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 substitute specification filed 5/30/2023 has not been entered because it does not conform to 37 CFR 1.125(b) and (c) because: no marked up copy of the amended specification is provided.
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 2-6 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.
Claim 2, the plate 41 does not protrude from the strip 30 but is rather below the strip.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1,7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bergmiller et al. US 20100013270.
Bergmiller et al. have glass plate 18, peripheral window frame 20, paragraph 25, support element 12 comprising a stop plate extending from the front frame bar 20, shown in figures 2 away from a rear of the plate at a leading edge of the cover, paragraph 18.. A peripheral frame has front, rear and side elements or bars as claimed.
Claim 7, Bergmiller et al. have wrapping element 12 extending from the front frame bar and encapsulating the stop plate 22 as shown in figure 2C.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention..
Claim(s) 2-5, 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bergmiller et al. in view of Kleinhoffer et al. US 9902245..
Bergmiller et al. have sealing strip 32 on the fixed roof opening and abutted to the glass panel frame 96..
Prior to the filing of applicant, it was known in this art to provide a glass plate frame with the sealing strip 82 fixed to the frame 60 and abutted to the roof opening an obvious reversal of parts for a similar sealing juncture.
Claim 3, Bergmiller et al. have a wrapping 12 at the stop plate 22, figure 2C.
Claim 4, the seal of Kleinhoffer et al. is fixed to the frame in an engaging manner at 90,94.
Claim 5, see engagement groove at 98 and sealing strip 82 with abutting portion 94, figure 3.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bergmiller et al. in view of Kleinhoffer et al. Lutz US 4626023.
Claim 9, Bergmiller et al. have support element at front only for a tilting roof panel. Kleinhoffer et al. teaches support elements20, 16,18 at front and both sides with enough clearance between the stop and the roof to allow tilting movement. Disposition of a stop at rear 5a of Lutz, front and sides 16,18,20 of Kleinhoffer et al. is deemed to be an obvious expedient for a downwardly sliding roof as taught by Lutz at 4 to prevent lift at rear, front and sides or for a tilting roof as taught by Bergmiller et al. with sufficient clearance between roof and stop 5a to allow the required amount of tilt.
It would have been obvious at the time of filing to provide in Bergmiller et al. side stops of Kleinhoffer et al. and rear stop of Lutz for the above reasons.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bergmiller et al. in view of Kleinhoffer et al. as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of FR2684050.
The seal of Kleinhoffer et al. lacks a covering portion of the frame, taught by FR2684050 at 51a. It would have been obvious at the time of filing to provide in the combination above a seal covering as taught by FR2684050 in order to ensure retention of seal and frame.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 10-11 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DENNIS H PEDDER whose telephone number is (571)272-6667. The examiner can normally be reached 4:30-1pm.
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, Amy Weisberg can be reached at 571-270-5550. 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.
/Dennis H Pedder/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3612
DENNIS H. PEDDER
Examiner
Art Unit 3612
DHP
7/29/2025