Supports: cabinet structure – Show-case type – With compartments
Reexamination Certificate
2001-10-26
2004-10-12
Hansen, James O. (Department: 3637)
Supports: cabinet structure
Show-case type
With compartments
C312S114000, C312S138100, C312S319700
Reexamination Certificate
active
06802576
ABSTRACT:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates to a protected display case for securely viewing and storing items such as jewelry, cameras, and guns.
2. Description of the Prior Art
A large variety of valuable items are routinely placed on display in stores to attract customers. Jewelry is one of the better known examples of such items. In the case of jewelry, and particularly for expensive jewelry, the display of the items creates a number of serious issues.
First, there is the issue of control over the items. If expensive jewelry is on display, the owner wants to be sure that the jewelry cannot be accessed by anyone other than authorized store personnel. Even then, the owner may want access to the jewelry by store personnel restricted to certain times and under certain conditions.
Another issue concerns moving the jewelry. More expensive jewelry may be moved from the display case to a vault for storage when the store is not open for business. In these situations there is the possibility of damage to the jewelry in the transportation process. Also, there is the chance that some jewelry may be lost and/or mis-marked during transport. Finally, it takes time to move the jewelry from the vault to the display and vice versa. The store must usually be closed during the setup process and the employees are being paid for their time while there are no customers in the store.
The last, but certainly not the least, concern is for security. Should a robbery occur, the items need to be safe even when on display.
In response to the need for a secure display case, a number of solutions have been developed. Some display cases incorporate break resistant glass, or another type of transparent material, so that the items on display can be viewed while still being more secure than with just plain glass viewing windows. While this is an improvement, it does not stop access to the item from behind the display case where the items are typically removed.
Another innovation was the use of a folding shield as identified in U.S. Pat. No. 4,929,862 to Hamilton et al (“Hamilton”). In that patent, a flexible cover can be drawn over the items. The cover is comprised of a tamper resistant material and thus makes it difficult for a potential thief to access the items. There are two disadvantages to this solution.
First, the cover is moved manually. During operating hours, the cover is not in position to protect the items on display. If a robbery occurs during this time, the employees will not have the opportunity to put the cover in place.
Secondly, the narrow front panel that is intended to add security also narrows the range of view for the items on display. It is of critical importance to have the merchandise on display visible as much as possible to potential customers. When that range is diminished, then to some degree sales must suffer. That is an unacceptable consequence especially in the jewelry business.
Another idea combines a shield and a moving display tray. In U.S. Pat. No. 5,733,021 to O'Neil et al (“O'Neil I”) a solid shield and a scissor type moving apparatus are used. First, the scissor device moves the display items from a viewing position in the top of the display case to a more secure position in the bottom of the display case. Once the items are in the bottom of the display case, a solid shield can be inserted between the top and bottom sections to prevent access to the items from the top of the case. This has two disadvantages.
First, the scissor mechanism is not a reliable or stable means for moving the display tray. As the scissor mechanism raises the tray, the ends of the arms of the scissors on the tray come closer together. As a result, the support for the tray is not at the ends where it is most effective, but somewhere between the middle and the end. Therefore, the tray is not as stable as it would be if there were supports at the opposing ends.
In the case where the scissor arms are fully extended vertically then the display tray is supported at virtually two points. This is very unstable. In the case where the arms are about horizontal, it is difficult to operate the scissor and to raise the display case. This is due to the fact that the scissor can fail to operate when the arms are fully horizontal. In this position, more force is required to move the arms than if the arms were in a more vertical position. It is a characteristic of the scissor device.
Secondly, the movement of the tray does not occur in a steady or failure free manner. With only one motor being used, all of the joints in the scissor device tend not to respond to the forces involved at the same time. This makes for an inconsistent movement of the display tray that has its own disadvantages. Due to the nature of the scissor apparatus, there is no guarantee that the tray will be in the same horizontal position in the raised and lowered positions each time it is operated. This affects the esthetic character of the items on display since the display tray may not be flush with the rest of the display area. It is also likely that if a item, such as a piece of jewelry, were dislodged from its display position and fell into the bottom part of the case, then the scissor mechanism may crush or mangle the item as the scissor mechanism operates. In the case of valuable jewelry, this could be a disaster.
Lastly, the cover has the same disadvantages as found in the Hamilton patent. In particular, the cover in the “O'Neil I” patent must be manually inserted. When there is a robbery attempt in progress, the employees will not have the time or opportunity to first lower the tray and then manually install the shield. This is compounded by the fact that neither the Hamilton nor “O'Neil I” patents claims a break resistant viewing material in conjunction with the security systems. Thus, when the security divider is not in place, there is an opportunity for the display window to be shattered and the items on display removed.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,791,749 to O'Neil et al (“O'Neil II”) is drawn to a secured display case, but also suffers from the infirmities of the O'Neil I and Hamilton patents.
First, the “O'Neil II” patent claims an obscuring closure for covering the opening between the top and bottom of the display case when the items are in the bottom of the case. This obscuring closure is operated by a hand crank system. The reason, disclosed in the patent, for this procedure is that the items are to be put on display each morning and secured at night. Thus, employees have the time to perform the manual operation. There is no mention as to the device operating during an attempted robbery while the store is open or the use of a motor to operate the obscuring closure.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
The invention is directed to a protected display case for securely displaying items and for storing the items when not on display. The display has a top and bottom section, an access opening between the top and bottom sections, a shelf to hold items, a lifting mechanism, and a movable panel assembly.
The lifting mechanism has at least two guides spaced apart and fixed in vertical locations, a motor, and a gear assembly. The lifting mechanism raises the shelf in relation to the guides to a position where the items are within the top section and viewable to customers and lowers the shelf where the items are stored within the bottom section and not viewable. When the shelf is in the lowered position, the movable panel assembly covers the access opening thereby securing the items within the bottom volume.
REFERENCES:
patent: 4065194 (1977-12-01), Mattia
patent: 4929862 (1990-05-01), Hamilton et al.
patent: 5165768 (1992-11-01), Zarrabi et al.
patent: 5733021 (1998-03-01), O'Neill et al.
patent: 5791749 (1998-08-01), O'Neill et al.
patent: 5853235 (1998-12-01), Barnes
patent: 6540311 (2003-04-01), Canedy et al.
patent: 3825402 (1990-01-01), None
Declaration of Mr. Brad Shepherd regarding experimental; use of one embodiment of invention.
Hansen James O.
Jackson Harold L.
LandOfFree
Protected display case does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Protected display case, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Protected display case will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3289090