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 § 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) 14 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 1,192,361 to Wistrom in view of U.S. Patent No. 3,678,627 to Dixon.
Regarding claim 14, Wistrom discloses a seal for a door bottom having a seal pan (fig. 1: 5 & 6), a pressure member (1) in the seal pan, a sealing strip (10) attached to a bottom of the seal pan, and a dampening material (rubber 9, lines 48-50) disposed in the seal pan. However, another seal is not disclosed. Dixon discloses a seal for a door having a first damping component (fig. 1: 4) comprising a plurality of shaped surfaces (see shaped surface such as 4, 4A) and a second damping component (6 & 6A) at least partially enclosed by the first damping component. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wistrom by adding such a seal in order to protect and seal more edges of the door as it is closed.
Regarding claim 15, the first damping component only partially surrounds the second component such that when a door compresses the seal, the first component does not completely surround the second component.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 1,192,361 to Wistrom in view of U.S. Patent No. 3,678,627 to Dixon further in view of U.S. Patent Application No. US 2016/0186483 to Kroeger.
Regarding claim 19, Wistrom in view of Dixon do not disclose a low friction fabric cover on the bottom of the sealing strip. Kroeger discloses such a material (claim 1). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wistrom in view of Dixon by adding such a cover in order to better protect the strip.
Claim Objections
Claims 16, 17 and 20 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. The prior art of record does not disclose the structural limitations of these claims combined with the limitations of the claims from which they depend from.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/5/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant argues the restriction of claim 21. They Applicant should note that the independent claim 14 is drawn to a seal which is a sub combination which may be used separately from the combination claim 21, which is a seal and a door slab having outer skins and curved constrainment sheet. The seal of claim14 may be used in doors or entryways having structure different than that of claim 21.
Regarding the rejection of claim 14, the Applicant argues Wistrom does not have a pan creating an internal cavity that houses other components. However, as recited in the above rejection, the portion pointed to as being a pan, has an internal space with various components withing. The Applicant argues that Wistrom does not teach the limitations of the instant application and is contradicted by Wistrom’s text and drawings but does not specify how. The Applicant should note that Wistrom need not specifically refer to the components with the same names as the Applicant uses in the claims of the instant application. The components of Wistrom are structurally the same as those claimed by the Applicant, structurally. Therefore, they meet the limitations of the application. The Applicant argues the use of the Dixon reference of not having a seal pan, a pressure member, etc. However, these limitations are met by Wistrom and Dixon combined. Dixon need not disclose all these limitations. Dixon is used to teach additional seals. Regarding the rejections of claim 15, the Applicant argues the same argument as that of claim 14 which is addressed above. The arguments of amended claims 16, 17 and 20 are convincing in light of the recent claim amendments.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 Basil Katcheves whose telephone number is (571)272-6846. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 8:00 am to 6:30pm EST.
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 Glessner can be reached on (571)272-6754. 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.
/BASIL S KATCHEVES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633