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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/3/24 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the composite roof beam configured and arranged to be higher between said ends that at said ends as recited in claim 6 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Doherty et al., US 6,658,808.
Regarding claim 1:
Doherty discloses a composite roof beam (10’, refer to Figs. 4 and 5) wherein:
said composite roof beam comprises a first elongate member (18’) and a second elongate member (identical to the first, refer to Fig. 2) for reinforcing the first elongate member, each comprising a rectangular box section with a hollow centre (23) having a length, a width and a depth;
the first elongate member is provided at each of two adjacent corners of its box section with a first connector (30’) extending lengthwise and comprising a channel (interior 30’) closed off from the hollow centre of the first elongate member and open outwards through a neck narrower than the channel (the teeth extending inward create a neck that is narrower than the interior channel);
the second elongate member has at each of two adjacent corners of its box section a second connector (28’) extending lengthwise and comprising a rib projecting through the neck of a complementary first connector and a flange on said rib held within the channel of the complementary first connector; and
the first elongate member and the second elongate member are respectively configured and arranged so that the first and second connectors interconnect, with the second connector being a close fit within the first connector, whereby the first and second elongate members are coupled together to form said composite roof beam.
PNG
media_image1.png
145
353
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
285
712
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 14:
Doherty discloses a method of making a composite roof beam as claimed in claim 1 wherein the second connectors on the second elongate member are configured and arranged to fit slidingly within the first connectors on the first elongate member, and
the connectors are fitted together and the second elongate member is slide along the length of the first elongate member and secured thereto (3rd paragraph of the detailed description).
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, 3-4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeZen, CA 2089022 in view of Wuellerich et al., US 2003/0175542.
Regarding claim 1:
DeZen discloses a composite roof beam (pg. 5) wherein:
said composite roof beam comprises a first elongate member and a second elongate member for reinforcing the first elongate member, each comprising a rectangular box section with a hollow centre having a length, a width and a depth;
the first elongate member is provided at each of two adjacent corners of its box section with a first connector extending lengthwise and comprising a channel closed off from the hollow centre of the first elongate member and open outwards through a neck;
the second elongate member has at each of two adjacent corners of its box section a second connector extending lengthwise and comprising a rib projecting through the neck of a complementary first connector; and
the first elongate member and the second elongate member are respectively configured and arranged so that the first and second connectors interconnect, with the second connector being a close fit within the first connector, whereby the first and second elongate members are coupled together to form said composite roof beam.
PNG
media_image3.png
403
841
media_image3.png
Greyscale
DeZen does not expressly disclose the first elongate member open outwards through a neck narrower than the channel nor the second elongate member having a flange on said rib held within the channel of the complementary first connector.
Wuellerich discloses an extruded profile wherein a connection between respective members includes a first elongate member (3) opening outwards through a neck narrower than a channel (3a) and a second elongate member having a flange (5) on a rib (2a) held within the channel of the complementary first connector.
PNG
media_image4.png
230
438
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to substitute the connection means of Wuellerich for that of DeZen in order to provide a form fitting connection that will not detach with outward deformation.
Regarding claim 3:
DeZen discloses wherein the box section of the second elongate member has a depth less than the depth of the box section of the first elongate member.
Regarding claim 4:
DeZen appears to disclose but does not expressly disclose wherein the depth of the box section of the second elongate member is not more than half the depth of the box section of the first elongate member.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the depth of the box section of the second elongate member not more than half the depth of the box section of the first elongate member, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level or ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). There would be no unexpected or unpredictable result obtained from changing the relative sizes of the box sections There is no evidence that the claimed dimensions not specifically taught by DeZen provide a criticality that would be unachievable and unexpected with a reasonable amount of experimentation.
Regarding claim 14:
DeZen discloses a method of making a composite roof beam as claimed in claim 1 wherein the second connectors on the second elongate member are configured and arranged to fit slidingly within the first connectors on the first elongate member, and
the connectors are fitted together and the second elongate member is slide along the length of the first elongate member and secured thereto.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeZen, CA 2089022 in view of Wuellerich et al., US 2003/0175542 as applied to claim 1, further in view of Conterno, US 2008/0295436
Regarding claim 7:
DeZen discloses wherein the beam may be of metal but does not specify an aluminum alloy.
Conterno discloses a composite structural beam (Fig. 5A) that is of aluminum alloy (para. 0071).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to substitute aluminum alloy as suggested by Conterno for the material of DeZen in order to provide strength, affordability and light weight that is extrudable.
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeZen, CA 2089022 in view of Wuellerich et al., US 2003/0175542 as applied to claim 1, further in view of Dunn, US 3,027,984.
Regarding claims 8 and 9:
DeZen does not expressly disclose additional connectors as claimed.
Dunn discloses a composite beam comprising additional connectors that keders (13) configured and arranged to hold edges (14) of sheeting material extending width wise of the composite roof beam capable of forming a roof (as for a screened in porch).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to provide keders as suggested by Dunn on the composite beam of DeZen.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 5-6 and 10-13 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 2, the prior art does not reasonably suggest wherein each rib of the second connector is of arcuate form and extends outwardly from its corner location and then inwardly through the neck of the respective first connector. Modifying the prior art of record to include such a connection would require improper hindsight reconstruction.
Regarding claims 5 and 6, the prior art discloses the composite roof beam but does not teach nor reasonably suggest wherein it is supported on columns at its opposite ends with no additional supports between said ends.
Regarding claims 10-13, the prior art discloses the roof beam of claim 1 but does not teach nor reasonably suggest wherein two of the roof beams are part of a roof truss as claimed.
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 BRENT W HERRING whose telephone number is (571)270-3661. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30a-6:00p MT.
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.
/BRENT W HERRING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633