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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 11/24/25 is acknowledged.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 1 in a telephone communication with applicants representative Jovan Jovanovic on 2/26/26 is acknowledged.
Claims 3-13, 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention and/or species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/24/25 and the telephone communication on 2/26/26.
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 15,16,17,18 and all claims depending therefrom 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 15 recites “abuttingly approaching”, it is unclear what is encompassed by this term. Is it abutting or is it approaching, how is it both?
Claim 16 depends from claim 15 and recites “abutting engages”, it is unclear how the lower substrate can abuttingly approaching in claim 15 AND abuttingly engage the lower surface of the base wall, causing confusion regarding the scope of the claimed invention. Is it approaching or is it engages?
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a2 as being anticipated by Anderberg et al (12467646).
Claim 1. Anderberg discloses a wall sill assembly for use in a wall construction comprising:
- a sill base member including:
- a base wall (as seen in the annotated figure) having an upper surface, a lower surface opposite the upper surface, and an inner end (as seen in the annotated figure) and an outer end (as seen in the annotated figure) opposite the inner end;
- an inner wall extending in a direction which is one of oblique and perpendicular to the base wall, from the inner end of the base wall (as seen in the annotated figure);
- an extension interface (as seen in the annotated figure) extending in a direction which is one of oblique and perpendicular to the base wall, from the outer end thereof; and
- an extension sill member including:
- an extension interface coupling (the curved bend from the extension interface to the extension base wall; as seen in the annotated figure);
- an extension base wall (as seen in the annotated figure) extending from the extension interface coupling; and
- an extension end wall (as seen in the annotated figure) extending from the extension base wall opposite the extension base wall;
- wherein the extension sill member is positionable so that the extension interface coupling at least partially encapsulates the extension interface, with the extension base wall extending over a portion of the upper surface of the base wall, and with the extension end wall extending away from the upper surface of the base wall, in a spaced apart configuration relative to the inner wall (as seen in the annotated figure).
PNG
media_image1.png
1161
1104
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a2 as being anticipated by Bifano (5946870).
Claim 1. Bifano discloses a wall sill assembly for use in a wall construction comprising:
- a sill base member including:
- a base wall (188/300 as seen in figure 6-8)) having an upper surface, a lower surface opposite the upper surface, and an inner end (at 182) and an outer end (at 286) opposite the inner end;
- an inner wall (the upstanding wall forming 182 as seen in figures 6-8) extending in a direction which is one of oblique and perpendicular to the base wall, from the inner end of the base wall (as seen in figures 6-8);
- an extension interface (286 and/or 184 as seen in figures 6-8) extending in a direction which is one of oblique and perpendicular to the base wall, from the outer end thereof; and
- an extension sill member (210 as seen in figures 6-8) including:
- an extension interface coupling (18/310 as seen in figures 6-8);
- an extension base wall (40 as seen in figures 6-8) extending from the extension interface coupling; and
- an extension end wall (22 as seen in figures 6-8) extending from the extension base wall opposite the extension base wall;
- wherein the extension sill member is positionable so that the extension interface coupling at least partially encapsulates the extension interface (where it encapsulates the top surface), with the extension base wall extending over a portion of the upper surface of the base wall, and with the extension end wall extending away from the upper surface of the base wall, in a spaced apart configuration relative to the inner wall (as seen in figures 6-8).
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) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bifano (5946870).
Claim 2. Bifano discloses the wall sill assembly of claim 1 wherein the sill base member and the extension sill member may comprises a reinforced polymer member (as noted at least at col. 8, lines 36-39) and the sill base member and the extension sill member may comprises a metal member (where it is disclosed other materials including metal (col. 8, lines 37-39 and col. 5, lines 8-14, col. 6, lines 56-62).
Bifano does not expressly disclose that the sill base member comprises a reinforced polymer member and the extension sill member comprises a metal member. Bifano does disclose that reinforcement polymer and metal are acceptable materials and that the members may be made separately. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the sill base member comprises a reinforced polymer member and the extension sill member comprises a metal member, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. In the instant case it would have been obvious for at least the reason of easily and inexpensively manufacturing the product and easily attach to an existing support structure and to reduce degradation due to exposure to sunlight.
Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anderberg et al (12467646) in view of Prygon (20180245347).
Claim 14. Anderberg discloses a wall construction comprising:
- a wall substrate (such as 320) having an outer surface;
- the wall sill assembly of claim 1 (as above), wherein the inner wall overlies the outer surface,
- an insulation (256) extending over at least a portion of the wall substrate with a lower surface thereof abutting the upper surface of the base wall of the wall sill assembly, the insulation being fit between the inner wall and the extension end wall of the wall sill assembly (as seen in figure 6); and
- a cladding (304) extending over at least a portion of the insulation and extending over the extension end wall.
Anderberg does not expressly disclose a fastener extending through the inner wall and into the wall substrate to attach the wall sill assembly to the wall substrate; or a fastener extending through the cladding and the insulation and the wall substrate so as to attach the cladding to the wall substrate.
Prygon discloses an exterior wall cladding system including a wall sill assembly (at 44) having an inner wall overlying an outer surface of substrate (18) and a fastener (46) extending through the inner wall and into the wall substrate to attach the wall sill assembly to the wall substrate and a cladding (60) extending over the wall substrate and exterior wall layers with a fastener (64) extending through the cladding and exterior wall layers and the substrate so as to attach the cladding to the wall substrate (as seen in figure 4).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to pursue known design options and modify the wall construction of Anderberg to have fastener extending through the inner wall and into the wall substrate and a fastener extending through the cladding and the insulation and the wall substrate so as to attach the wall sill assembly and the cladding to the wall substrate, as taught by Prygon, to achieve the predictable result of securely attaching the wall sill assembly and the cladding assembly to the substrate, separately to allow for removal and replacement of one without undoing the securement of the other, or where assembly can be in stages where the wall sill assembly can be securely attached before or without attachment of the cladding.
Claim 15. The wall construction of claim 14 further comprising a lower outer substrate (268) positioned over a portion of the outer surface of the wall substrate, the lower outer substrate having an upper surface (at 266) abuttingly approaching the lower surface of the base wall (as seen in figure 6), with an outer surface that is inboard of the extension interface of the wall sill assembly (as seen in figure 6).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19 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.
Claims 16-18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 16 -The prior art discloses lower substrates that abuttingly engage lower surface of a base wall of a wall sill assembly, but the prior art does not disclose a lower outer substrate with an outer surface that is inboard of the extension interface of the wall sill assembly and abuttingly engages the lower surface of the base wall of the wall sill assembly as required by claim 16. While various wall sill assemblies are known in the art, none alone or in combination anticipate or make obvious all of the claimed features and limitations as set forth by the applicant in dependent claim 16. It would have been beyond the level of ordinary skill in the art to modify or combine the prior art to arrive at the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 17. While various wall sill assemblies are known in the art, none alone or in combination anticipate or make obvious all of the claimed features and limitations as set forth by the applicant in dependent claim 17. Particularly the prior art fails to disclose a lower outer sealing layer including an upper edge that extends between the extension interface and the extension interface coupling. It would have been beyond the level of ordinary skill in the art to modify or combine the prior art to arrive at the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 18- While various wall sill assemblies are known in the art, none alone or in combination anticipate or make obvious all of the claimed features and limitations as set forth by the applicant in dependent claim 18. Particularly the prior art fails to disclose the lower outer substrate has a lower outer substrate thickness that is greater than an insulation thickness of the insulation. It would have been beyond the level of ordinary skill in the art to modify or combine the prior art to arrive at the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 19- While various wall sill assemblies are known in the art, none alone or in combination anticipate or make obvious all of the claimed features and limitations as set forth by the applicant in dependent claim 19. Particularly the prior art fails to disclose a subframe sheeting positioned over a portion of the insulation between the insulation and cladding. It would have been beyond the level of ordinary skill in the art to modify or combine the prior art to arrive at the claimed invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA LAUX whose telephone number is (571)272-8228. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-3:30.
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.
JESSICA L. LAUX
Examiner
Art Unit 3635
/JESSICA L LAUX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635