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
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of group 8 figures 8a-8b claims 1-20 in the reply filed on 3/6/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the search for all the species would not present an undue burden. This is not found persuasive because each specie has features different and distinct from the others. Applicant is encouraged to clarify that the species are obvious variants of each other and the rejection of one specie would be applicable to the others if applicant deems they are the same.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
(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) 1-2, 5-6, 10-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Nelson et al (2021/0115725).
Nelson et al figure 5, shows a window jamb assembly, comprising:
a window jamb (135c) with a recess along a lineal profile of the window jamb, wherein at least one protrusion(460) is defined within the recess; and an insertable attachment component(430, 145) comprising a screw boss, wherein the insertable
attachment component is structured to engage with the at least one protrusion defined within the recess (by part 430), wherein the insertable attachment component is structured to receive a screw(440) via the screw boss.
Per claim 2, Nelson et al further shows a blind bracket(445), wherein the
blind bracket defines at least one screw aperture(the hole for part 440 therethrough) that allows the screw to pass through and engaged the screw boss of the insertable attachment component.
Per claims 5-6, Nelson further shows the blind bracket(445) defines an attachment side and an extending side, wherein the extending side is perpendicular to the attachment side (either 445 or its attaching perpendicular parts), at least one of the attachment side or the extending side define a tab (the shorter part perpendicular to part 445) that is structured to engage a blind (able to function as claimed depending on the structure of the blind).
Per claims 10-11, Nelson further shows the insertable attachment component
defines at least one cantilever portion(636, 640, figure 6) structured to engage at least one of the at least one protrusion defined within the recess, wherein the at least one cantilever portion comprises a tapered hook to engage at least one of the at least one protrusion defined within the recess.
Per claims 12, Nelson shows the insertable attachment component
comprises a U-shape with a first side, a second side, and a third side, wherein the first side of the insertable attachment component is engageable with one of the at least one protrusion.
Per claim 13, Nelson further shows the window jamb defines a first end and
a second end, wherein the first end of the window jamb comprises an aperture to receive a screw.
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) 7-9 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelson.
Nelson shows all the claimed limitations except for the attachment being made of first and second attachment members.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Nelson’s structure to show the attachment being made of first and second attachment members since having attachment member made of two pieces would allow for the formation of shorter members forming a longer assembly and thus provide for the easy of production.
Nelson as modified further shows an additional insertable attachment component comprising an additional screw boss, wherein the additional insertable attachment component is structured to engage with the at least one protrusion defined within the
recess, wherein the insertable attachment component is inserted proximate a first end of the window jamb and the additional insertable attachment component is inserted proximate a second end of the window jamb, wherein a distance between the insertable
attachment component and the additional insertable attachment component is based on a size of a window.
Claim(s) 14-15, 17-20 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelson.
Nelson shows all the claimed structural limitations. the claimed method steps would have been the obvious method steps of manufacturing a window jamb assembly with Nelson’s structures.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4, 16 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.
Prior art does not provide sufficient motivation to modify Nelson’s structures to show the attachment side comprises the at least one screw aperture and at least one
protruding dimple in combination with other claimed limitations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art shows different jamb assemblies.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHI D Tran whose telephone number is (571)272-6864. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 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 at 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.
/PHI D A/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Prosecution Insights