DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-2, 4, 6-8, 12-20, 22, 25, 27-28 and 31 are pending.
Claims 3, 5, 9-11, 21, 23-24, 26, 29-30 and 32-39 are cancelled.
Claim 31 is withdrawn.
Claims 1-2, 4, 6-8, 12-20, 22, 25, 27-28 are addressed on the merits herein.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/12/26 has been entered.
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) 1-2, 4, 6, 12-18, 20, 22, 25, 27-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mosl (DE102014104112) in view of Yu (US 2020/0263421), Thomson (US 2022/0170312; as supported by 63/142,079) and https://web.archive.org/web/20201001123756/https://www.betonwood.com/eng/wood-fiber-flex50.html (“BetonWood”).
Re claim 1, Mosl discloses a building aperture window (1), wherein the building aperture window (1) comprises an insulated glass unit (4) arranged in a frame (3),
wherein the frame (3) comprises one or more hollow profiles (23) comprise walls (of 23) of a polymer material (Page 5 paragraph 5 of English translation disclosing plastic), and wherein the one or more hollow profiles (23) comprises one or more cavities (at 23b) with a wood fibre insulation material (23b; Page 5 paragraph 8 of English translation disclosing 23b is made from the same material as 23a which includes wood fiber, per Page 5 paragraph 5),
wherein said polymeric material (Page 5 paragraph 5 of English translation disclosing plastic) is selected from one or more of CPVC (Chlorinated polyvinyl chloride), PVC (Polyvinyl chloride) and PP (polypropylene) (Page 5 paragraph 15 of English translation disclosing PVC and PP),
but fails to disclose wherein the wood fibre insulation material has a thermal conductivity coefficient (λim) below 0.06 W/(m·K), wherein the wood fibre insulation material comprises lignin between at least 10 wt% and 40 wt% lignin, and the wood fibre insulation material with a Uframe value below 1 W/(m2·K).
However, Yu discloses wherein the wood fibre insulation material (Mosl: per the above; Yu: 68) has a thermal conductivity coefficient (λim) below 0.06 W/(m·K) ([0005]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the building aperture window of Mosl wherein the wood fibre insulation material has a thermal conductivity coefficient (λim) below 0.06 W/(m·K) in order to efficiently block heat transfer, improving energy-saving effects ([0004]).
In addition, Thomson discloses a wood fibre insulation material (Mosl: per the above; Thomson: 102) which comprises lignin ([0026]; [0034] of 63/142,079).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the building aperture window of Mosl with lignin as disclosed by Thomson in order to increase flame resistance, thermal insulation, and to utilize sustainable, bio-based products, all well-known benefits of lignin utilized with insulation.
In addition, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the building aperture window of Mosl as modified such that wood fire insulation material comprises between at least 10 wt% and 40 wt% lignin in order to ensure the above properties, including flame resistance and thermal insulative properties are effective.
In addition, BentonWood discloses the wood fibre insulation material with a Uframe value below 1 W/(m2·K) (BentonWood discloses it’s FiberTherm Flex 50 is wood fiber. In addition, it discloses a thermal conductivity coefficient of .038 W/mK. Further, it lists a panel with a thickness, for example, of 100mm. The Uframe value for a 100mm thick insulating panel is calculated by the following: U = .038/.1 = 0.38 W/ (m2·K) which is less than 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the building aperture window of Mosl with the wood fibre insulation material with a Uframe value below 1 W/(m2·K) as disclosed by BentonWood in order to provide superior thermal performance by reducing heat escape, resulting in better energy efficiency. Moreover, it is noted that Uframe value (U-factor and/or U-value) is an extremely well-known material property that is commonly utilized in the art, and a person of ordinary skill can readily design and manufacture to desired Uframe values. In addition, it appears common in the art for wood fiber insulation panels, with sufficient thickness, to include Uframe values below 1.
Re claim 2, Mosl as modified discloses a building aperture window according to claim 1, wherein the wood fibre insulation material (23b, as modified) in the one or more cavities (within 23b) has a density (Fig. 1, as it is a material), but fails to disclose the density below 100 kg/m3.
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the building aperture window of Mosl with the density below 100 kg/m3in order to provide a lightweight, or lighter weight, material.
Re claim 4, Mosl as modified discloses a building aperture window according to claim 1, wherein the wood fibre insulation material (23b; Page 5 paragraph 8 of English translation disclosing 23b is made from the same material as 23a which includes wood fiber, per Page 5 paragraph 5) comprises wood fibres (Page 5 Paragraph 5 of English translation).
Re claim 6, Mosl as modified discloses a building aperture window according to claim 1, wherein the wood fibre insulation material (23b) is unfastened to (Fig. 1) the walls of the one or more profiles (23) facing the cavity (at 23b).
Re claim 12, Mosl as modified discloses a building aperture window according to claim 1, wherein the wood fibre insulation material (23b) comprises cellulose (Thomson: [0023]; [0034] of ‘079) but fails to disclose at least 30 wt% and less than 60 wt% cellulose.
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the building aperture window of Mosl as modified with at least 30 wt% and less than 60 wt% cellulose in order to ensure properties of cellulose in insulation including high R-value, soundproofing, and fire resistance
Re claim 13, Mosl as modified discloses a building aperture window according to claim 1, wherein the wood fibre insulation material (23b) comprises hemicellulose (Thomson: [0026]; ‘709: [0034]), but fails to disclose 25-40 wt% hemicellulose.
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the building aperture window of Mosl as modified with 25-40 wt% hemicellulose in order to ensure properties of hemicellulose in insulation including high R-value, soundproofing, and fire resistance.
Re claim 14, Mosl as modified discloses a building aperture window according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the wood fibre insulation material (23b) comprises at least 96 wt%, wood fibre components.
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the building aperture window of Mosl wherein the wood fibre insulation material (23b) comprises at least 96 wt%, wood fibre components in order to ensure properties of wood fibre insulation including thermal insulating properties, moisture regulation, and acoustical insulation.
Re claim 15, Mosl as modified discloses a building aperture window according to claim 1, wherein the wood fibre insulation material (23b) comprises elongated wood fibre components (23b being wood fiber) but fails to disclose having a thickness of between 5 um and 100 um.
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the building aperture window of Mosl with a wood fibre thickness of between 5 um and 100 um in order to ensure sufficient strength of the wood fibres. It has been held that a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Re claim 16, Mosl as modified discloses a building aperture window according to claim 1, wherein the wood fibre insulation material (23b) comprises elongated wood fibre components (23b being wood fiber) but fails to disclose having length of between 5mm and 5cm.
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the building aperture window of Mosl with a wood fibre length of between 5mm and 5cm in order to ensure sufficient strength of the wood fibres. It has been held that a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Re claim 17, Mosl as modified discloses a building aperture window according to claim 1, wherein at least 40% of wood fibre components (23b) of the wood fibre insulation material (23b) are clumped together at clumped parts (because 23b is disclosed as being within the cavities, all fibres therein may be considered “clumped” thus disclosing 100% clumped) with other wood fibre components (23b) of the wood fibre insulation material (23b) wherein the clumped parts (of 23b) comprise clumped )( parts (because 23b is disclosed as being within the cavities, all fibres therein may be considered “clumped”) or bundled wood fibre components (23b; Page 5 paragraph 8 of English translation disclosing 23b is made from the same material as 23a which includes wood fiber, per Page 5 paragraph 5).
Re claim 18, Mosl as modified discloses a building aperture window according to claim 1, wherein the one or more hollow profiles (23) provide the structural integrity (Fig. 1) of the frame (3), and wherein the wood fibre insulation material (23b) provides substantially no structural integrity (3 may stand on its own without 23b) to the frame (3).
Re claim 20, Mosl as modified discloses a building aperture window according to claim 1, wherein the walls (of 23) surround the cavity (within 23) along the longitudinal direction (Fig. 1) of the one or more hollow profiles (at 23b) at all sides of (Fig. 1) the wood fibre insulation material (23b).
Re claim 22, Mosl as modified discloses a building aperture window according to claim 1, Thomson discloses wherein the wood fibre insulation material (22) comprises a wood fibre mat ([0023]; ‘079: [0034]).
Re claim 25, Mosl as modified discloses a building aperture window according to claim 1, wherein the one or more hollow profiles (at 23b) of the frame (3) is/are a multi-cavity hollow profile (at 23b) comprising a plurality of cavities (within 23b) comprising the wood fibre insulation material (23b).
Re claim 27, Mosl as modified discloses a building aperture window according to claim 1, wherein the one or more hollow profiles (at 23b) of the frame (3) is a multi-cavity hollow profile (at 23b) comprising a plurality of elongated cavities (within 23b) extending parallel to each other (Fig. 1) in the longitudinal direction (Fig. 1) of the multi-cavity hollow profile (at 23b), wherein said multi-cavity hollow profile (at 23b) comprises a main cavity (any one of the cavities of 23b), and wherein at least the main cavity (any one of the cavities at 23b) is filled with said wood fibre insulation material (23b), but fails to disclose the main cavity having a cross section that is at least 200% larger than each of the remaining cavities of the profile.
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the building aperture window of Mosl with the main cavity having a cross section that is at least 200% larger than each of the remaining cavities of the profile in order to reduce material used for 23 (and thus material costs), as fewer dividing walls would be necessary with one larger main cavity. It has been held that a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Re claim 28, Mosl as modified discloses a building aperture window according to claim 1, Thomson wherein the wood fibre insulation material (102) is a thermally treated wood fibre insulation material ([0026]; ‘079: [0034]) .
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mosl (DE102014104112) in view of Yu (US 2020/0263421), Thomson (US 2022/0170312; as supported by 63/142,079) and Husler (US 3,788,021).
Re claim 7, Mosl as modified discloses a building aperture window according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the wood fibre insulation material is treated with fire retardant compound and/or anti-fungus compound(s).
However, Husler discloses wherein the wood fibre insulation material is treated with fire retardant compound (Col 2 lines 8-12) and/or anti-fungus compound(s).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the building aperture window of Mosl wherein the wood fibre insulation material is treated with fire retardant compound and/or anti-fungus compound(s) in order to reduce the spread of flames in the event of a fire.
Re claim 8, Mosl as modified discloses a building aperture window according to claim 7, but fails to disclose wherein the wood fibre insulation material comprises at least 1 wt% and less than 5 wt% of said fire retardant compound and/or said anti-fungus compound(s).
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the building aperture window of Mosl as modified wherein the wood fibre insulation material comprises at least 1 wt% and less than 5 wt% of said fire retardant compound and/or said anti-fungus compound(s) in order to ensure the above properties, including flame resistance, are effective.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mosl (DE102014104112) in view of Yu (US 2020/0263421), Thomson (US 2022/0170312; as supported by 63/142,079) and Mann (US 6,327,826).
Re claim 19, Mosl as modified discloses a building aperture window according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the one or more hollow profiles comprises metal reinforcements for contributing to the structural integrity of the frame.
However, Mann discloses wherein the one or more hollow profiles (19) comprises metal reinforcements (28; Col 3 lines 39-40) for contributing to the structural integrity (Fig. 1) of the frame (15).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the building aperture window of Mosl wherein the one or more hollow profiles comprises metal reinforcements for contributing to the structural integrity of the frame in order to increase strength and rigidity of the frame, and to better resist warping.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections 35 USC 103: Applicant’s arguments with respect to all claims have been considered but are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant argues the amended language requiring a Uframe value below 1 W/(m2·K). This language is addressed in view of BentonWood above.
Regarding claim 2, Applicant argues that the rationale provided for the modification is overly general. There is no requirement or bar for specificity of rationale. Providing the claimed density would provide a lightweight, or lighter weight, material. The fact that Mosl itself does not disclose any density is not dispositive. Density is a well-known material property, and a person of ordinary skill can easily manufacture or design to desired densities.
Next, Applicant argues that Thomson teaches away from the claimed invention. A prior art reference that “teaches away” from the claimed invention is a significant factor to be considered in determining obviousness. However, the nature of the teaching must be weighed in substance. A known or obvious composition does not become patentable simply because it has been described as somewhat inferior to some other produce for the same use. In re Gurley, 27 F.3d 551; see MPEP 2145(X)(D). Applicant contends that Thomson is directed to a high-density polymer with wood fibres within resin. Applicant states that it would be illogical and technically inconsistent to combine Thomson with Mosl because Mosl relies on cavity-based insulation rather than solid, load bearing concepts. Again, the fact that Mosl and Thomson are utilized differently does not preclude obviousness. Regardless, Thomson is not relied upon as disclosing any density in claim 2, rendering arguments directed to any density of Thomson moot.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE WALRAED-SULLIVAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8838. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am - 5:00pm.
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)270-3238. 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.
KYLE WALRAED-SULLIVAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3635
/KYLE J. WALRAED-SULLIVAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635