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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Serbu have been considered and the claim amendments overcome the rejection previously made under 35 USC 102.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the combination of Whittemore ‘587 in view of Whittemore ‘904 have been considered but are not persuasive.
Claim 65 has been amended to require “an enclosure coupled directly to the magnetic door between the opening of the magnetic door and at least one of the left side of the magnetic door and the right side of the magnetic door, wherein the magnetic door comprises an aperture.”
Applicant argues that Whittemore ‘904 requires the enclosure to be coupled to a rigid frame that sandwiches the curtain material and that the enclosure is not coupled directly. Whittemore ‘904 teaches a housing frame (402) which is interpreted to be equivalent to the base discussed in claims 69-73. The housing frame (402) is connected to a pole (600) and supports the air duct (Fig 11); this is equivalent to what is shown in Applicant’s Figure 17. Regarding both claim 67 and 70, as modified, Whittemore ‘904 teaches wherein the base (402) is integral (forms a single unit) with the partition material, therefore the base would be integral with the magnetic door of Whittemore ‘597 and the enclosure is understood to be directly connected to the magnetic door.
Applicant further argues that the combination of Whittemore ‘587 and Whittemore ‘904 would not result in the claimed invention having a magnetic door with an enclosure positioned “between the opening of the magnetic door and at least one of the left side of the magnetic door and the right side of the magnetic door, wherein the magnetic door comprises an aperture” and that the combination would result in a curtain and an enclosure and an aperture on the curtain. The location of the enclosure would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art. Whittemore ‘587 teaches a magnetic door and Whittemore ‘904 teaches an aperture and an enclosure. Providing the aperture and enclosure on the magnetic door is an arrangement choice that would not alter the function of the elements. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device). The position of the aperture and enclosure would not modify operation; the elements would perform as intended.
Drawings
The drawing objection made in the previous office action has been withdrawn. Examiner thanks the Applicant for pointing out the figures displaying the reference numerals.
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.
Claims 65, 67-94 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whittemore (US 10,781,597), hereinafter referred to as Whittemore ‘597, in view of Whittemore (WO 2020/146904), hereinafter referred to as Whittemore ‘904.
Regarding claims 65, 69 and 70, Whittemore ‘597 discloses a system (Fig 1D), comprising:
a magnetic door (112) having a top, a bottom, a left side, and a right side, the magnetic door having an opening (between magnetic seams) extending to the bottom of the magnetic door between the left side and the right side of the magnetic door from a position below the top of the magnetic door (Fig 1E),
PNG
media_image1.png
1008
1456
media_image1.png
Greyscale
the opening having a left seam (at 38A) and a right seam (at 38B), the left seam comprising a first magnet (Fig 5A), the right seam comprising a second magnet (Fig 5A), wherein the first and second magnets are constructed and arranged to be magnetically coupled.
PNG
media_image2.png
992
538
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Whittemore ‘597 fails to disclose an enclosure coupled directly to the magnetic door between the opening of the magnetic door and at least one of the left side of the magnetic door and the right side of the magnetic door, wherein the magnetic door comprises an aperture and in claim 69, a base positioned at the aperture and configured to support an air duct.
However, Whittemore ‘904 teaches that it is known for a system providing a partition to include an enclosure (800) (Figs 11 and 12), an aperture (cutout) (Fig 5A) and a base (402) (Fig 8) in order to provide a means of connection and support of an air duct (500) (Fig 11).
PNG
media_image3.png
1098
590
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
668
754
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
706
798
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
862
802
media_image6.png
Greyscale
It would be desirable to provide Whittemore ‘597 which has the purpose of providing a construction site with a partition with the elements taught by Whittemore ‘904 since Whittemore ‘904 also teaches providing a construction site with partition and further teaches the added improvement of providing an enclosure, aperture, and base positioned at the aperture configured to support an air duct in order to provide movement of air and ventilation of the enclosed area. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Whittemore ‘597 in view of the teachings of Whittemore ‘904 and combine the known elements in order to provide means for movement of air and ventilation. All the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Further, the location of the enclosure would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art. Whittemore ‘587 teaches a magnetic door and Whittemore ‘904 teaches an aperture and an enclosure. Providing the aperture and enclosure on the magnetic door is an arrangement choice that would not alter the function of the elements. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device). The position of the aperture and enclosure would not modify operation and the elements would perform as intended. Further, regarding both claim 65 and 70, as modified, Whittemore ‘904 teaches wherein the base (402) is integral (forms a single unit) with the partition material, therefore the base would be integral with the magnetic door of Whittemore ‘597 and the enclosure is understood to be directly connected to the magnetic door.
Regarding claim 67, Whittemore ‘597 as modified with the teachings of Whittemore ‘904, Whittemore ‘904 teaches that the enclosure (800) comprises a flexible fabric.
Regarding claim 68, Whittemore ‘597 as modified with the teachings of Whittemore ‘904, Whittemore ‘904 teaches that the enclosure (800) comprises a retractable member, the retractable member comprising an adjustable inner width (Fig 10).
Regarding claim 71, Whittemore ‘597 as modified with the teachings of Whittemore ‘904, Whittemore ‘904 teaches wherein the base comprises at least one of a circular shape (Fig 6), a ring, half of a ring, a channel, a rectangular shape and a square shape.
Regarding claim 72, Whittemore ‘597 as modified with the teachings of Whittemore ‘904, Whittemore ‘904 teaches wherein the base comprises an aperture (Fig 8) .
Regarding claim 73, Whittemore ‘597 as modified with the teachings of Whittemore ‘904, Whittemore ‘904 teaches wherein the base comprises a flange comprising a seat (Fig 8) and further comprising: the enclosure having an opening constructed and arranged to be secured at the seat (Fig 12); and a coupling mechanism (801) that secures the enclosure to the seat (Fig 12).
Regarding claim 74, Whittemore ‘597 as modified with the teachings of Whittemore ‘904, Whittemore ‘904 teaches wherein the coupling mechanism (801) comprises a hose clamp.
Regarding claim 75, Whittemore ‘597 as modified with the teachings of Whittemore ‘904, Whittemore ‘904 teaches wherein the enclosure comprises: a first end coupled to the base (Fig 12); and a second end comprising a retractable member (Fig 10), the retractable member comprising an adjustable inner width.
Regarding claim 76, modified Whittemore ‘597 discloses wherein the magnetic door comprises a material selected from a durable material, a ruggedized nylon material, a nylon-taffeta, a rip-stop material, a synthetic material, a natural fabric material, a plastic material col 16, lines 13-26).
Regarding claim 77, modified Whittemore ‘597 discloses wherein the first and second magnets comprise an elongated body having a north pole and a south pole (Figs 5A and 5B).
Regarding claim 78, modified Whittemore ‘597 discloses wherein the first and second magnets each comprise a plurality of magnets positioned along the left or right seam.
Regarding claim 79, modified Whittemore ‘597 discloses wherein the left and right seams comprise corresponding magnets at corresponding vertical positions and wherein north and south poles of the corresponding magnets are configured to be of opposite polarity so that the corresponding magnets attract each other.
Regarding claim 80, modified Whittemore ‘597 discloses further comprising an attachment mechanism (clips or magnets or mounting straps) configured to couple the magnetic door to a mounting surface.
Regarding claim 81, modified Whittemore ‘597 discloses wherein the attachment mechanism comprises a plurality of attachment mechanisms (tops and sides have attachment mechanisms).
Regarding claim 82, modified Whittemore ‘597 discloses wherein the attachment mechanism comprises a first member and a second member (Figs 15Ai-15Eiv).
Regarding claim 83, as best understood, modified Whittemore ‘597 discloses wherein the first member is positioned at a curtain (110) and the second member is positioned between the first member and the magnetic door.
Regarding claim 86, as best understood, modified Whittemore ‘597 discloses the attachment mechanism secures the magnetic door directly to a curtain (110).
Regarding claim 87, as best understood, modified Whittemore ‘597 discloses wherein the attachment mechanism removably secures the magnetic door to the curtain.
Regarding claim 88, as best understood, modified Whittemore ‘597 discloses wherein the magnetic door is supported exclusively by the curtain and the attachment mechanism.
Regarding claim 89, modified Whittemore ‘597 discloses further comprising a curtain (110), wherein the attachment mechanism configured to couple the magnetic door to the curtain.
Regarding claim 90, modified Whittemore ‘597 discloses the opening is positioned at a center width of the magnetic door and fails to disclose wherein the opening is off-center about a width of the magnetic door such that a width of one of the left side and the right side has a greater width than the other of the left side and the right side. However, such modification to provide an off-center opening with sides of different widths would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention since such modification involves a mere change in size (dimensions of width) without producing any new or unpredictable results.
Regarding claim 91, modified Whittemore ‘597 discloses wherein the opening is positioned at a center of a width of the magnetic door such that a width of the left side is substantially the same as a width of the right side.
Regarding claim 92, Whittemore ‘597 as modified with the teachings of Whittemore ‘904, Whittemore ‘904 teaches wherein the enclosure surrounds the aperture.
Regarding claim 93, Whittemore ‘597 as modified with the teachings of Whittemore ‘904 teaches wherein the enclosure is coupled to the magnetic door at or near at least a portion of an edge of the aperture, as discussed above, providing the aperture and enclosure on the magnetic door is an arrangement choice that would not alter the function of the elements. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device). Therefore the position of the aperture and enclosure would not modify operation and the elements would perform as intended.
Regarding claim 94, Whittemore ‘597 as modified with the teachings of Whittemore ‘904 teaches wherein the aperture is between the opening of the magnetic door and at at least one of the left side of the magnetic door and the right side of the magnetic door, as discussed above, providing the aperture and enclosure on the magnetic door is an arrangement choice that would not alter the function of the elements. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device). Therefore the position of the aperture and enclosure would not modify operation and the elements would perform as intended.
Claims 66, 84, and 85 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whittemore ‘597, and Whittemore ‘904, as applied in claim 65, 80, and 82 above, in further view of Whittemore (US 9,115,539), hereinafter referred to as Whittemore ‘539.
Regarding claim 66, Whittemore ‘597 as modified with the teachings of Whittemore ‘904, Whittemore ‘904 teaches the enclosure is attached but fails to specifically disclose that the enclosure is at least one of sewn to the magnetic door and taped to the magnetic door. However, Whittemore ‘539 teaches a known attachment means in the form of tape. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a known alternative attachment means without producing any new or unpredictable results.
Regarding 84, modified Whittemore ‘597 fails to disclose wherein the first member comprises duct tape and the second member comprises double-sided tape. However, Whittemore ‘539 teaches a known attachment means in the form of duct tape and double-sided tape. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a known alternative attachment means without producing any new or unpredictable results.
Regarding 85, modified Whittemore ‘597 fails to disclose wherein the attachment mechanism comprises double- sided tape. However, Whittemore ‘539 teaches a known attachment means in the form of double-sided tape. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a known alternative attachment means without producing any new or unpredictable results.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Johnnie A. Shablack whose telephone number is (571)270-5344. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 6am-3pm EST, alternate Friday.
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.
/Johnnie A. Shablack/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights