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 .
The amendment filed on 04 September 2025 in response to the non-final office action mailed on 16 June 2025 has been considered. Claim(s) 1,3-14,and 17 is/are pending. Claim(s) 2, 15, and 16 has/have been canceled. Claim(s) 1, 3-14, and 17 has/have been examined in this action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 3-14, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2020/0040570 A1 to Cook et al. in view of US 5,508,321 to Brebner.
Regarding claim 1, Cook et al. disclose a fire protection glazing made of at least two glass panes (1, 1) spaced apart from each other by a spacer (2), wherein a fire protection material (4) and the spacer are arranged in an intermediate space between the two glass panes (Fig.1), wherein a secondary seal (3) encloses the fire protection material and the spacer in the intermediate space, and wherein the secondary seal bonds the glass panes (Paragraph [0357], Fig.1), spaced apart by the spacer, to each other, and wherein the secondary seal comprises a polymer-based matrix selected from the group consisting of epoxide, polyurethane, silicone, polysulfide (Paragraphs [0034]-[0046]; Table 1).
Cook et al. does not specifically disclose wherein the secondary seal has an intumescent fire protection property.
Brebner discloses forming a silicone rubber sealant composition including alkali silicate and expandable graphite (Column 1, line 65-Column 2, line 8; Column 2, lines 28-30; lines 42-44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have provided the secondary sealant of Cook et al. with an intumescent material as taught by Brebner so to aid in impeding the fire as the unit undergoes increases in heat from a surrounding fire, not only will with inner layer react, but also the seal around the perimeter of the unit will resist the heat and fire as well.
Regarding claim 3, Cook et al. disclose wherein the secondary seal is different from the spacer (3 vs. 2, Fig.1).
Regarding claim 4, Cook et al. disclose wherein the secondary seal is a single element (3, Fig.1).
Regarding claim 5, Brebner discloses different formulations of the intumescent sealant having both no added graphite and also no added alkali silicates. One of ordinary skill in the art would be able to achieve the secondary seal being free of a cooling fire protection property while accepting the negative of leaving out the silicates. For example, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have removed the silicates from the material while accepting the idea of the char becoming weak. Altering materials, or replacing silicates with other known intumescent would not yield unexpected results based on the desired final effects of the secondary sealant material.
Regarding claim 6, Cook et al. disclose wherein the intermediate space between the two glass panes only receives the fire protection material (4), the spacer (2), having a spacer attachment for attaching the spacer to one or both of the two glass panes (adhesive; Paragraph [0357]), and the secondary seal (3).
Regarding claim 7, Cook et al. disclose wherein the secondary seal is arranged in a region of the intermediate space adjacent to end faces of the glass panes (Fig.1).
Regarding claim 8, Brebner discloses wherein the secondary seal comprises inorganic material (sodium silicate; Column 2, lines 28-20), which intumesces when a temperature rises in the event of a fire and in this manner achieves at least part of the intumescent fire protection property of the secondary seal.
Regarding claim 9, Brebner discloses wherein the secondary seal comprises organic material (expandable graphite; Column 2, lines 42-44) which intumesces when a temperature rises in a fire and in this manner achieves at least part of the intumescent fire protection property of the secondary seal.
Regarding claim 10, Brebner discloses wherein the organic material in the secondary seal is expandable graphite (expandable graphite; Column 2, lines 42-44) and expandable graphite is intumescent in case of a temperature rise in a fire due to a chemical reaction (oxidation) of the organic material.
Regarding claim 11, Brebner discloses wherein the organic material (expandable graphite) that intumesces due to a chemical reaction; expandable graphite comprises the following materials: an acid source (expandable graphite is treated by acids), a char former (graphite itself forms the char), a blowing agent (gases are created by molecule decomp), and a binder (silicone) for binding the above-mentioned materials.
Regarding claim 12, Brebner discloses wherein the organic material (expandable graphite) in the secondary seal; expandable graphite intumesces in case of a temperature rise in a fire due to a physical reaction (volume increase) of the organic material.
Regarding claim 13, Brebner discloses wherein the secondary seal comprises exfoliated graphite (expandable graphite; Column 2, lines 42-44; the intumescent material is actually expandable graphite which turns into exfoliated graphite when undergoing heating).
Regarding claim 14, Brebner discloses wherein the secondary seal comprises a synergistic material (expandable graphite is in fact a synergistic material since the material can combine with others to provide greater fire protection).
Regarding claim 17, Brebner discloses wherein the inorganic material is alkali silicate (Column 1, line 65-Column 2, line 8; Column 2, lines 28-30).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3-14, and 17 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN D KWIECINSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-5160. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday from 8:30 am to 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, Brian Mattei can be reached at (571) 272-3238. 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.
RDK
/RYAN D KWIECINSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635