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 1-8, 12, 14-16, 18, 21, 24, 26, 45-47 and 59 are pending.
Claims 9-11, 13, 17, 19-20, 22-23, 25, 27-44, 48-58 and 60-67 are cancelled.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 7/23/26 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.
Claim 59 is 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.
Re claim 59, claim 59 recites, “the first component” in line 11, “the first component” in line 11, and ‘the second component” in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claims. It appears this language is intended to recite, “the first exterior component,” “the first exterior component” and “the second interior component” and will be interpreted as such.
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) 1-4, 7-8, 12, 18, 21, 24, 26, 45-47 and 59 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banford (US 2002/0139071) in view of Gronlund et al (“Gronlund”) (US 2019/0071918) and Wang (US 2007/0022699).
Re claim 1, Banford discloses a fenestration assembly (Fig. 1) comprising:
a fenestration frame (10/50), the fenestration frame (10/50) comprising
an exterior subunit (10), the exterior subunit (10) defining a receiving channel (31), the exterior subunit (10) comprising a first composition ([0043] disclosing PVC);
an interior subunit (50), wherein a portion (66) of the interior subunit (50) fits within (Fig. 1) the receiving channel (31), wherein the portion (66) of the interior subunit (50) that fits within (Fig. 1) the receiving channel (31) comprises a first outer wall (top wall of 66) opposite from a second outer wall (bottom wall of 66), the interior subunit (50) comprising a second composition ([0043] disclosing wood), the second composition ([0043] wood) comprising particles and/or fibers ([0064]),
wherein the first composition ([0045] PVC) is different than ([0009]) the second composition ([0043] wood),
but fails to disclose the second composition comprising a polymer resin, the portion of the interior subunit defined between the first outer wall and the second outer wall defines an interior channel.
However, Gronlund discloses the second composition (Banford: [0043], [0066]) comprising particles and/or fibers (Claim 1); and a polymer resin (Claim 1; [0082]).
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 fenestration assembly of Banford with the interior subunit comprising (particles and/or fibers) and a polymer resin as disclosed by Gronlund in order to increase strength including in wind loading ([0067]), and to provide better cost, performance and aesthetic properties ([0004]).
In addition, Wang discloses the portion (Banford: 66) of the interior subunit (Banford: 50) defined between the first outer wall (Banford: top of 66) and the second outer wall (Banford: bottom of 66) defines an interior channel (Wang: within 3; notably, [0019] disclosing 3 formed as a wooden surface on a plastic core, thus maintaining the wooden benefits of Banford’s element 50).
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 fenestration assembly of Banford with the portion of the interior subunit defined between the first outer wall and the second outer wall defines an interior channel as disclosed by Wang in order to reduce material used thus reducing weight and material costs.
Re claim 2, Banford as modified discloses the fenestration assembly of claim 1, the interior subunit (50) further comprising a tongue (66 being a tongue).
Re claim 3, Banford as modified discloses the fenestration assembly of claim 2, wherein the tongue (66) engages (Fig. 1) the receiving channel (31).
Re claim 4, Banford as modified discloses the fenestration assembly of claim 3, wherein the receiving channel (31) surrounds (Fig. 1) the tongue (66) on at least three sides (Fig. 1).
Re claim 7, Banford as modified discloses the fenestration assembly of claim 1, the fenestration frame (10/50) further comprising an adhesive ([0024]), wherein the adhesive ([0024]) is disposed between a surface (any surface of 31) of the receiving channel (31) and a surface (of 66) of a distal end (as no point of reference is provided) of a tongue (66), thereby coupling the tongue (66) within the receiving channel (31).
Re claim 8, Banford as modified discloses the fenestration assembly of claim 7, but fails to disclose wherein the adhesive is disposed between an exterior most surface of the receiving channel and a surface of an exterior most surface of the tongue.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fenestration assembly of Banford wherein the adhesive is disposed between an exterior most surface of the receiving channel and a surface of an exterior most surface of the tongue in order to ensure the end of the tongue is coupled to the channel instead of just the length thereof, providing better connection thereto. It has been held that rearrangement of parts is considered within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019.
Re claim 12, Banford as modified discloses the fenestration assembly of claim 7, but fails to disclose wherein the adhesive has a thickness of at least 0.03 inches and not more than 0.06 inches.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify [the fenestration assembly of Banford wherein the adhesive has a thickness of at least 0.03 inches and not more than 0.06 inches in order to ensure a sufficient amount of adhesive to maintain connection between components. 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 18, Banford as modified discloses the fenestration assembly of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the exterior subunit exhibits less thermal expansion than the interior subunit.
However, Wang discloses wherein the exterior subunit (1) exhibits less thermal expansion than ([0019] discloses that 1 and 3 may be different materials, and example materials plastic, aluminum alloy, wooden surfaces on plastic cores; a selection of these materials, one for 1 and one for 3 would result in 1 having less thermal expansion than 3) the interior subunit (3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify [the fenestration assembly of Banford wherein the exterior subunit exhibits less thermal expansion than the interior subunit in order to protect the exterior subunit from the elements, especially warping due to heating.
Re claim 21, Banford as modified discloses the fenestration assembly of claim 1, Gronlund discloses the particles and/or fibers comprising at least 1 wt. % wood particles (Table 1).
Re claim 24, Banford as modified discloses the fenestration assembly of claim 1, Gronlund discloses the particles and/or fibers comprising wood particles and glass fibers (Table 1).
Re claim 26, Banford as modified discloses the fenestration assembly of claim 1, wherein a proximal portion (right side of 31) of the receiving channel (31) is defined by a body member (36); and wherein a distal portion (of 31) of the receiving channel (31) is defined between a first extension (34) and a second extension (39).
Re claim 45, Banford as modified discloses the fenestration assembly of claim 1, Gronlund discloses wherein the exterior subunit (Wang: 1) is a pultrusion ([0217]); wherein the interior subunit (Wang: 3) is an extrusion ([0217]).
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 fenestration assembly of Banford with pultruding and extruding as disclosed by Gronlund in order to provide a well-known, inexpensive, repeatable process of formation.
It should further be noted that the language “protrusion” and “extrusion” is considered product-by-process; therefore, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. See M.P.E.P. §2113. The patentability of the product does not depend on its method of production. If the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the same prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Re claim 46, Banford as modified discloses the fenestration assembly of claim 1, Gronlund discloses wherein the exterior subunit (Wang: 1) is an extrusion ([0217]); wherein the interior subunit (Wang: 3) is an extrusion ([0217]); and wherein the interior subunit (10) is formed with a different composition ([0009]; [0043] disclosing PVC; [0045] disclosing wood) than the exterior subunit (50).
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 fenestration assembly of Banford with extruding as disclosed by Gronlund in order to provide a well-known, inexpensive, repeatable process of formation.
It should further be noted that the language “extrusion” is considered product-by-process; therefore, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. See M.P.E.P. §2113. The patentability of the product does not depend on its method of production. If the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the same prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Re claim 47, Banford discloses a fenestration assembly (10/50) comprising:
a fenestration frame (10/50), the fenestration frame (10/50) comprising
an exterior extrusion (10; [0043]);
the exterior extrusion (10) defining a receiving channel (31) and a first composition ([0043] disclosing PVC);
an interior subunit (50), wherein the interior subunit (50) fits within (at 66) the receiving channel (31), the interior subunit (50) comprising a second composition ([0043] disclosing wood),
but fails to disclose the exterior extrusion defining an inner volume, the exterior extrusion comprising at least 30 wt. % glass fibers and a first polymer resin, the interior subunit defining an inner volume, and the interior subunit comprising particles and/or fibers and a second polymer resin.
However, Gronlund discloses the exterior extrusion (Banfrod: 10; Gronlund: 300) comprising particles and/or fibers (Claim 1) and a first polymer resin (Claim 1; see also [0039]) and the interior subunit (Banford: 50; Gronlund: 300) comprising particles and/or fibers (Claim 1) and a second polymer resin (Claim 1; see also [0039]).
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 fenestration assembly of Banford with the exterior extrusion comprising at least 30 wt. % glass fibers and a first polymer resin, and the interior subunit comprising particles and/or fibers and a second polymer resin as disclosed by Gronlund in order to increase strength including in wind loading ([0067]), and to provide better cost, performance and aesthetic properties ([0004]).
In addition, Wang discloses the exterior extrusion (3) defining an inner volume (interior to 3), and the interior subunit (1) defining an inner volume (within 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 fenestration assembly of Banford with the exterior extrusion defining an inner volume, and the interior subunit defining an inner volume as disclosed by Wang in order to reduce material used thus reducing weight and material costs.
Re claim 59, Banford discloses a fenestration frame (10/50) comprising:
a series of at least two dual component structural members (10/50) comprising a first exterior component (10) and a second interior component (50);
the first exterior component (10) comprising a first composition ([0043] disclosing PVC);
a receiving channel (31), the receiving channel (31) being defined by a first side portion (top of 31), a second side portion (bottom of 31), and a base portion (left side of 31) connecting the first side portion (top of 31) with the second side portion (bottom of 31);
the second interior component (50) comprising a second composition ([0043] disclosing wood);
a tongue portion (66) that engages the receiving channel (31) of the first component (10) to combine the first component (10) and the second component (50) into a structural member (10/50), wherein the tongue (66) comprises a first outer wall (top wall of 66) opposite from a second outer wall (bottom wall of 66);
but fails to disclose the first exterior component as a fiber-reinforced polymeric material, the second interior component as a particulate-filled polymeric material, the tongue portion with an interior channel defined between the first outer wall and the second outer wall.
However, Gronlund discloses the first exterior component (Banford: 10; Gronlund: 300) as a fiber-reinforced polymeric material (Claim 1; see also [0039]) and the second interior component (Banford: 50; Gronlund: 300) as a particulate-filled polymeric material (Table 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 fenestration assembly of Banford with the first component as a fiber-reinforced polymeric material, the second component as a particulate-filled polymeric material as disclosed by Gronlund in order to increase strength including in wind loading ([0067]), and to provide better cost, performance and aesthetic properties ([0004]).
In addition, Wang discloses the tongue portion (proximate 31) with an interior channel (within 3) defined between the first outer wall (top wall of 31) and the second outer wall (bottom wall of 31).
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 fenestration frame of Banford with the tongue portion with an interior channel defined between the first outer wall and the second outer wall as disclosed by Wang in order to reduce material used thus reducing weight and material costs.
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banford (US 2002/0139071) in view of Gronlund et al (“Gronlund”) (US 2019/0071918), Wang (US 2007/0022699) and Kerscher et al (“Kerscher”) (US 209/0211183).
Re claim 5, Banford as modified discloses the fenestration assembly of claim 1, but fails to disclose the exterior subunit comprising: a first projection; and a second projection, wherein the first projection and the second projection extend within the receiving channel from opposite sides of the receiving channel.
However, Kerscher discloses the exterior subunit (Fig. 19 324) comprising: a first projection (356); and a second projection (356), wherein the first projection (356) and the second projection (356) extend within the receiving channel (350) from opposite sides (Fig. 19) of the receiving channel (350).
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 fenestration assembly of Banford with the exterior subunit comprising: a first projection; and a second projection, wherein the first projection and the second projection extend within the receiving channel from opposite sides of the receiving channel as disclosed by Banford in order to facilitate alignment and depth insertion into the receiving channel.
Re claim 6, Banford as modified discloses the fenestration assembly of claim 5, but fails to disclose the tongue comprising: a first recess, wherein the first recess is configured to accept the first projection; and a second recess, wherein the second recess is configured to accept the second projection.
However, Kerscher discloses the tongue (362) comprising: a first recess (370), wherein the first recess (370) is configured to accept the first projection (356); and a second recess (370), wherein the second recess (370) is configured to accept the second projection (356).
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 fenestration assembly of Banford with the tongue comprising: a first recess, wherein the first recess is configured to accept the first projection; and a second recess, wherein the second recess is configured to accept the second projection as disclosed by Banford in order to facilitate alignment and depth insertion into the receiving channel.
Claim(s) 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banford (US 2002/0139071) in view of Gronlund et al (“Gronlund”) (US 2019/0071918), Wang (US 2007/0022699) and Marstein (WO2012/169901).
Re claim 14, Banford as modified discloses the fenestration assembly of claim 1, but fails to disclose the fenestration frame further comprising a connector, wherein the connector extends through a portion of the exterior subunit and into a portion of the interior subunit.
However, Marstein discloses the fenestration frame (22) further comprising a connector (18), wherein the connector (18) extends through a portion of the exterior subunit (13) and into a portion of the interior subunit (23).
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 fenestration assembly of Banford with the fenestration frame further comprising a connector, wherein the connector extends through a portion of the exterior subunit and into a portion of the interior subunit as disclosed by Marstein in order to more rigidly secure the components together.
Re claim 15, Banford as modified discloses the fenestration assembly of claim 14, Marstein discloses wherein the connector (18) allows a limited degree of independent movement (due to the gapping such as at 15 and below 163 in Fig. 3, allowing for relative flexure) of the exterior subunit (13) relative to the interior subunit (23).
Re claim 16, Banford as modified discloses the fenestration assembly of claim 14, Marstein discloses wherein the connector (18) extends through a lateral portion (14) of the exterior subunit (13) and into a lateral portion (24) of the interior subunit (23).
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections 35 USC 103: Applicant’s arguments with respect to all claims have been considered but are generally moot as they do not apply to any combination of references in the above, as a result of Applicant’s amended necessitating new grounds of rejection considering Wang.
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
Prosecution Insights