DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office Action is in response to the claims filed on 02/13/2026.
Claims 1, 5-20, 22-25, and 27-29 are currently pending and have been examined below. Claims 2-4, 21, and 26 have been cancelled.
Claim Interpretation
In line 2 of claim 17, “the one or more side sealings comprise at least two of the side sealings” questions the clarity of the clarity whether the two side sealings are in addition to the one sealing required by the limitation “the one or more side sealings” (i.e., claim 17 requires three side sealings). Examiner notes that the scope of the claim is clear and takes the position that the claim were interpreted such that the limitation “comprise at least two of the side sealings” includes the one sealing (i.e., claim 17 requires only two side sealings). Note that this interpretation was also applied to the similar claim 23.
Claim Objection
Claims 1, 5, 15, 18, and 24 are objected to because:
In line 13 of claim 1, “the each flap and the respective edge” should read --the each first and second flap and the respective edge--. This issue is also present in claim 24.
In line 13 of claim 5, “a longitudinal axis, , wherein” should read --a longitudinal axis, wherein--.
In line 14 of claim 5, “the one or more flaps flex away” is brought to applicant’s attention as the recitation includes the interpretation of more than one flap. This is objected because line 6 only introduces one flap. It seems that this should read --the flap flexes away--.
In lines 3 and 4 of claim 15, “the two flaps” should read --the first and second flaps--.
In line 2 of claim 18, “one or more side sealing” should read --one or more of the side sealings--.
Appropriate correction is required. Above provides non-limiting examples, the applicant(s) must find and correct all issues similar to those discussed above.
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 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ball et al. (US 9249616) (hereinafter “Ball”).
Claim 1
(Ball discloses) A side sealing (seal shown in figure 1) adapted to seal between a door blade (130) and a side frame (150) in an overhead door system (note that although the door blade and side frame was shown by Ball, both parts were interpreted as intended use and not positively recited in this rejection; note that the seal of Ball can also be used to seal for an overhead door system), the door blade being movable between a closed position and an opened position within said side frame (intended use),
the side sealing comprising:
a profile element (sealing element in figure 1) comprising an attachment portion (Annotated figure 1 below) adapted to be attached to the side frame via a clamping member (Annotated figure 1 below) and first (top flap 112) and second flaps (bottom flap 112) adapted to come into sealing contact with the door blade (intended use; the flaps 112 can be used to provide a sealing contact to a door blade), wherein the profile element is made of a flexible material (lines 4-8 of col. 4), wherein the clamping member comprises first (top flange 110) and second clamping flanges (bottom flange 110) and interconnecting part (111), wherein the interconnecting part is joined with the first flange at an edge of the first flange (Annotated figure 1 below), wherein the interconnecting part is joined with the second flange at an edge of the second flange (Annotated figure 1 below) and wherein the first and second flaps each extend from respective ones of the clamping flanges (Annotated figure 1 below) at a distance from the respective edges to define first and second offset portions between the each flap and the respective edge (Annotated figure 1 below showing the distances from the first flap and the second flap to the respective edges), and wherein the flaps are adapted to flex relative to the attachment portion to engage the door blade to seal against said door blade (intended use; figures 3-4 show the two flaps flexing relative to the attachment portion therefore they are capable of flexing when engaged to a door blade).
PNG
media_image1.png
556
827
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 1
Claim 6
(Ball discloses) The side sealing according to claim 1, wherein the flexible material comprises any one of natural rubber, isoprene rubber, styrene-butadiene rubber, ethylene propylene diene monomer, nitrile rubber, butyl rubber and chloroprene rubber (lines 4-11 of col. 4).
Claim 7
(Ball discloses) The side sealing according to claim 1, wherein the profile element is formed by extrusion (this was interpreted as a product-by-process limitation therefore this is taught; see MPEP 2113(I)).
Claim 8
(Ball discloses) The side sealing according to claim 1, further comprising an adhesive (140) provided on the attachment portion (Annotated figure 1 above) for adhesion of the profile element to the side frame or the door blade (intended use; the adhesive would provide adhesion to any surface it attaches to).
Claim 9
(Ball discloses) The side sealing according to claim 8, wherein the adhesive is adapted to provide a releasable adhesion of the profile element to the side frame or the door blade (intended use; figure 1).
Claim 10
(Ball discloses) The side sealing according to claim 8, wherein the adhesive is provided as a strip (figure 1) extending along the profile element (figure 1).
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 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ball, as applied to claims 1 and 6-10 above, in view of Emringer et al. (FR 2633361) (hereinafter “Emringer”).
Claims 11 and 12
(Ball discloses) The side sealing according to claim 8.
Ball is silent regarding
(i) wherein the adhesive is a hot melt sealant. (claim 11).
(ii) wherein the adhesive is a butyl sealant. (claim 12).
(However, Emringer teaches) A side sealing (1; Emringer figures 2-3) further comprising:
an adhesive (11), wherein the adhesive is a sealant (Excerpt 1 from page 3 below; note that ‘hot melt’ and ‘butyl’ was interpreted as intended use language).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to substitute the adhesive of Ball with the sealant of Emringer, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the predictable and expected benefits such as water-tight filled adhesion.
PNG
media_image2.png
209
765
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Excerpt 1
Claim 13
(Ball discloses) The sealing according to claim 8.
Ball fails to disclose wherein the adhesive is arranged to extend in a clamping engagement between the attachment portion and the side frame or the door blade when the side sealing is attached to said side frame or door blade.
(However, Emringer teaches) A side sealing (1; Emringer figures 2-3);
wherein an adhesive (11) is arranged to extend in a clamping engagement (within clamps 3a and 3b) between an attachment portion (3) and a frame (13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the clamping engagement of Ball with the adhesive similar to the teachings of Emringer, with a reasonable expectation of success, to provide additional adhesion at the clamping engagement therefore improving the sealing of the side sealing.
Claims 5, 14-19, 24, and 27-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ball in view of Arnold et al. (US 20020119285) (hereinafter “Arnold”).
Claim 5
(Ball discloses) A side sealing (seal shown in figure 1) adapted to seal between a door blade (130) and a side frame (150) in an overhead door system (note that although the door blade and side frame was shown by Ball, both parts were interpreted as intended use and not positively recited in this rejection; note that the seal of Ball can also be used to seal for an overhead door system), the door blade being movable between a closed position and an opened position within said side frame (intended use),
the side sealing comprising:
a profile element (sealing element in figure 1) comprising an attachment portion (Annotated figure 1 above) adapted to be attached to the side frame via a clamping member (Annotated figure 1 above) and a flap (top flap 112) extending from the attachment portion (Annotated figure 1 above) and adapted to flex relative to the attachment portion (Annotated figure 1 above), wherein the clamping member comprises first (top flange 110) and second clamping flanges (bottom flange 110) and an interconnecting part (111), wherein the interconnecting part is joined with the first flange at an edge of the first flange (Annotated figure 1 above), wherein the interconnecting part is joined with the second flange at an edge of the second flange (Annotated figure 1 above) and wherein the flap extends from the first or the second flange (the top flap extends from the first flange; note that this was interpreted as an ‘or’ clause therefore only one of the options are required to be taught) at a distance from the respective edge to define an offset portion between the flap and the respective edge (Annotated figure 1 above showing the distance from the flap to the respective edge),
wherein in an unrolled configuration (configuration shown in figure 1), the profile element extends along a longitudinal axis (axis towards the page as viewed in figure 1), wherein the profile element is made of a flexible material (lines 4-8 of col. 4), wherein, in the unrolled configuration, the one or more flaps flex away from the attachment portion (Annotated figure 1 above) and are adapted to come into sealing contact with the door blade (intended use; the flaps 112 can be used to provide a sealing contact to a door blade).
Ball fails to disclose a rolled configuration, and in the rolled configuration, the one or more flaps flex toward the clamping member, wherein in the rolled configuration the profile element is rollable about an axis extending orthogonal to the longitudinal axis to form a roll.
(However, Arnold teaches) a side sealing (Arnold figures 6-7) comprising:
an unrolled configuration (Arnold figure 6), wherein a profile element extends along a longitudinal axis (Annotated figure 6 below);
a rolled configuration (Annotated figure 3 below), and in the rolled configuration, one or more flaps flex toward a clamping member (Annotated figure 3 below; note that the flaps would flex as they are being rolled; also, since the profile element is rolled in a stacked formation [shown in figure 3], the flaps would flex, as they are being rolled, toward either the clamping member stacked above or stacked below), wherein in the rolled configuration the profile element is rollable about an axis extending orthogonal to the longitudinal axis to form a roll (Annotated figure 3 below).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the side sealing of Ball such that it can be packaged and rolled similar to the side sealing of Arnold, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the predictable benefits of portability and such that the side sealing can be cut to the exact requirements to meet the user needs.
PNG
media_image3.png
460
513
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 6
PNG
media_image4.png
369
538
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 3
Claim 14
(Ball discloses) One or more of the side sealings according to claim 1 (see rejection in claim 1 above).
Ball fails to disclose a side sealing kit comprising one or more side sealings and a container, the container being adapted to contain said one or more side sealings.
(However, Arnold teaches) a side sealing kit (Arnold figure 3) comprising one or more side sealings (11) and a container (18), the container being adapted to contain said one or more side sealings (Arnold figure 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the side sealing of Ball such that it is a kit similar to the side sealing kit of Arnold, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the predictable and expected benefits such as portability and the kit allows the side sealing to be more convenient for replacements as it can be bought separately. Additionally, the kit modification significantly reduces the cost of repairs of the overhead door systems as replacing the entire side frame or door blades is no longer required when the sealing has become ineffective.
Claim 15
(Ball, as modified above, discloses) The side sealing kit according to claim 14, wherein in an unrolled configuration (configuration shown in figure 1), the profile element extends along a longitudinal axis (axis towards the page as viewed in figure 1), wherein in the unrolled configuration, the two flaps flex away from the attachment portion (Annotated figure 1 above) and are adapted to come into sealing contact with the door blade (intended use; the flaps 112 can be used to provide a sealing contact to a door blade),
wherein, in a rolled configuration (the rolled configuration when the side sealing of modified Ball is rolled to 18; see Arnold figure 3), the two flaps flex toward the clamping member (note that the flaps would flex as they are being rolled; also, since the profile element is rolled in a stacked formation [shown in figure 3], the flaps would flex, as they are being rolled, toward either the clamping member stacked above or stacked below) to enable the profile element to be rolled up about an axis (see axis shown in Annotated figure 3 above) extending orthogonal to the longitudinal axis to form a roll (note that this par. is inevitably taught via the combination with Arnold).
Claim 16
(Ball, as modified above, discloses) The side sealing kit according to claim 15, wherein the container is adapted to contain said roll (this is inevitably taught via the combination with Arnold).
Claim 17
(Ball, as modified above, discloses) The side sealing kit according to claim 14.
Modified Ball fails to disclose wherein the one or more side sealings comprise at least two side sealings, and wherein the container is adapted to contain said at least two side sealings.
However, examiner is directing the attention to the fact that the courts have held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to duplicate the one side sealing of modified Ball such that there are at least two side sealings, with a reasonable expectation of success, for having an additional side sealing for backup emergencies, replacements, or reapplication.
Claim 18
(Ball, as modified above, discloses) The side sealing kit according to according to claim 16, wherein the roll is adapted to be cut to form said one or more side sealing (step 20 shown in figure 1 of Arnold).
Claim 19
(Ball, as modified above, discloses) The side sealing kit according to claim 16.
Modified Ball is silent regarding wherein the roll has a length of between 6 and 14 meters.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art is expected to routinely experiment with parameters so as to ascertain the optimum or workable ranges for a particular use. Accordingly, it would have been no more than an obvious matter of engineering design choice, as determined through routine experimentation and optimization, for one of ordinary skill to provide the roll of modified Ball to have a length of between 6 and 14 meters, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the predictable benefit of having sufficient length for installation to the frame or any surface.
Claim 24
(Ball discloses) A method for providing a side sealing (seal shown in figure 1) adapted to seal between a door blade (130) and a side frame (150) in an overhead door system (note that although the door blade and side frame was shown by Ball, both parts were interpreted as intended use and not positively recited in this rejection; note that the seal of Ball can also be used to seal for an overhead door system), the door blade being movable between a closed position and an opened position within said side frame (intended use), the method comprising:
providing a profile element (sealing element in figure 1) of the side sealing made from a flexible material (lines 4-8 of col. 4), wherein the profile element comprises an attachment portion (Annotated figure 1 above) adapted to be attached to the side frame via a clamping engagement (intended use; Annotated figure 1 above) and first (top flap 112) and second flaps (bottom flap 112) adapted to engage the door blade to seal against said door blade (intended use; the flaps 112 can be used to seal against a door blade), wherein the clamping member comprises first (top flange 110) and second clamping flanges (bottom flange 110) and an interconnecting part (111), wherein the interconnecting part is joined with the first flange at an edge of the first flange (Annotated figure 1 above), wherein the interconnecting part is joined with the second flange at an edge of the second flange (Annotated figure 1 above) and wherein the first and second flaps each extend from respective ones of the first and the second flanges (Annotated figure 1 above) at a distance from the respective edges to define first and second offset portions between the each flap and the respective edge (Annotated figure 1 above showing the distances from the first flap and the second flap to the respective edges), and
wherein in an unrolled configuration (configuration shown in figure 1), the two flaps come into sealing contact with the door blade in the closed position (examiner notes that the door blade was not positively recited in the preamble of claim 24, therefore the door blade was interpreted as not positively; however, if applicant intended the door blade to be positively recited, examiner is interpreting ‘blade’ as the flat section 150 [see blade definition below]), wherein the profile element extends along a longitudinal axis in the unrolled configuration (axis towards the page as viewed in figure 1).
Ball fails to disclose a rolled configuration, wherein in the rolled configuration, the profile element is rollable about an axis extending orthogonal to the longitudinal axis to form a roll; and
rolling said profile element about the axis orthogonal to the longitudinal axis to form at least a part of the roll.
(However, Arnold teaches) a side sealing (Arnold figures 2-3) comprising:
an unrolled configuration (a portion of the sealing unrolled shown in Arnold figure 3), wherein a profile element extends along a longitudinal axis (Annotated figure 3 above);
a rolled configuration (rolled configuration shown in Arnold figure 3), wherein in the rolled configuration, the profile element is rollable about an axis (Annotated figure 3 above) extending orthogonal to the longitudinal axis to form a roll (Annotated figure 3 above); and
rolling said profile element about the axis orthogonal to the longitudinal axis to form at least a part of the roll (Annotated figure 3 above).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the side sealing of Ball such that it can be packaged and rolled similar to the side sealing of Arnold, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the predictable benefits of portability and such that the side sealing can be cut to the exact requirements to meet the user needs.
PNG
media_image5.png
232
725
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claim 27
(Ball, as modified above, discloses) The method according to claim 24, further comprising applying an adhesive (140) on the attachment portion for adhesion of the profile element to the side frame (intended use; the adhesive can be used for adhesion to a side frame).
Claim 28
(Ball, as modified above, discloses) The method according to claim 24, further comprising
cutting the roll to form the side sealing (step 20 shown in Arnold figure 1).
Claim 29
(Ball, as modified above, discloses) The method according to claim 24, further comprising providing a container (18; this is taught in the combination above such that the rolled configuration is maintained) and positioning the roll in said container (this is taught in the combination above).
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ball in view of Arnold, as applied to claims 5, 14-19, 24, and 27-29 above, in further view of Happel et al. (US 8839564) (hereinafter “Happel”).
Claim 25
(Ball, as modified above, discloses) The method according to claim 24.
Modified Ball is silent regarding further comprising extruding the profile element.
(However, Happel teaches) extruding a profile element (23; Happel figure 1; lines 62-65 of col. 12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to produce the profile element of modified Ball by extrusion as taught by Happel, with a reasonable expectation of success, such that the side sealing is produced at a lower cost and using a production method that is well-known in the art therefore it can be easily manufactured.
Claims 20 and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lisell (EP 1574658) in view of Ball.
Claim 20
(Lisell discloses) An overhead door system (figures 1 and 4a) comprising one or more of the side sealings (15), wherein each of said one or more side sealings is provided along a vertical side (vertical side along 7) of a door opening (opening when the door 5 is opened) when a door blade (5) is in the closed position to seal between a side frame (7) and the door blade (figure 4a).
Lisell fails to disclose the overhead door system comprising one or more of the side sealings according to claim 1.
(However, Ball teaches) one or more of the side sealings according to claim 1 (see rejection in claim 1 above).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the shape of the side sealing of Lisell with the shape of the side sealing of Ball, with a reasonable expectation of success, for providing a double contacting element to the door blade therefore improving the sealing of the overhead door system.
Claim 22
(Lisell, as modified above, discloses) The overhead door system according to claim 20, wherein the side frame comprises a pair of vertical tracks (vertical tracks shown in figure 1) and a pair of horizontal tracks (horizontal tracks shown in figure 1), connected by a pair of connecting track portions (curved track portions connecting the vertical tracks to the horizontal tracks shown in figure 1).
Claim 23
(Lisell, as modified above, discloses) The overhead door system according to claim 20, wherein the one or more of the side sealings comprise first and second side sealings, wherein the vertical side of the door opening comprises a first vertical side and a second vertical side of the door opening (see two vertical sides shown in figure 1), wherein the first and second side sealings are provided along the respective first and second vertical sides to seal between the side frame and the door blade when the door blade is in the closed position (although the drawings only shows one sealing, the overhead door system of Lisell would teach a first side sealing and second side sealing to be respectively attached along a first vertical side and second vertical side of the door opening to seal both sides of the door opening between the pair of vertical tracks and each opposite ends of the door blade in order to maintain balance and for the overhead door system to function properly).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments directed to the claim objections have been considered.
Applicant’s arguments filed on 02/13/2026 have been considered but were found unpersuasive. The response below were directed to pages 2-4 of the Remarks section.
Regarding “Ball does not show or suggest providing an offset portion where the connection of the flap to the flange is offset from the edge of the flange. As shown in Fig. 1 as annotated by the Examiner, bumpers 112 are connected with the edge at the common point where legs 110 and base 111 are joined”, note that the claim merely recites “to define first and second offset portions between the each flap and the respective edge”, the scope of the claim is not specific enough from which respective edge is the offset portions being defined from as such they are much broader than applicant’s argument. The breadth of the amendments renders the claims rejectable via the prior art as such these were found unpersuasive.
Regarding “With respect to independent claims 5 and 24, the addition of Arnold to Ball does not cure this defect. Arnold teaches a seal for manufactured homes. The Examiner's annotation of Fig. 6 of Arnold is reproduced below” and “There is no suggestion that Arnold's flanges are connected with side skin 37 in a way that provides an offset portion between the edge of a flange and the point where a flap is connected, as required by the claims”, since the other independent claims were also amended similarly to claim 1, these were also rejected in a similar manner.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 PATRICK B PONCIANO whose telephone number is (571)272-9910. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30-4:00.
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.
/PATRICK B. PONCIANO/Examiner, Art Unit 3634
/DANIEL P CAHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634