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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 16 March 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1 and 4-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, although the disclosure supports the claimed amendment of the “spacer does not adhere to either of the two adjacent glass panes”, the amendment is unclear and renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear how the spacer can contact the sealant “5” which adheres the glass panels together, and yet the spacer “does not adhere to either of the two adjacent glass panes”. How can the spacer abut the sealant which is adhered to the glass panes but be recited as not being adhered to the glass panes. The original disclosure states “the spacer therefore need not necessarily be adhered to the spaced-apart glass panes” and further states “no additional adhesive is necessary between the pane and the spacer”. These appears to be two different ideas. The idea of “not being adhered” and “not requiring additional adhesive” are very different, since the secondary sealant does appear to contact the spacer which would in fact “adhere” the spacer to the glass panes, but would also not require “additional adhesive”. The idea of the spacer not being “adhered” to the panes borders on a new matter limitation since it is unclear exactly what is being claimed or what is intended to be recited by the original disclosure.
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 and 4-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 203 03 253 U1 to Hero-Glas (See Translation also) in view of WO 2009/007452 A1 to Goelff in view of EP 1 205 524 A2 Poehlman (See Translation) further in view of US 2012/024114 A1 to Huffer et al.
Regarding claim 1, Hero-Glas discloses a fire protection glazing comprising two adjacent glass panes (1, 2), a spacer (3), a fire protection material (7; Page 3, lines 26-28), and a secondary seal (5) different from the spacer (Fig.1), the two adjacent glass panes being spaced apart from each other by the spacer (Fig.1), the fire protection material and the spacer being arranged in an intermediate space between the two adjacent glass panes (Fig.1), wherein the secondary seal (5) encloses the fire protection material and the spacer in the intermediate space (Fig.1), wherein the secondary seal adheres to the two adjacent glass panes and thereby bonds the two adjacent glass panes, spaced apart by the spacer, to each other in a fixed relative position; and the secondary seal has an intumescent fire protection property (Page 3, lines 30-32 of Translation).
Hero-Glas does not disclose wherein the spacer does not adhere to either of the two adjacent glass panes and wherein the secondary seal has a cooling fire protection property. Hero-Glas appears to disclose wherein the secondary seal bonds the glass panes spaced apart by the spacer to each other (the seal 5 is butyl rubber as disclosed in lines 24-32, Page 3 of translation; it is typically known in the art that seals that contain butyl rubber adhere to surfaces of the glass panes; Further it appears the material 5 would fall out of the pane if it were not bonded to the glass surfaces). Hero-Glas does not specifically state that the material “5” forms a bond with the glass panes.
Huffer et al. disclose wherein a double glazing (104, 106) is formed with a spacer (108) which is not adhered to the glass panes (friction fit, Paragraph [0039]) and further the glass panes are secured to one another by a secondary seal (112, Fig.4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have secured the glass panes together with an exterior adhesive and providing a spacer which is not secured to the glass as taught by Huffer et al. so to enable the spacer to maintain the distance between the glass panes and allowing the glass to remain effectively secured around the perimeter to reduce forces from additional fixing means.
Goelff discloses providing endothermic, cooling additives to a butyl rubber material used within a window glazing (Page 2, Final paragraph – Page 3, First paragraph).
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 sealant of Hero-Glas with an endothermic additive as taught by Goelff so to provide the window glazing with a better ability to combat a fire, but not only providing foam of the edge seal, but also providing cooling effects, thereby aiding in the prevent of the fire spreading.
Poehlman discloses wherein the butyl sealant material contains tackifying additives and adhesion-promoting substances (Page 3, lines 19-21).
If one were to argue that Hero-Glas does not in fact disclose wherein the material “5” does not bond the glass panes, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have provided tackifying additives and adhesion-promoting substances to the butyl rubber substance of Hero-Glas as taught by Poehlman so to ensure the material effectively forms a bond and seals the glazing.
Regarding claim 4, Hero-Glas discloses wherein the secondary seal is designed as a single element (5).
Regarding claim 5, Hero-Glas discloses wherein, the fire protection material (7), the spacer (3), and the secondary seal (5) are arranged in the intermediate space between the two adjacent glass panes (1, 2, Fig.1), and no other element is arranged in the intermediate space between the two adjacent glass panes (Fig.1).
Regarding claim 6, Hero-Glas discloses wherein the secondary seal (5) is arranged in a region of the intermediate space adjacent to the end faces of the two adjacent glass panes (Fig.1).
Regarding claim 7, Hero-Glas discloses the secondary seal having an intumescent material but does not specifically disclose wherein the seal comprises inorganic material.
Poehlman discloses forming intumescent seals for sealing glazings, the seals having an inorganic material (Page 2, line 41 – Page 3, line 2 and Page 5, lines 21-22) 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, but does not specifically disclose wherein the inorganic material is alkali silicate.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have formed the secondary seal of Hero-Glas having an inorganic intumescent material so to effectively seal the glazing and providing a known intumescent material to aid in fire protection. Choosing an intumescent material may come down to cost, availability, cohesiveness with other materials, etc. and would have been an obvious choice to one of ordinary skill in the art without yielding unexpected results. Alkali silicate is a notoriously well-known material with intumescent properties, and therefore would have been an obvious choice for use in the formation of the second seal material of Hero-Glas.
Regarding claim 8, Hero-Glas discloses wherein the secondary seal comprises an organic material (expandable graphite) which intumesces when a temperature rises during a fire to achieve at least part of the intumescent fire protection property of the secondary seal.
Regarding claim 9, Hero-Glas specifically teaches expandable graphite which is an organic material which undergoes a physical reaction. Hero-Glas does not specifically disclose wherein the organic material in the secondary seal is intumescent in case of a temperature rise in a fire due to a chemical reaction of the organic material.
Poehlman discloses wherein the organic material in the secondary seal is intumescent in case of a temperature rise in a fire due to a chemical reaction of the organic material (Abstract; Page 2, lines 23-48; Page 5, Claims, lines 1-3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have formed the secondary seal of Hero-Glas having an organic intumescent material which has a chemical reaction so to effectively seal the glazing and providing a known intumescent material to aid in fire protection. Choosing an intumescent material may come down to cost, availability, cohesiveness with other materials, etc. and would have been an obvious choice to one of ordinary skill in the art without yielding unexpected results.
Regarding claim 10, Poehlman discloses wherein the organic material is intumescent due to a chemical reaction comprises the following materials: an acid source, a char former, a blowing agent, and a binder for binding the acid source, char former, and blowing agent (Page 2, Paragraph 4, 5, 6; Page 3, Paragraph 1-2, 4, and 7).
Regarding claim 11, Hero-Glas discloses wherein the organic material in the secondary seal is intumescent during a temperature rise in a fire due to a physical reaction of the organic material (expandable graphite).
Regarding claim 12, Hero-Glas discloses wherein the secondary seal comprises exfoliated graphite (expandable graphite).
Regarding claim 13, Hero-Glas in view of Goelff discloses both intumescent additives and endothermic additives within a butyl rubber material, Hero-Glas teaches using expandable graphite which releases gas when encountering the heat from a fire. Goelff does not disclose using a specific endothermic material, but endothermic additives are known to typically involve releasing a gas or a liquid when undergoing a change due to the temperature change from a fire.
Although Goelff does not specifically teach a material which releases gas during a fire to achieve at least part of the cooling fire protection property of the secondary seal, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have used a material which releases a gas during a fire thereby enabling the material to absorb heat from the fire and aide in suppressing the fire.
Regarding claim 14, Hero-Glas discloses wherein the secondary seal releases gas during a fire due to decomposition of the material of the secondary seal (expanded graphite releases gas due to chemical composition decomposition when subjected to a fire).
Regarding claim 15, , Hero-Glas discloses wherein the secondary seal releases gas during a fire due to decomposition of the material of the secondary seal (expanded graphite releases gas due to chemical composition decomposition when subjected to a fire). As discussed above, Goelff does not specifically teach which endothermic material is used, but providing an endothermic material which reacts due different temperatures will aide in battling a fire at different points during the fires life cycle (i.e. having an intumescent material which expands to block the fire, and then following with an endothermic material which suppresses the fire, will add to the effectiveness of the sealant material).
Regarding claim 16, Although Goelff does not disclose the specific endothermic additive, Goelff does teach providing an endothermic material which, during a fire, absorbs thermal energy to achieve at least part of the cooling fire protection property of the secondary seal (endothermic materials absorb heat from a fire which causing the cooling effect).
Regarding claim 17, Hero-Glas in view of Goelff disclose wherein the secondary seal comprises a synergistic material (intumescent and endothermic materials are more effective when used together).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection relies on additional prior art references which were not previously relied upon. The arguments are primarily based on the idea of the spacer not being adhered to the glass panes which the newly applied reference provides teachings.
Conclusion
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
Prosecution Insights