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 August 2025 in response to the non-final rejection mailed on 07 May 2025 has been considered. Claim(s) 1-18 is/are pending. Claim(s) 1-18 has/have been examined in this action.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 5, it is believed that the claim is attempting to recite that the fire material, the spacer, and the secondary seal are arranged in the space between the glass panes, but as written is a bit confusing.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 2 and 18 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 2, the secondary seal of the glazing is described as an intumescent material, a material having a fire protection property, and a seal which serves to immovably attach the glass panes to each other which appears to be a contradicting element of the intended invention. How can an intumescent material “immovably” attach the glass panes to one another when the martial if exposed to fire/extreme temperatures will foam and expand? Using the recitation “immovably attaching” also implies that the glazing cannot expand and contract relative to one another due to forces, temperatures, etc. The claim has been interpreted to mean that the glazing is spaced apart, sealed, and held together by the spacer and the sealant.
Regarding claim 18, it is unclear what is meant by “for reducing a portion of further material in the secondary seal”. What is the “further material” and how is the fire-suppressing material “reducing a portion” of the material?
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) 1-18 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).
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), 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), and the secondary seal has an intumescent fire protection property (Page 3, lines 30-32 of Translation).
Hero-Glas does not disclose 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.
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 2, Hero-Glas wherein the secondary seal serves to immovably attach the two adjacent glass panes to each other (cured butyl rubber).
Regarding claim 3, Hero-Glas discloses wherein the secondary seal is different from the spacer (3 and 5).
Regarding claim 4, Hero-Glas discloses wherein the secondary seal is designed as a single element (5).
Regarding claim 5, Hero-Glas discloses wherein, exclusively the fire protection material (7), the spacer (3), having a spacer attachment (4, 9, 10) for attaching the spacer to the two adjacent glass panes, and the secondary seal (5) are arranged in the intermediate space between the two adjacent glass panes (1, 2, 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 pecific 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).
Regarding claim 18, Hero-Glas in view of Goelff disclose wherein the secondary seal comprises a fire-suppressing material for reducing a portion of further material in the secondary seal (endothermic additives aide in suppressing a fire).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-18 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