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 .
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fernandez, WO 2017/064346.
Regarding Claim 1, Fernandez teaches:
- a first body (9) that can be fixedly connected in a perimeter channel (2) of a profile (figs. 1-2) of a fixed frame (1);
- a second body (23) that can be fixedly connected in a perimeter channel (fig. 1) of a profile (figs. 1-2) of a movable leaf (3); and
- a lever assembly (16, 17) articulating each other said first body (9) and said second body (23); wherein said lever assembly (16, 17) comprises:
- a first lever (16) with a first end rotatably articulated to said first body about a first rotation axis (8) fixed with respect to said first body (see fig. 6), a second end rotatably articulated to said second body about a second rotation axis (26) parallel with respect to said first rotation axis and fixed with respect to said second body, and a middle portion interposed between said first end and said second end,
- a second lever (17) having a first end articulated to said first body (9), a second end rotatably articulated to an end of said second body about a third rotation axis (20) parallel with respect to said first rotation axis and a middle portion interposed between said first end and said second end, wherein said first lever (16) and said second lever (17) are rotatably articulated each other in correspondence of their middle portion about a fourth rotation axis (18) parallel with respect to said first rotation axis, characterised in that
- said first end of said second lever is articulated to said first body by a kinematic pair (7, 31) realizing a rotation and translation relative motion of said first end of said second lever with respect to said first body respectively about a fifth rotation axis (7) parallel with respect to said first rotation axis and along a trajectory that extends towards said first rotation axis and that, for at least a portion, is tangent or coincident with respect to at least one rectilinear direction contained in a plane perpendicular with respect to said first rotation axis, wherein said at least one rectilinear direction is incident with respect to the plane defined by said opening (see figs. 3-4).
Regarding Claim 2, Fernandez teaches:
said kinematic pair provides a pin (7) defining said fifth rotation axis (7) and fixed to said first body (9) in correspondence of a portion of the same distal with respect to said first rotation axis (8) and slidably inserted along a slot (31) realized in said first end of said second lever.
Regarding Claim 4¸ Fernandez teaches:
said kinematic pair comprises a pin (7) defining said fifth rotation axis (7) and which is fixed to said first end of said second lever, wherein said pin slides in a shaped slot (31) realized in said first body and defining said trajectory.
Regarding Claim 5, Fernandez teaches:
said second end of said first lever (16) is articulated to said second body (23) by means of a connecting rod (22) whose opposite ends are hinged respectively to said second body, defining said second rotation axis (26), and to said second end of said first lever, defining a sixth rotation axis (21) parallel with respect to said second rotation axis.
Regarding Claim 6, Fernandez teaches:
said third rotation axis (20) is fixed with respect to said second body (23).
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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fernandez ‘346.
Regarding Claim 3, Fernandez does not teach the slot being straight. However, it would have
been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the slot being straight because that would be easier to manufacture than a curved or shaped groove. Furthermore, Fernandez discloses element 31 as “a groove, and more preferably a curved groove” (see disclosure regarding 31 and see claims 2-3) which does not require the groove to be curved and “a reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art, including nonpreferred embodiments (MPEP 2123). Furthermore, a change in shape is generally considered obvious to those of ordinary skill in the art and applicant has not provided any unforeseen result stemming from the use of the claimed structure nor provided any specific problem solved by the claimed structure, In re Dailey.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fernandez ‘346 as applied to claims 1-2 above, and further in view of Sorensen, EP 1,849,947.
Regarding Claim 7, Fernandez is silent with regard to the limitations of this claim.
Sorensen teaches:
a limiter (7) of the opening angle of a movable leaf with respect to a fixed frame, wherein said limiter comprises a body (9) which can be engaged on a first end (fig. 4) of a lever (1) or on a first body and which is provided with a portion (9b) that can be superimposed or inserted in said slot (see fig. 2) reducing its useful length for the sliding of said pin (7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Fernandez with the teachings of Sorensen, such that the limitations of the claim would be satisfied, because the limiter would allow adjustment of the hinge kinematics to account for construction tolerances.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-15 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW J SULLIVAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5218. The examiner can normally be reached IFP, Typically M-Th, 8:00-6:00, regular Fr availability.
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, Jason San can be reached at 571-272-6531. 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.
/M.J.S/Examiner, Art Unit 3677
/JASON W SAN/SPE, Art Unit 3677