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 . Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1-20 stand rejected as set forth below.
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 roof deck of claim 16 must be shown or the feature canceled from the claim. No new matter should be entered. For the purpose of examination, the roof deck of claim 16 is interpreted as the surface of a roof.
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. The statement “an asphalt-based adhesive or a non-asphalt-based adhesive” is not limiting as it describes every possible type of adhesive as disclosed in claim 1. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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, 6-10, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shiao (US-20210262232-A1), and further in view of Jeppesen (US-20100039226-A1).
In regard to Claim 1, Shiao discloses a roofing shingle (Fig 3, element 200)[0051], comprising: a first shingle portion (Fig 1, element 110)[0041], comprising: a base portion (Fig. 1, element 115)[0041], and a plurality of tooth portions (tabs 116) extending from the base portion, wherein the plurality of tooth portions comprises at least a first tooth portion (Fig. 1)[0041]; a second shingle portion positioned to at least partially overlap the first shingle portion (Fig. 1, element 118)[0041]; a first adhesive line between the first tooth portion and the second shingle portion [0041]; Shiao does not disclose an RFID tag in the first adhesive line. Jeppesen teaches arranging a RFID tag onto the first layer of material prior to providing the second layer of material (Abstract) and, in some embodiments, one surface of the tag is provided with a suitable adhesive [0042-0043]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the embodiment of figure 1 of Shiao to include the RFID tag in the first adhesive line as taught by Jeppesen, in order to accurately identify and track the product after it has been manufactured.
In regard to Claim 2, Shiao and Jeppesen disclose a roofing shingle as described above. Jeppesen discloses the roofing shingle as described above wherein the RFID tag is on a surface of the first adhesive line [0042-0043] but does not disclose wherein the RFID tag is fully within an interior of the first adhesive line. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the RFID tag as disclosed by Jeppesen able to be placed in multiple locations within or on the surface of the shingle as disclosed by Shiao, in order to enable manufacturing flexibility and variability.
In regard to Claim 3, Shiao and Jeppesen disclose a roofing shingle as described above. Jeppesen discloses the roofing shingle as described above wherein the RFID tag is on a surface of the first adhesive line [0042-0043].
In regard to Claim 4, Shiao and Jeppesen disclose a roofing shingle as described above. Jeppesen discloses the roofing shingle as described above wherein the RFID tag is on a surface of the first adhesive line [0042-0043] but does not disclose wherein the RFID tag is on a surface of the first tooth portion. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the RFID tag as disclosed by Jeppesen able to be placed in multiple locations within or on the surface of the shingle of Shiao, in order to enable manufacturing flexibility and variability.
In regard to Claim 5, Shiao and Jeppesen disclose a roofing shingle as described above. Jeppesen discloses the roofing shingle as described above wherein the RFID tag is on a surface of the first adhesive line [0042-0043] but does not disclose wherein the RFID tag is on a surface of the second shingle portion. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the RFID tag as disclosed by Jeppesen able to be placed in multiple locations within or on the surface of the shingle of Shiao, in order to enable manufacturing flexibility and variability.
In regard to Claim 6, Shiao discloses wherein the first adhesive line comprises an asphalt-based adhesive or a non-asphalt-based adhesive [0041].
In regard to Claim 7, Shiao discloses the roofing shingle as described above wherein the first tooth portion comprises: a substrate [0060]; an asphalt-filled layer on the substrate [0060]; and a plurality of granules on the asphalt-filled layer [0002].
In regard to Claim 8, Shiao discloses the roofing shingle as described above wherein the substrate comprises a fiberglass mat [0058].
In regard to Claim 9, Shiao and Jeppesen disclose a roofing shingle as described above. Shiao discloses a first adhesive line between the first tooth portion and the second shingle portion [0041], but does not disclose a second adhesive line between the first tooth portion and the second shingle portion. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include additional adhesive lines within the shingle of the combination of Shiao and Jeppesen to provide better wind resistance and enhanced water proofing.
In regard to Claim 10, Shiao and Jeppesen disclose a roofing shingle as described above. Shiao discloses a first adhesive line between the first tooth portion and the second shingle portion [0041], but does not disclose a third adhesive line between the base portion and the second shingle portion. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include additional adhesive lines within the shingle of the combination of Shiao and Jeppesen to provide better wind resistance and enhanced water proofing.
In regard to Claim 16, Shiao discloses a roofing system, comprising: a roof deck [0041]; a roofing shingle installed on the roof deck (Fig 3, element 200)[0051], the roofing shingle comprising: a first shingle portion (Fig 1, element 110)[0041], comprising: a base portion (Fig. 1, element 115)[0041], and a plurality of tooth portions (tabs 116) extending from the base portion, wherein the plurality of tooth portions comprises at least a first tooth portion (Fig. 1)[0041]; a second shingle portion positioned to at least partially overlap the first shingle portion (Fig. 1, element 118)[0041]; a first adhesive line between the first tooth portion and the second shingle portion [0041]; Shiao does not disclose an RFID tag in the first adhesive line. Jeppesen teaches arranging a RFID tag onto the first layer of material prior to providing the second layer of material (Abstract) and, in some embodiments, one surface of the tag is provided with a suitable adhesive [0042-0043]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the embodiment of figure 1 of Shiao to include the RFID tag in the first adhesive line in the embodiment of Jeppesen, in order to accurately identify and track the product after it has been manufactured.
In regard to Claim 17, Shiao and Jeppesen disclose a roofing shingle as described above. Jeppesen discloses the roofing shingle as described above wherein the RFID tag is on a surface of the first adhesive line [0042-0043] but does not disclose wherein the RFID tag is fully within an interior of the first adhesive line. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the RFID tag as disclosed by Jeppesen able to be placed in multiple locations within or on the surface of the shingle of Shiao, in order to enable manufacturing flexibility and variability.
In regard to Claim 18, Shiao and Jeppesen disclose a roofing shingle as described above. Jeppesen discloses the roofing shingle as described above wherein the RFID tag is on a surface of the first adhesive line [0042-0043].
In regard to Claim 19, Shiao and Jeppesen disclose a roofing shingle as described above. Jeppesen discloses the roofing shingle as described above wherein the RFID tag is on a surface of the first adhesive line [0042-0043] but does not disclose wherein the RFID tag is on a surface of the first tooth portion. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the RFID tag as disclosed by Jeppesen able to be placed in multiple locations within or on the surface of the shingle of Shiao, in order to enable manufacturing flexibility and variability.
In regard to Claim 20, Shiao and Jeppesen disclose a roofing shingle as described above. Jeppesen discloses the roofing shingle as described above wherein the RFID tag is on a surface of the first adhesive line [0042-0043] but does not disclose wherein the RFID tag is on a surface of the second shingle portion. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the RFID tag as disclosed by Jeppesen able to be placed in multiple locations within or on the surface of the shingle of Shiao, in order to enable manufacturing flexibility and variability.
Claims 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pinault (US-7125601-B1), and further in view of Jeppesen (US-20100039226-A1) and Bondoc (US-4717614-A).
In regard to Claim 11, Pinault discloses a roofing shingle (Fig. 2 element 30 & pg 6, col 8, lines 24-31), comprising: a substrate (Fig. 2 element 32& pg 6, col 8, lines 24-32); a first asphalt-filled layer on the substrate (Fig. 2 element 32 & pg 6, col 8, lines 24-32); a plurality of granules on the first asphalt-filled layer (Fig. 2 element 34 & pg 6, col 8, lines 24-32). Pinault does not disclose an RFID tag on the substrate, wherein at least a portion of the first asphalt-filled layer covers the RFID tag. Jeppesen teaches arranging a RFID tag onto the first layer of material prior to providing the second layer of material (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the embodiment disclosed in Pinault to include the RFID tag for roofing products disclosed in Jeppesen, in order to accurately identify and track the product after it has been manufactured.
In regard to Claim 12, Pinault and Jeppesen disclose the roofing shingle as described above. Pinault does not disclose a second asphalt-filled layer, wherein the first asphalt-filled layer and the second asphalt-filled layer are on opposite sides of the substrate. Bondoc discloses the roofing shingle as described above further comprising: a second asphalt-filled layer, wherein the first asphalt-filled layer and the second asphalt-filled layer are on opposite sides of the substrate (Fig. 3 elements 30, 32, and 34 & pg 10, col 9, lines 45-57). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the embodiment disclosed in Pinault in combination with Jeppesen to include the second asphalt-filled layer on roofing products disclosed in Bondoc, in order to improve the weather resistance and increase the life of the shingles.
In regard to Claim 13, Pinault and Jeppesen disclose the roofing shingle as described above wherein the substrate comprises a fiberglass mat (pg 8, col 8, lines 41-43).
In regard to Claim 14, Pinault and Jeppesen disclose the roofing shingle as described above wherein the wherein the roofing shingle includes a headlap portion and a reveal portion (Fig. 2) but do not disclose wherein RFID tag is below the headlap portion. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the RFID tag as disclosed by Jeppesen able to be placed in multiple locations on the shingle of Pinault, in order to enable manufacturing flexibility and variability.
In regard to Claim 15, Pinault and Jeppesen disclose the roofing shingle as described above wherein the wherein the roofing shingle includes a headlap portion and a reveal portion (Fig. 2) but do not disclose wherein RFID tag is below the reveal portion. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the RFID tag as disclosed by Jeppesen able to be placed in multiple locations on the shingle of Pinault, in order to enable manufacturing flexibility and variability.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See list of references on attached PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Audrey Fisher whose telephone number is (571)272-2849. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 7:30-4:30.
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.
/A.B.F./Examiner, Art Unit 3635
/BRIAN D MATTEI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3635