DETAILED ACTION
The following Non-Final Office Action is in response to the application filed 5/17/2024.
Status of the claims: Claims 1-18 are hereby examined below.
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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 3,7 and 13 recite that the position of the slit is radially variable. It is unclear as to what this requires. How is the position radially variable? Examiner is unsure if anything is actually positively recited by this claim other than the position can be anywhere.
Claims 4,8 and 14 state that the length of the slit is variable. It is unclear what this requires other than the length can be anything.
Claims 5 and 11 recite “the edges have an irregular shape”. It is unclear what is required for an “irregular shape”. Per the specification “irregular” means “without a fixed or specified boundary”. Examiner does not know what exactly it means to not have a fixed or specified boundary. All shapes would have a boundary that is both fixed and specified. This definition is confusing and unclear.
Dependent claims are rejected as depending on a rejected claim.
Claims are being examined as best understood.
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 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bostyn US 8,109,317 in view of Roh KR102263989.
In regard to claim 1, with reference to Figures 1-5, Bostyn ‘317 discloses a manual release structure for use with a roll-up door comprising: a longitudinally and vertically extending wall clip (9, Fig. 1) disposed to one side of a doorway (1, Fig. 2); a longitudinally and vertically extending face frame slide (14, Fig. 4) captured within the wall clip (9), the face frame slide (14) comprising a U-shaped structure having an opening (interior) facing inwardly of the doorway and protrusions (shown below) at each side of the opening; and a longitudinally and vertically extending rail (8, Fig. 4) captured within the face frame slide (14) opening and retained in place by the protrusions (shown below) of the opening, the rail comprising a vertical axis (through the middle), an opening (shown below) and at least one vertical slit (shown below) parallel to the axis; and wherein the at least one slit allows the rail to flex (8) and the opening to expand.
PNG
media_image1.png
212
294
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
309
435
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Bostyn ‘317 fails to disclose a rearward facing notch disposed in the face frame slide at a point, the notch extending a length at each side of the face frame slide; and wherein the at least one vertical slit is disposed in the rail at the point of the face frame slide slot. With reference to Figure 6, Roh ‘989 discloses a rearward facing notch (27, Fig. 6) disposed in the face frame slide (20, Fig. 6) at a point, the notch extending a length at each side of the face frame slide (20). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify the device of Bostyn ‘317 to include a rearward facing notch in the face frame slide as taught by Roh ‘989 to help facilitate easier opening in an emergency situation. As modified to include the notch as taught by Roh ‘989, the slit would be located at the point of the frame slide slot as is claimed.
In regard to claim 2, Bostyn ‘317 discloses wherein the at least one slit (shown above) comprises a length along the rail (8).
As best understood, in regard to claim 3, Bostyn ‘317 discloses wherein the position of the at least one slit (shown above) is radially variable.
As best understood, in regard to claim 4, Bostyn ‘317 discloses wherein the length of the at least one slit (shown above) is variable.
As best understood, in regard to claim 5, Bostyn ‘317 discloses a manual release structure for use with a roll-up door, the roll-up door comprising a central door panel (3, Fig. 1) disposed within a doorway (1, Fig. 2) and flanked by two lateral vertical edges (of 2, Fig 1), the edges having an irregular shape, and the manual release structure comprising: a longitudinally and vertically extending wall clip (9) disposed to each side of the doorway; a longitudinally and vertically extending face frame slide (14) captured within the wall clip, the face frame slide comprising a U-shaped structure having an opening (shown above) facing inwardly of the doorway and protrusions (shown above) disposed at each side of the opening; and a longitudinally and vertically extending flexible rail (8) captured within the face frame slide (14) opening and retained in place by the protrusions of the opening, the rail comprising a vertical axis, an opening (shown above) and at least one vertical slit (shown above) parallel to the axis; wherein a lateral edge (11, Fig. 4) of the roll-up door can be retained within and pass through the rail (8); and wherein the at least one slit (shown above) allows the rail (8) to flex and the opening to expand.
Bostyn ‘317 fails to disclose a rearward facing notch disposed in the face frame slide at a point, the notch extending a length at each side of the face frame slide; and wherein the at least one vertical slit is disposed in the rail at the point of the face frame slide slot. With reference to Figure 6, Roh ‘989 discloses a rearward facing notch (27, Fig. 6) disposed in the face frame slide (20, Fig. 6) at a point, the notch extending a length at each side of the face frame slide (20). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify the device of Bostyn ‘317 to include a rearward facing notch in the face frame slide as taught by Roh ‘989 to help facilitate easier opening in an emergency situation. As modified to include the notch as taught by Roh ‘989, the slit would be located at the point of the frame slide slot as is claimed.
In regard to claim 6, Bostyn ‘317 discloses wherein the at least one slit (shown above) comprises a length along the rail (8).
As best understood, in regard to claim 7, Bostyn ‘317 discloses wherein the position of the at least one slit (shown above) is radially variable.
As best understood, in regard to claim 8, Bostyn ‘317 discloses wherein the length of the at least one slit (shown above) is variable.
In regard to claim 9, Bostyn ‘317 as modified by Roh ‘989 discloses wherein the irregular shape of the roll-up door edge (11, Bostyn ‘317) facilitates rotation of the door edge within the rail (8, Bostyn ‘317) at the point of the notch (27, as taught by Roh ‘989).
In regard to claim 10, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to include indicia for hand placement at the point of of the notch, as it has been held that where the only difference between a prior art product and a claimed product is printed matter that is not functionally related to the product, the content of the printed matter will not distinguish the claimed product from the prior art. In re Ngai, **>367 F.3d 1336, 1339, 70 USPQ2d 1862, 1864 (Fed. Cir. 2004)< (Claim at issue was a kit requiring instructions and a buffer agent. The Federal Circuit held that the claim was anticipated by a prior art reference that taught a kit that included instructions and a buffer agent, even though the content of the instructions differed.). See also In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385-86, 217 USPQ 401, 404 (Fed. Cir. 1983)("Where the printed matter is not functionally related to the substrate, the printed matter will not distinguish the invention from the prior art in terms of patentability …. [T ]he critical question is whether there exists any new and unobvious functional relationship between the printed matter and the substrate.").
As best understood, in regard to claim 11, Bostyn ‘317 discloses a manual release structure and a roll-up door assembly comprising a roll up door comprising a central door panel (3, Fig. 1) disposed within a doorway (1, Fig. 2) and flanked by two lateral vertical edges (of 2, Fig 1), the edges having an irregular shape, a longitudinally and vertically extending wall clip (9) disposed to each side of the doorway; a longitudinally and vertically extending face frame slide (14) captured within the wall clip, the face frame slide comprising a U-shaped structure having an opening (shown above) facing inwardly of the doorway and protrusions (shown above) disposed at each side of the opening; and a longitudinally and vertically extending flexible rail (8) captured within the face frame slide (14) opening and retained in place by the protrusions of the opening, the rail comprising a vertical axis, an opening (shown above) and at least one vertical slit (shown above) parallel to the axis; wherein a lateral edge (11, Fig. 4) of the roll-up door can be retained within and pass through the rail (8); and wherein the at least one slit (shown above) allows the rail (8) to flex and the opening to expand.
Bostyn ‘317 fails to disclose a rearward facing notch disposed in the face frame slide at a point, the notch extending a length at each side of the face frame slide; and wherein the at least one vertical slit is disposed in the rail at the point of the face frame slide slot. With reference to Figure 6, Roh ‘989 discloses a rearward facing notch (27, Fig. 6) disposed in the face frame slide (20, Fig. 6) at a point, the notch extending a length at each side of the face frame slide (20). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify the device of Bostyn ‘317 to include a rearward facing notch in the face frame slide as taught by Roh ‘989 to help facilitate easier opening in an emergency situation. As modified to include the notch as taught by Roh ‘989, the slit would be located at the point of the frame slide slot as is claimed.
In regard to claim 12, Bostyn ‘317 discloses wherein the at least one slit (shown above) comprises a length along the rail (8).
As best understood, in regard to claim 13, Bostyn ‘317 discloses wherein the position of the at least one slit (shown above) is radially variable.
As best understood, in regard to claim 14, Bostyn ‘317 discloses wherein the length of the at least one slit (shown above) is variable.
In regard to claim 15, Bostyn ‘317 as modified by Roh ‘989 discloses wherein the irregular shape of the roll-up door edge (11, Bostyn ‘317) facilitates rotation of the door edge within the rail (8, Bostyn ‘317) at the point of the notch (27, as taught by Roh ‘989).
In regard to claims 16-17, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to include indicia for hand placement at the point of the notch/ instructional indicator on the doorway, as it has been held that where the only difference between a prior art product and a claimed product is printed matter that is not functionally related to the product, the content of the printed matter will not distinguish the claimed product from the prior art. In re Ngai, **>367 F.3d 1336, 1339, 70 USPQ2d 1862, 1864 (Fed. Cir. 2004)< (Claim at issue was a kit requiring instructions and a buffer agent. The Federal Circuit held that the claim was anticipated by a prior art reference that taught a kit that included instructions and a buffer agent, even though the content of the instructions differed.). See also In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385-86, 217 USPQ 401, 404 (Fed. Cir. 1983)("Where the printed matter is not functionally related to the substrate, the printed matter will not distinguish the invention from the prior art in terms of patentability …. [T ]he critical question is whether there exists any new and unobvious functional relationship between the printed matter and the substrate.").
In regard to claim 18, Bostyn ‘317 as modified by Roh ‘989 discloses wherein force placed against the door panel indicia (as obvious to include as stated above) initiates disengagement of the door edge (11, Bostyn ‘317) from the rail (8, Bostyn ‘317).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEREMY C RAMSEY whose telephone number is (571)270-3133. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Wed 7:00-3:30.
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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at 571-270-5616. 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.
/JEREMY C RAMSEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3634
/DANIEL P CAHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634