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
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 3-11, 13-17 and 19-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stephan (US 8931989).
Regarding claims 1, 11 Stephan discloses a capsule apparatus 10 for delivering sealant 40 for fasteners 70, the capsule apparatus comprising: a perimeter wall 14; a top cap 50 aligned to an interior contour of the perimeter wall, wherein the perimeter wall and the top cap define a cavity 25 during an initial state; and a fastener 70 configured to be disposed through an aperture 54 of the top cap, wherein engaging the fastener to an installation surface 80 causes the top cap to traverse along a length of the perimeter wall and transition from the initial state to an installed state, and wherein the top cap traversing along the length of the perimeter wall pushes sealant disposed within the cavity towards the installation surface Fig. 9.
Regarding claims 3, 10 and 20, Stephan discloses wherein the sealant 40 is butyl-based compound (Col. 5, Ln. 23). Regarding claims 4, 13 and 19, Stephan discloses wherein the top cap 50 is a flange corresponding to the fastener 70.
Regarding claims 5, 14 and 21, Stephan discloses a protective cover 12 at an opposite end of the perimeter wall from the top cap 50, wherein the protective cover includes one or more apertures 22 configured to allow the sealant 40 to flow through when the sealant is pushed towards the installation surface Fig. 9.
Regarding claims 6, 15 and 22, Stephan discloses wherein the sealant 40 flows toward the installation surface upon being pushed by the traversal of the top cap 50 at one or more temperatures above zero degrees Fahrenheit. Regarding claims 7 and 23, Stephan discloses wherein the sealant 40 does not flow toward the installation surface at one or more temperatures below 170 degrees Fahrenheit until being pushed by the traversal of the top cap 50.
Regarding claims 8, 16 and 24, Stephan discloses wherein the fastener 70 does not damage the installation surface when the fastener engages to the installation surface 80 using an amount of force sufficient to cause the top cap 50 to traverse along the length of the perimeter wall 14.
Regarding claim 9, Stephan discloses a system Fig. 9 of delivering sealant 40 for fasteners 70, the system comprising: one or more capsules 1, wherein each capsule includes a cavity 25 within an amount of sealant may be disposed; and a mount that includes: a mount body 50 that that includes one or more fastener apertures 54, wherein the one or more capsules are disposed on the mount body; and one or more sealant flow cavities 25 that allows sealant to flow from the fastener apertures to one or more sealant ports 22. Regarding claim 17, Stephan discloses a method for installing a fastener sealant capsule Fig. 9, the method comprising: disposing an amount of sealant 40 within a cavity 25 defined by a perimeter wall 14 and a top cap 50 aligned to an interior contour of the perimeter wall and positioned along a length of the perimeter wall during an initial state; positioning a fastener 70 through an aperture 54 of the top cap; and engaging the fastener to an installation surface, wherein engaging the fastener to the installation surface causes the top cap to traverse along the length of the perimeter wall, and wherein the top cap traversing along the length of the perimeter wall pushes the sealant towards the installation surface.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 2, 12 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stephan in view of Wogan et al. (US 2024/0060598).
Regarding claims 2, 12 and 18, Stephan discloses the invention as claimed above but fails to explicitly disclose where wherein the top cap includes one or more breakaway tabs. Wogan et al., a fastener sealant capsule 100, discloses the use of one or more tabs 204 Fig. 12A. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to provide the top cap of Stephan with one or more tabs as taught by Wogan et al. in order to retain the top cap in a first position at one distal end of the perimeter wall (Para 0060 of Wogan et al.).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EUGENE G BYRD whose telephone number is (571)270-1824. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5:30pm.
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, Kristina Fulton can be reached at 5712727376. 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.
/EUGENE G BYRD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights