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 .
Response to Amendments
The amendments filed on 04/09/2026 have been received, to which the Applicant is thanked. The Applicant has overcome the claim objections of record, and they have been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
The arguments have been fully considered, but have not been found to be persuasive.
In response to Applicants argument on pages 4-5 regarding newly amended claim language,
The examiner respectfully responds the Applicants arguments are directed to new amendments to the claim language, which have been addressed in the rejection below.
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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daniels et al (US 2007/0173191), hereinafter referred to as Daniels, in view of Weiss et al (US 2009/0130047), hereinafter referred to as Weiss, in further view of Wolfert (US 4,325,290).
Regarding claim 1, Daniels (US 2007/0173191) shows a ventilation system comprising:
a base (see Annotated Figure 1) including a flashing portion (see Annotated Figure 1) and a chimney portion (see Annotated Figure 1) formed integrally with the flashing portion (see Annotated Figure 1); and
a hood (20, Fig. 2) fitting over the cylindrical chimney portion (see Annotated Figure 1), the hood including a top surface (see Annotated Figure 1), a slant back portion (see Annotated Figure 1) extending from the top surface to a tab (see Annotated Figure 1) engaged with the flashing portion (Fig. 4, see Annotated Figure 1), and
three sidewalls (34/35, Fig. 3) extending from the top surface to the flashing portion (Fig. 2), wherein at least one of the three sidewalls includes integrally pierced louvers (60, Fig. 3 – the louvers 60 are integral to the structure of the hood 20 and pierce into the space within, under the hood).
However, Daniels lacks showing an integral cylindrical chimney portion.
Weiss (US 2009/0130047), an air ventilating apparatus with a filter, is in the same field of endeavor as Daniels which is an air ventilating apparatus with a filter.
Weiss teaches an integral cylindrical chimney portion (124, Fig. 12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the chimney portion of Daniels to incorporate the teachings of the chimney portion of Weiss, which would provide an improved airborne odor elimination reduction method that includes entraining VPHP-containing malodorous air, with a circular opening to coordinate with other tubular conduits without the need for an adapter or transition box (¶0018).
However, Daniels lacks showing at least one of the three sidewalls includes integrally pierced louvers defining respective holes through the at least one of the three sidewalls.
Wolfert (US 4,325,290), a roof vent cover, is in the same field of endeavor of Daniels which is a roof vent cover.
Wolfert teaches at least one sidewall (24, Fig. 4) includes integrally pierced louvers (28, Fig. 4) defining respective holes (30, Fig. 4) through the at least one sidewalls (Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the at least one of three sidewalls and louvers of Daniels to incorporate the teachings of the sidewalls and louvers with holes of Wolfert, which would provide to achieve low pressure areas in the vicinity of the outer side walls for enhancing exhaustion of air through the louvered openings from the space below the roof (Col. 3, Lines 19-34).
PNG
media_image1.png
651
765
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1
Regarding claim 2, Daniels shows wherein the chimney portion includes a tapered portion (see Annotated Figure 1) at a top of the chimney portion (see Annotated Figure 1).
However, Daniels lacks showing a cylindrical chimney portion (124, Fig. 12).
Weiss teaches a cylindrical chimney portion (124, Fig. 12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the chimney portion of Daniels to incorporate the teachings of the chimney portion of Weiss, which would provide an improved airborne odor elimination reduction method that includes entraining VPHP-containing malodorous air, with a circular opening to coordinate with other tubular conduits without the need for an adapter or transition box (¶0018).
Regarding claim 3, Daniels shows wherein the hood is formed from one piece of formed metal (¶0039).
Regarding claim 4, Daniels shows further comprising: a filter (29, Fig. 2, ¶0028, Lines 21-27 – element 29 is a mesh screen that provides an enhanced filtering effect) surrounding the chimney portion (Fig. 2) and covered by the hood (Fig. 2).
However, Daniels lacks showing a non-woven polyester filter surrounding the cylindrical chimney portion.
Weiss teaches a non-woven polyester filter (125, Fig. 12, ¶0095) surrounding the cylindrical chimney portion (124, Fig. 12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the filter and chimney portion of Daniels to incorporate the teachings of the filter and chimney portion of Weiss, which would provide an improved airborne odor elimination reduction method that includes entraining VPHP-containing malodorous air (¶0018).
Regarding claim 5, Daniels shows wherein each of the three sidewalls include integrally pierced louvers (60, Fig. 2/3).
Claims 6-7 & 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daniels et al (US 2007/0173191), hereinafter referred to as Daniels, in view of Weiss et al (US 2009/0130047), hereinafter referred to as Weiss.
Regarding claim 6, Daniels (US 2007/0173191) shows an off-ridge ventilation system for a roof, the ventilation system comprising:
a base (see Annotated Figure 1) including a flashing portion and a chimney portion (see Annotated Figure 1) formed integrally with the flashing portion (see Annotated Figure 1); and
a hood (20, Fig. 2) fitting over the chimney portion (see Annotated Figure 1), the hood formed from one piece of formed metal (¶0039) and including a slant back portion (see Annotated Figure 1) extending from a top surface of the hood (see Annotated Figure 1) to a tab (see Annotated Figure 1) engaged with the flashing portion (see Annotated Figure 1).
However, Daniels lacks showing a cylindrical chimney portion.
Weiss (US 2009/0130047), an air ventilating apparatus with a filter, is in the same field of endeavor as Daniels which is an air ventilating apparatus with a filter.
Weiss teaches a cylindrical chimney portion (124, Fig. 12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the chimney portion of Daniels to incorporate the teachings of the chimney portion of Weiss, which would provide an improved airborne odor elimination reduction method that includes entraining VPHP-containing malodorous air, with a circular opening to coordinate with other tubular conduits without the need for an adapter or transition box (¶0018).
Regarding claim 7, Daniels shows wherein the hood includes a plurality of sidewalls (34/35, Fig. 3) extending from the top surface of the hood to the flashing portion (Fig. 2/3).
Regarding claim 9, Daniels shows further comprising: a filter (29, Fig. 2, ¶0028, Lines 21-27 – element 29 is a mesh screen that provides an enhanced filtering effect) surrounding the chimney portion (Fig. 2).
However, Daniels lacks showing a non-woven polyester filter surrounding the cylindrical chimney portion.
Weiss teaches a non-woven polyester filter (125, Fig. 12, ¶0095) surrounding the cylindrical chimney portion (124, Fig. 12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the filter and chimney portion of Daniels to incorporate the teachings of the filter and chimney portion of Weiss, which would provide an improved airborne odor elimination reduction method that includes entraining VPHP-containing malodorous air (¶0018).
Regarding claim 10, Daniels shows elements of the claimed invention as stated above in claim 6 including wherein the chimney portion is formed monolithically with the flashing portion (Fig. 2 – the Merriam-Websters Dictionary defines Monolithic: “cast as a single piece”, to which the Examiner is using the broadest reasonable interpretation to understand the chimney portion is formed monolithically with the flashing portion, as they are formed of a single piece).
However, Daniels lacks showing the chimney portion being cylindrical.
Weiss teaches the chimney portion is cylindrical (124, Fig. 12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the chimney portion of Daniels to incorporate the teachings of the chimney portion of Weiss, which would provide an improved airborne odor elimination reduction method that includes entraining VPHP-containing malodorous air, with a circular opening to coordinate with other tubular conduits without the need for an adapter or transition box (¶0018).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daniels et al (US 2007/0173191), hereinafter referred to as Daniels, in view of Weiss et al (US 2009/0130047), hereinafter referred to as Weiss, in further view of Wolfert (US 4,325,290).
Regarding claim 8, Daniels shows wherein each of the plurality of sidewalls includes integrally pierced louvers (60, Fig. 3 – the louvers 60 are integral to the structure of the hood 20 and pierce into the space within, under the hood).
However, Daniels lacks showing each of the plurality of side walls includes integrally pierced louvers defining respective holes through the plurality of sidewalls.
Wolfert (US 4,325,290), a roof vent cover, is in the same field of endeavor of Daniels which is a roof vent cover.
Wolfert teaches each of the plurality of side walls (24/26, Fig. 4) includes integrally pierced louvers (28, Fig. 4) defining respective holes (20, Fig. 4) through the plurality of sidewalls (Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the plurality of sidewalls and louvers of Daniels to incorporate the teachings of the plurality of sidewalls and louvers with holes of Wolfert, which would provide to achieve low pressure areas in the vicinity of the outer side walls for enhancing exhaustion of air through the louvered openings from the space below the roof (Col. 3, Lines 19-34).
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 L FAULKNER whose telephone number is (469)295-9209. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9-7, Every other F: Flex.
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, Michael Hoang can be reached at 571-272-6460. 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.
/RYAN L FAULKNER/Examiner, Art Unit 3762
/AVINASH A SAVANI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights