DETAILED ACTION
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 concave side of the lateral longitudinal flashing element in Claim 1 on Lines 10-11 and the concave side of the longitudinal portion on Lines 23-24 as well as the concave side of the longitudinal portion on Lines 10-11 of Claim 12 and the concave side of the lateral longitudinal flashing element on Lines 27-28 and 40-41 of Claim 12 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 Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 21 recites “a first lateral longitudinal flashing elements”. It appears as through “elements” should not be plural. Line 23 recites “a respective one of the roof element”. It appears as though it should be “elements”. Line 34 recites “a second lateral longitudinal flashing elements”. It appears as through “elements” should not be plural. Line 36 recites “a respective one of the roof element”. It appears as though it should be “elements”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent # 4,543,753 to Sonneborn in view of US Patent # 5,522,189 to Mortensen et al.
Regarding claim 1, Sonneborn teaches in Figure 7, a lateral intermediate flashing element (16), said lateral longitudinal flashing elements (10) each having a generally L-shaped cross-section with a first leg and a second leg, the first leg being adapted to be arranged against a side of a respective one of the roof element (1) raising from a plane of the roof in a mounted position, the second leg being arranged to extend along said plane of the roof in the mounted position, the first leg and the second leg being joined at a corner of the L-shape, an inner side of the first leg and an inner side of the second leg relative to the L-shape constituting a concave side of the lateral longitudinal flashing element, a distal edge portion of the second leg opposite the corner being bent towards the concave side at an angle to form an apex, wherein the lateral intermediate flashing element (16) comprises a longitudinal portion (18A) having a generally L-shaped cross-section with a first leg and a second leg, the first leg being adapted to be arranged partly against respective sides of the roof elements (1), the second leg being arranged to extend along said plane of the roof in the mounted position, the first leg and the second leg being joined at a corner of the L-shape, an inner side of the first leg and an inner side the second leg relative to the L-shape constituting a concave side of the longitudinal portion, a distal edge portion of the second leg opposite the corner being bent towards the concave side at an angle to form an apex; the longitudinal portion (18A) having an upper longitudinal end and a lower longitudinal end. Sonneborn does not teach the lateral longitudinal flashing elements or the longitudinal portion of the lateral intermediate flashing element have a slit-shaped pocket in their second legs. However, Mortensen teaches in Figure 4, flashing elements (10a) with second legs that have a slit-shaped pocket (14a) with an opening on the inner side towards a distal edge portion and a bottom towards a corner of its L-shape, the pocket (14a) being provided by a flat Z-shaped portion of the second leg, the flat Z-shaped portion having a cross-section with a flat Z-shape. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the flashing frame of Sonneborn with the flashing of Mortensen with a reasonable expectation of success because Mortensen teaches the pockets allow fastening of the roofing (Column 3, Lines 22-29). Neither Sonneborn nor Mortensen teach a width of the longitudinal portion is smaller at the lower longitudinal end than the upper longitudinal end. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to change the shape of the longitudinal portion such that the width at the upper longitudinal end is smaller than the width at the lower longitudinal end since a change in the shape of a prior art device is a design consideration within the skill of the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). In the instant case, the problem solved by Mortensen can be regarded as creating a geometry adapted to receive a second longitudinal element and thereby potentially extending laterally the flashing area. Note: the Examiner does not find “for connecting lateral longitudinal flashing elements for flashing roof elements positioned adjacent each other at different altitudes along a slanted roof” to be limiting. When reading the preamble in the context of the entire claim, a recitation is not limiting because the body of the claim describes a complete invention and the language recited solely in the preamble does not provide any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations. Thus, the preamble of the claim(s) is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. See Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). See MPEP § 2111.02.
Regarding claim 2, Sonneborn in view of Mortensen teach a lateral intermediate flashing but they do not teach the angle of the apex is smaller at the lower longitudinal end than at the upper longitudinal end. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the angle of the apex smaller at the lower longitudinal end than at the upper longitudinal end since a change in the shape of a prior art device is a design consideration within the skill of the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). Furthermore, it seems as though the angle of the apex would need to be modified during installation of the flashing.
Regarding claim 3, Sonneborn in view of Mortensen teach a lateral intermediate flashing. Furthermore, Sonneborn teaches in Figure 7, a gutter flashing portion (13) attached to the first leg of the longitudinal portion (18A) and said first leg comprises a recess [see Figure 6] corresponding to the gutter flashing portion (13).
Regarding claim 4, Sonneborn teaches in Figure 7, a kit of flashing elements [an arrangement of members] comprising: a lateral intermediate flashing element (16) according to claim 1 as made obvious by Sonneborn in view of Mortensen. Note: the Examiner does not find “for flashing roof elements positioned adjacent each other at different altitudes along a slanted roof” to be limiting. When reading the preamble in the context of the entire claim, a recitation is not limiting because the body of the claim describes a complete invention and the language recited solely in the preamble does not provide any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations. Thus, the preamble of the claim(s) is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. See Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). See MPEP § 2111.02.
Regarding claim 5, Sonneborn in view of Mortensen teach a lateral intermediate flashing. Furthermore, Sonneborn teaches in Figure 7, a gutter flashing portion (13) attached to the first leg of the longitudinal portion (18A) and said first leg comprises a recess [see Figure 6] corresponding to the gutter flashing portion (13).
Regarding claim 6, Sonneborn in view of Mortensen teach a lateral intermediate flashing. Furthermore, Sonneborn teaches in Figure 7, the second leg of the first lateral longitudinal flashing element (10), and the second lateral longitudinal flashing element (10), respectively has a width between the corner and the apex. Furthermore, Mortensen teaches in Figure 4a, the pocket (14a) of the second leg of the flashing elements (10a), has a depth appears to be equal to or larger than 50% of the width of the flashing element (10a). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the flashing frame of Sonneborn with the flashing of Mortensen with a reasonable expectation of success because Mortensen teaches the pockets allow fastening of the roofing (Column 3, Lines 22-29) wherein the depth of the pocket needs to be deep enough for proper attachment of the flashing.
Regarding claim 7, Sonneborn in view of Mortensen teach a lateral intermediate flashing. Furthermore, Sonneborn teaches in Figure 7, the second leg of the first lateral longitudinal flashing element (10), and the second lateral longitudinal flashing element (10), respectively has a width between the corner and the apex. Furthermore, Mortensen teaches in Figure 4a, the pocket (14a) of the second leg of the flashing elements (10a), has a depth appears to be equal to or larger than 50% of the width of the flashing element (10a). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the flashing frame of Sonneborn with the flashing of Mortensen with a reasonable expectation of success because Mortensen teaches the pockets allow fastening of the roofing (Column 3, Lines 22-29) wherein the depth of the pocket needs to be deep enough for proper attachment of the flashing.
Regarding claim 8, Sonneborn in view of Mortensen teach a lateral intermediate flashing. Furthermore, Sonneborn teaches in Figure 7, the angles forming the apexes are acute angles.
Regarding claim 9, Sonneborn in view of Mortensen teach a lateral intermediate flashing. Furthermore, Mortensen teaches in Figure 4, the opening of the slit-shaped pocket (14a) of the flashing element (10a) is provided at a first bend portion [fold (Column 3, Lines 25-26)], and the bottom of the slit-shaped pocket (14a) is provided by a second bend portion [fold (Column 3, Lines 25-26)], and in a mounted position, a longitudinal part of a flashing element (10a) accommodated in the slit-shaped pocket (14a). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the flashing frame of Sonneborn with the flashing of Mortensen with a reasonable expectation of success because Mortensen teaches the bends create the pocket for the flashing (Column 3, Lines 24-29).
Regarding claim 10, Sonneborn in view of Mortensen teach a lateral intermediate flashing. Furthermore, Mortensen teaches in Figure 4, the opening of the slit-shaped pocket (14a) of the flashing element (10a) is provided at a first bend portion [fold (Column 3, Lines 25-26)], and the bottom of the slit-shaped pocket (14a) is provided by a second bend portion [fold (Column 3, Lines 25-26)], and in a mounted position, a longitudinal part of a flashing element (10a) accommodated in the slit-shaped pocket (14a). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the flashing frame of Sonneborn with the flashing of Mortensen with a reasonable expectation of success because Mortensen teaches the bends create the pocket for the flashing (Column 3, Lines 24-29).
Regarding claim 11, Sonneborn in view of Mortensen teach a lateral intermediate flashing. Furthermore, Mortensen teaches in Figure 4, the opening of the slit-shaped pocket (14a) of the flashing element (10a) is provided at a first bend portion [fold (Column 3, Lines 25-26)], and the bottom of the slit-shaped pocket (14a) is provided by a second bend portion [fold (Column 3, Lines 25-26)], and in a mounted position, a longitudinal part of a flashing element (10a) accommodated in the slit-shaped pocket (14a). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the flashing frame of Sonneborn with the flashing of Mortensen with a reasonable expectation of success because Mortensen teaches the bends create the pocket for the flashing (Column 3, Lines 24-29).
Regarding claim 12, Sonneborn teaches in Figure 7, a method comprising: providing a kit [an arrangement of members] of flashing elements comprising a lateral intermediate flashing element (16) comprising a longitudinal portion (18A) having a generally L-shaped cross-section with a first leg and a second leg, the first leg being adapted to be arranged partly against respective sides of the roof elements (1), the second leg being arranged to extend along said plane of the roof in the mounted position, the first leg and the second leg being joined at a corner of the L-shape, an inner side of the first leg and an inner side of the second leg relative to the L-shape constituting a concave side of the longitudinal portion, a distal edge portion of the second leg opposite the corner being bent towards the concave side at an angle to form an apex, the longitudinal portion (18A) having an upper longitudinal end and a lower longitudinal end; a first lateral longitudinal flashing element (10) having a generally L-shaped cross-section with a first leg and a second leg, the first leg being adapted to be arranged against a side of a respective one of the roof elements (1) raising from a plane of the roof in a mounted position, the second leg being arranged to extend along said plane of the roof in the mounted position, the first leg and the second leg being joined at a corner of the L-shape, an inner side of the first leg and an inner side of the second leg relative to the L-shape constituting a concave side of the lateral longitudinal flashing element (1), a distal edge portion of the second leg opposite the corner being bent towards the concave side at an angle to form an apex; and a second lateral longitudinal flashing element (10) having a generally L-shaped cross-section with a first leg and a second leg, the first leg being adapted to be arranged against a side of a respective one of the roof elements (1) raising from a plane of the roof in a mounted position, the second leg being arranged to extend along said plane of the roof in the mounted position, the first leg and the second leg being joined at a corner of the L-shape, an inner side of the first leg and an inner side of the second leg relative to the L-shape constituting a concave side of the lateral longitudinal flashing element (10), a distal edge portion of the second leg opposite the corner being bent towards the concave side at an angle to form an apex. Sonneborn does not teach the lateral longitudinal flashing elements or the longitudinal portion of the lateral intermediate flashing element have a slit-shaped pocket in their second legs. However, Mortensen teaches in Figure 4, flashing elements (10a) with second legs that have a slit-shaped pocket (14a) with an opening on the inner side towards a distal edge portion and a bottom towards a corner of its L-shape, the pocket (14a) being provided by a flat Z-shaped portion of the second leg, the flat Z-shaped portion having a cross-section with a flat Z-shape; the opening of the slit-shaped pocket (14a) of the flashing element (10a) is provided at a first bend portion [fold (Column 3, Lines 25-26)], and the bottom of the slit-shaped pocket (14a) is provided by a second bend portion [fold (Column 3, Lines 25-26)], and in a mounted position, a longitudinal part of a flashing element (10a) accommodated in the slit-shaped pocket (14a); inserting in a longitudinal direction the lower end of the flashing (2b) into an upper longitudinal end of the flashing element (10a) to be accommodated in the slit-shaped pocket (14a). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the flashing frame of Sonneborn with the flashing of Mortensen with a reasonable expectation of success because Mortensen teaches the pockets allow fastening of the roofing (Column 3, Lines 22-29). Neither Sonneborn nor Mortensen teach a width of the longitudinal portion is smaller at the lower longitudinal end than the upper longitudinal end. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to change the shape of the longitudinal portion such that the width at the upper longitudinal end is smaller than the width at the lower longitudinal end since a change in the shape of a prior art device is a design consideration within the skill of the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). In the instant case, the problem solved by Mortensen can be regarded as creating a geometry adapted to receive a second longitudinal element and thereby potentially extending laterally the flashing area. Note: the Examiner does not find a method “of flashing two roof elements positioned adjacent each other at different altitudes along a slanted roof,” to be limiting. When reading the preamble in the context of the entire claim, a recitation is not limiting because the body of the claim describes a complete invention and the language recited solely in the preamble does not provide any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations. Thus, the preamble of the claim(s) is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. See Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). See MPEP § 2111.02.
Regarding claim 13, Sonneborn in view of Mortensen teach a method. Furthermore, Sonneborn teaches in Figure 7, the angles forming the apexes are acute angles.
Regarding claim 14, Sonneborn in view of Mortensen teach a method. Furthermore, Sonneborn teaches in Figure 7, a gutter flashing portion (13) attached to the first leg of the longitudinal portion (18A) and said first leg comprises a recess [see Figure 6] corresponding to the gutter flashing portion (13).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW J TRIGGS whose telephone number is (571)270-3657. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 6am-2pm 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 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.
/ANDREW J TRIGGS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635