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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 3/17/2026 has been entered.
PRODUCT BY PROCESS CLAIM:
“ The subject matter present is regarded as a product by process claim in which a product is introduced by the method in which it is made. It is the general practice of this office to examine the final product described regardless of the method provided by the applicant.”
Claims 5, 18 “ are formed by applying a localized force…”, “ prior to installation…onto a roll” is a product by process limitation and treated accordingly to the policy set forth above.
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, 4, 7-8, 18, 20 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Koenig Jr. (5477643).
Koenig Jr (figure 1) shows a flashing(able to function as a flashing) for a building profile, comprising: a flexible (thin) sheet of impermeable(polymeric) material, the flexible sheet having a profile section defined by an axis that extends from a first side edge to a second side edge, wherein a plurality of fold lines (any one of the valleys among the ridges (of section 14) having one or more fold lines extending in a first direction and spaced along the axis in a second direction that is perpendicular to the first direction, the plurality of fold lines comprising a central fold line(any of the fold line in between two other fold lines in the figure 1), a first fold line, and a second fold line disposed on an opposite side of the central fold line relative to the first fold line, wherein the central fold line is parallel to the first fold line and the second fold line, the one or more fold lines being defined by an increased flexibility relative to the flexibility of the flexible sheet, the sheet being integrally formed as a single piece of flexible material, wherein in a relaxed state, the flexible sheet comprising a first planar surface and a second planar surface separated by the profile section, the first planar surface (12, left) being coplanar with the second planar surface (12 right, figure 1) along the axis, the profile section is adapted such that, in use, the first planar surface is coplanar with the second planar surface(able to function as claimed) and the profile section(figures 2-4) defines a non-planar profile that extends outward relative to the first planar surface and the second planar surface.
Per claim 4, Koenig further shows the flexible sheet is integrally formed as a single piece of flexible material, wherein the one or more fold lines are formed by applying a localized force to deform the flexible sheet.
Per claim 6, Koenig further shows the plurality of fold lines are defined by a deformation( the bending at the lines) of the flexible sheet and/or a reduced thickness relative to an adjacent portion of the flexible sheet.
Per claim 7, Koenig (figure 1) further shows a first side edge fold line that extends along the first planar surface opposite the profile section(the fold line that is beyond the profile action and opposite thereof), the first side edge being adapted to engage an edge of a building opening a building opening(able to function as claimed).
Per claim 8, Koenig further shows one or more corner fold lines(the corners between 60 and 14 at 20 or 36) that extend along the second direction of the flexible sheet.
Per claim 18, Koenig further shows prior to installation, the flexible sheet lies flat (see product by process limitation policy above).
Per claim 20, Koenig further shows in the relaxed state, each of the first planar surface and the second planar surface have a width that is greater than a width of the profile section, the widths of the first planar surface, the second planar surface, and the profile section being measured along the axis (the axis perpendicular to the plane).
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-8, 18 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Munro (2721819) in view of Sway (2112936) or Koenig Jr. (5477643).
Munro (figures 5-6) shows a flashing for a building profile, comprising: a flexible sheet of impermeable material, the flexible sheet having a profile section defined by an axis that extends from a first side edge to a second side edge, wherein a plurality of fold lines (any one of the valleys among the ridges (14) having one or more fold lines extending in a first direction and spaced along the axis in a second direction that is perpendicular to the first direction, the plurality of fold lines comprising a central fold line(any of the fold line in between two other fold lines in the figures), a first fold line, and a second fold line disposed on an opposite side of the central fold line relative to the first fold line, wherein the central fold line is parallel to the first fold line and the second fold line, the one or more fold lines being defined by an increased flexibility relative to the flexibility of the flexible sheet, the sheet being integrally formed as a single piece of flexible material.
Munro does not show in the relaxed state, the flexible sheet comprising a first planar surface and a second planar surface separated by the profile section, the first planar surface being coplanar with the second planar surface along the axis, the profile section is adapted such that, in use, the first planar surface is coplanar with the second planar surface and the profile section defines a non-planar profile that extends outward relative to the first planar surface and the second planar surface.
Sway(31, figure 2) and Koenig (12, figure 1) each shows the flexible sheet comprising a first planar surface and a second planar surface separated by the profile section, the first planar surface being coplanar with the second planar surface along the axis.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Munro’s flashing to show the flexible sheet comprising a first planar surface and a second planar surface separated by the profile section, the first planar surface being coplanar with the second planar surface along the axis as taught by either Sway or Koenig with a reasonable expectation of success in order to form solid outer planar surfaces used in mounting to building.
Munro as modified further shows in the relaxed state, the flexible sheet comprising a first planar surface and a second planar surface separated by the profile section, the first planar surface being coplanar with the second planar surface along the axis, the profile section is adapted such that, in use, the first planar surface is coplanar with the second planar surface and the profile section defines a non-planar profile that extends outward relative to the first planar surface and the second planar surface.
Per claim 4, Munro as modified further shows the flexible sheet is integrally formed as a single piece of flexible material, wherein the one or more fold lines are formed by applying a localized force to deform the flexible sheet (see part 15).
Per claim 5, Munro as modified further shows the flexible sheet comprising a sheet of polyethylene material (col 2 line 57).
Per claim 6, Munro as modified further shows the plurality of fold lines are defined by a deformation( the bending at the lines) of the flexible sheet and/or a reduced thickness relative to an adjacent portion of the flexible sheet.
Per claim 7, Munro as modified (figure 1) further shows a first side edge fold line that extends along the first planar surface opposite the profile section(the fold line that is beyond the profile action and opposite thereof), the first side edge being adapted to engage an edge of a building opening a building opening(able to function as claimed).
Per claim 8, Munro as modified further shows one or more corner fold lines that extend along the second direction of the flexible sheet.
Per claim 18, Munro as modified further shows prior to installation, the flexible sheet lies flat (see product by process limitation policy above; see also Messenger par. 18).
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.
Claim(s) 9, 11-14, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Munro (2721819) in view of Koenig or Sway.
Munro as modified shows all the claimed structural limitations. The claimed method steps of installing the flashing for a building opening, would have been the obvious method steps of forming the flashing with Munro’s modified structures.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Munro (2721819) in view of Sway or Koenig.
Munro as modified shows all the claimed structural limitations shows all the claimed limitations except for the sheet being rolled onto a roll prior to installation.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Munro’s modified structure to show the sheet being rolled onto a roll prior to installation with a reasonable expectation of success since it allows for easy transport of the sheet to the destination before usage.
Claim(s) 15, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Munro (2721819) in view of Koenig or Sway as applied to claim 14 above and further in view of Messenger (2015/0047269) or Collins (2006/0101726).
Munro as modified shows all the claimed structural limitations. Munro does not show the sheet being cut locations to fit within openings and surfaces to be covered.
Messenger and Collins each discloses cutting flashing members at locations to fit within openings and surfaces to be covered.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Munro’s modified structure to show the flashing cut at locations as taught by either Messenger/Collins with a reasonable expectation of success in order to fit the flashing at needed locations and corners and surfaces.
The claimed method steps of installing the flashing for a building opening, would have been the obvious method steps of forming the flashing with Munro’s modified structures.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 4-9, 11-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art shows different flashing designs.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHI D Tran whose telephone number is (571)272-6864. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
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, BRIAN GLESSNER can be reached at 571-272-6754. 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.
/PHI D A/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633