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 § 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 21-40 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.
Regarding claim 21, lines 19-21, the claim recites that the first position aids are attached to the one or more mullions, and then recites “wherein the first positioning aids and the mullion profiles are designed in such a way that the first positioning aids can be attached to the mullion profiles” which renders the claim vague and confusing. Is the second recitation attempting to further limit the claim or is it simply rehashing what the first recitation says. The positioning aids are attached to the mullions, therefore isn’t it clear that the aids and the mullions are designed so that they can attach to one another?
Claims 22-38 are rejected as being dependent from claim 21.
Claims 39 and 40 are rejected since they include claim 1 within the body of the claim.
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) 21-38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2017/201587 to Claeys.
PNG
media_image1.png
648
537
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 21, Claeys discloses a curtain wall comprising one or more mullions (2), formed by mullion profiles (2), one or more transoms (3), formed by transom profiles (3) and one or more panels (4), wherein the one or more mullions are installed vertically (Fig.1), wherein the one or more transoms are attached at right angles to the one or more mullions (Fig.1), wherein the one or more transoms and the one or more mullions define rectangular openings (Fig.1), wherein the one or more panels are placed in said openings to close these openings (Fig.1), wherein the panels are fitted with their side edges in rabbets (See Figure above) of the mullion profiles and of the transom profiles with the aid of seals (Fig.2 and 4), wherein the rabbets in the mullion profiles have a fixed indivisible width and the one or more panels are secured along the inside of the curtain wall in the mullion profiles by means of first glazing beads (See Figure above) that are made from a rigid material (aluminum; Page 5, lines 7-8) and are provided with seals (See Figure above) and are attached to the mullion profiles by means of first positioning aids (See Figure above), wherein the first positioning aids are attached to the one or more mullions (See Figure above), wherein the first positioning aids and the mullion profiles are designed in such a way that the first positioning aids can be attached to the mullion profiles (See Figure above), and wherein the first positioning aids and the first glazing beads are designed to position the first glazing beads together with the seals onto the mullion profiles through a rotational movement of the first glazing beads (the glazing beads are capable of being rotated into place; See Figure above, with or without the panel in place, the glazing bead can contain some rotational movement to install the bead), said rotational movement being guided by the first positioning aids (rotational movement is capable of being guided by the angles ends of the positioning aids).
Regarding claim 22, wherein said first positioning aids are arranged and adapted for converting a linear movement of said first glazing beads towards said mullion profiles to said rotational movement (the angled ends of the first positioning aids are capable of converting linear movement to rotational movement; also glazing bead can be installed while the positioning aid is rotated to lock into place).
Regarding claim 23, wherein said rotational movement occurs around a rotation axis parallel to the one or more mullions, from a direction at an angle to the plane of the one or more panels to a direction perpendicular to the plane of the one or more panels (if rotated, the glazing beads are capable of rotated to 90 degrees to the panel).
Regarding claim 24, wherein the first positioning aids and the mullion profiles are designed to snap the first positioning aids onto said mullion profiles (See Figure above).
Regarding claim 25, wherein the first glazing beads are made of aluminum (aluminum; Page 5, lines 7-8).
Regarding claim 26, wherein the first positioning aids are made of plastic (aluminum; Page 5, lines 7-8).
Regarding claim 27, wherein the first positioning aids and the mullion profiles are designed to snap the first positioning aids to the mullion profiles in a direction perpendicular to the plane of the one or more panels (Page 5, lines 13-17), wherein the first positioning aids and the first glazing beads are designed to snap the first glazing beads together with the seals onto the mullion profiles through a rotational movement, said rotational movement being guided by the first positioning aids (capable of rotating into position).
Regarding claim 28, wherein the first positioning aids are profiles that extend over only a portion of the length of the first glazing beads (Page 5, lines 22-24).
Regarding claim 29, wherein the first glazing beads are each secured to a mullion profile by at least two first positioning aids that are spaced apart (Page 5, lines 26-29).
Regarding claim 30, wherein the mullion profiles and the first glazing beads are arranged such that the first glazing beads rest against the mullion profile, with their side facing away from the panel in question (Page 6, lines 7-11).
Regarding claim 31, wherein the one or more panels are glass panels (Page 13, line 29).
Regarding claim 32, wherein the first glazing beads are fixed to mullion profiles only by means of first positioning aids (Page 32, claim 11).
Regarding claim 33, wherein the one or more panels (4) are fixed by means of second glazing beads (42, Fig.4) that are attached to a said transom profile by means of second positioning aids (43; Page 6, lines 13-15), wherein the second positioning aids and the one or more of said transom profiles are adapted to attach the second positioning aids to a said transom profile (Page 6, lines 15-18), wherein the second positioning aids and the second glazing beads are designed to position the second glazing beads together with the seals onto the transom profiles through a rotational movement, said rotational movement being guided by the second positioning aids (the beads 42 are capable of rotating within the rounded groove of 43, Fig.4).
Regarding claim 34, wherein said second positioning aids are arranged and adapted for converting a linear movement of said second glazing beads towards said transom profiles to said rotational movement (as beads 42 are translated downward toward transom, the bead cis capable of rotating via the rounded groove of 43).
Regarding claim 35, wherein said rotational movement occurs around a rotation axis parallel to the one or more transoms, from a direction at an angle to the plane of the one or more panels to a direction perpendicular to the plane of the one or more panels (Fig.4).
Regarding claim 36, wherein the second glazing beads are fixed to transom profiles only by means of second positioning aids (Claim 13).
Regarding claim 37, wherein the second positioning aids are profiles that extend over only a portion of the length of the second glazing beads and that the second glazing beads are each attached to a transom profile, by at least two second positioning aids that are spaced apart (Claim 14).
Regarding claim 38, wherein the transom profiles are Z-profiles (14, 16, 17) with a first vertical leg (16) directing upward and located on the inside of the transom profile and a second vertical leg (17) directing downward and located on the outside of the transom profile and a horizontal section (14) between the first and second leg.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 39 and 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2017/201587 to Claeys in view of Cardinal Series CCW725 Instructions (Cardinal).
Regarding claims 39 and 40, Claeys discloses a method for installing a seal (See Figure above) into a groove (groove which accepts the seal) of a first glazing bead of a curtain wall according to claim 1 (See claim 1 above), the method comprising the steps of:- in a workshop (Page 23, lines 8-11; Claeys teaches performing actions within a workshop), inserting the seal into the groove of the first glazing bead (seal 35).
Claeys does not specifically disclose cutting the inserted seal to a length that exceeds the length of the first glazing bead, thereby providing an excess seal that extends on both sides of the first glazing bead; - on a construction site, removing the excess seal by cutting the seal to the length of the first glazing bead.
Cardinal discloses cutting the seals of a curtain wall structure longer than structural members (Page 50, Figure 50.1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have cut the seals of Claeys having a length longer than the glazing beads of the curtain wall of Claeys as taught by Cardinal so to allow the gasket to be effectively trimmed and fitted upon installation of the components of the curtain wall and further to enable the seal to adapt due to temperature fluctuations. Allowing a user to trim the seal of a window structure being formed is a known process step and would not yield unexpected results. One would opt to provide too much length od seal and be able to trim the seal over providing too little length of seal and having gaps in the structure.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN D KWIECINSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-5160. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday from 8:30 am to 4:00 pm.
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) 272-3238. 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.
RDK
/RYAN D KWIECINSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Prosecution Insights