the rejections of dependent
claims 5 and 7, which are not separately argued.
5
Appeal 2017-004163
Application 13/962,5971
DECISION
We AFFIRM the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1-8.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). See 37 C.F.R.
§ 1.136(a)(l)(iv).
AFFIRMED
6