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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “spring or springs” of claim 4 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-5 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 1 claims a housing “configured to attach to a pre-cut or pre-fabricated hole in both the front windshield and a back window of a vehicle”. Thus, one housing is required to pass through both the windshield and the back window. It appears that applicant intends to claim one housing attached to a hole in the windshield and a second housing attached to a hole in the back window. If the claim is changed to two housings, it seems a vent system will be claimed instead of the current vent. It is noted that the vent being configured to open the flap merely requires the flap to be openable when the vehicle is shut off and closable when the vehicle is on. No means for moving the flap have been claimed in claim 1. Claims 2-5 depend from claim 1, so they are unclear at least due to their dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
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) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2011/0151761 to Lesle et al. (hereinafter “Lesle”).
Lesle discloses a vent having a housing (52), a flap (46) and a screen (indicated, but not numbered in figure 5 at the inlet between the fan and the ‘FIG 5” title). The housing is configured to attach to a hole in a window (paragraphs 4 and 36-39). The vent is configured to open when the vehicle is shut off and closed when the vehicle is on. Paragraph 27 states that the disclosed assemblies may be located on multiple windows. Paragraph 32 states that flap 46 may be released when the motor is actuated. Lesle does not explicitly disclose the claimed dimensions such dimensions are seen as obvious to an ordinary practitioner in the art to achieve sufficient airflow to provide adequate cooling as discussed in the Lesle specification. Further, while not clearly claimed, Lesle does not explicitly teach one device in the windshield and one in the rear window. Such an arrangement is seen as obvious to an ordinary practitioner in the art from paragraph 27’s teaching that housing can be located on multiple windows including the rear window and paragraph 28’s teaching that one housing can be used to admit air while a second can be used to expel air from the interior. Placing the inlet and out on opposite surfaces (such as the windshield and the rear window) would have been obvious to ensure moving air through the entire interior and reducing “short circuiting” -air entering and immediately leaving the interior with little effect on the interior conditions.
In regard to claim 2, paragraph 32 states that flap 46 can be operated automatically when the operator enters or leaves the vehicle.
In regard to claim 3, paragraph 32 states that manual operation can be performed by the operator of the vehicle.
In regard to claim 4, paragraph 23 states that the flap 46 may be spring biased.
In regard to claim 5, paragraph 21 describes seal 61,62 to seal the housings to the window pane.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Pollock (US 3,357,338) shows a ventilation system for an automobile with air passages by the windshield and rear window and a switch 78 associated with the ignition. Kanno et al (US 5,205,781) shows a ventilation device for a parked car. Farrington (WO 0061397) shows a vehicle ventilation system which vents air that has been heated at the top of the windows (including the windshield and rear window). Vollertsen (US 2009/0247063) shows a system for ventilating a parked car that operates only when the vehicle is parked and off.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM C DOERRLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4807. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7-5.
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, Eileen Lillis can be reached at (571) 272-6928. 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.
/WILLIAM C DOERRLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3993