DETAILED ACTION
The following Non-Final Office Action is in response to the application filed 6/7/2024.
Status of the claims: Claims 1-13 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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 6/7/2024 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
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 4-6 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.
Claim 4 recites a “dark” mesh. This is a term of relative degree. What defines “dark”.
Claim 5 recites “soft” nylon. This is a term of relative degree. What defines “soft”.
Claim 6 recites “durable” woven fabric. This is a term of relative degree. What defines “durable”.
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 1-7 and 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grat US 2007/0144688 in view of Gatham US 2009/0195014.
In regard to claim 1, Grat ‘688 discloses a screen assembly for covering an open window of a vehicle door, the screen assembly comprising: a screen unit having a panel (10, Fig. 1) made from a first material (paragraph [0014]) and a perimeter (20, Fig. 1) made from a second material (paragraph 90015]), the panel positioned (10) on an inside of the perimeter (20) and the perimeter comprising at least a top first side, a bottom second side, a left third side and a right fourth side (shown below); a plurality of magnets (40, left, bottom, right, Fig. 1) fixed inside the perimeter (20) at at least the bottom second side, the left third side and the right fourth side (shown below); and a plurality of inserts (40, top) made from a third material and fixed inside or on the perimeter at the top first side; the plurality of magnets (40) magnetically securing the screen assembly to the vehicle door at at least the bottom second side, the left third side and the right fourth side of the perimeter of the screen unit.
PNG
media_image1.png
549
923
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Grat ‘688 fails to disclose the plurality of inserts sliding into a weather seal in the window of the vehicle to secure the screen assembly to the vehicle window at the top first side of the perimeter of the screen unit.
Gatham ‘014 discloses an insert (212) sliding into a weather seal in the window of the vehicle to secure the screen assembly to the vehicle window at the top first side of the perimeter of the screen unit. (paragraph [0113])
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 Grat ‘688 to make a plurality of inserts to slide into a weather seal of the window was taught by Gatham ‘014 as such is shown to be a known means of affixing to a window area. Pushing in the window seal area would provide a tight fit without gaps.
In regard to claim 2, Grat ‘688 fails to disclose a fifth perimeter side positioned between the bottom second side and left third side, and a sixth perimeter side positioned between bottom second side and right fourth side, the screen assembly configured in the shape of an irregular hexagon, and the fifth and sixth sides fixed with a plurality of magnets therein.
Gatham ‘014 discloses a window net may be dimensioned and configured to a wide range of window shapes. (paragraph [0111]). 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 make the screen of Grat ‘688 to include a fifth perimeter side between the bottom and left side and a sixth perimeter side positioned between the bottom side and the right side in the shape of an irregular hexagon as Gatham ‘014 discloses that man vehicles have windows which are not four sided and can be numerous irregular shapes. Such would allow the device to be used on a particular vehicle.
In regard to claim 3, Grat ‘688 disclose wherein the plurality of magnets (40) fixed inside the bottom second side, the left third side, the right fourth side, the fifth side (as obvious to modify above) and the sixth side (as obvious to modify above) magnetically secures the screen assembly to the vehicle door.
In regard to claim 4, Grat ‘688 discloses the first material (10) is a flexible, dark (as bester understood) semi-permeable mesh. (paragraph [0018] states that the material will stop bugs from getting in but allow ventilation)
In regard to claim 5, Grat ‘688 discloses the first material is a mosquito net. Grat ‘688 fails to specifically disclose the first material is a soft nylon fabric. However, the examiner take Official Notice that it is old and well known to form mosquito nets out of soft nylon and one having ordinary skill in the art would know to use such for the purpose of its durability and flexibility.
In regard to claim 6, Grat ‘688 discloses wherein the second material is a durable woven fabric (abstract states canvas).
In regard to claim 7, Grat ‘688 as modified by Gatham ‘014 discloses the third material is a plastic polymer tubing (Gatham ‘014 paragarph [0112]). Gatham 014 fails to disclose the third material is foam. However, it it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the third material be foam, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Foam would provide a similar crushability while being durable and long lasting.
In regard to claim 9, Grat ‘688 fails to disclose specifically that the window is a roll-down rear window. However Grat ‘688 states that the screen can be created to match any automobile passenger window size, thus it would have been obvious that the window could be a roll-down rear window.
In regard to claims 10-11, Grat ‘688 discloses the perimeter (20) is flexible and durable enough to be folded and sewn or adhered to the the panel (10) such that the perimeter houses the plurality of magnets (40, left, bottom, right) and the plurality of inserts (40, top). (Abstract)
In regard to claim 12, Grat ‘688/Gatham ‘014 disclose a method of installing the screen assembly comprising the steps of securing the plurality of magnets (40, Grat ‘688) fixed inside the perimeter at the bottom second side, the left third side, the right fourth side, the fifth perimeter side and the sixth perimeter side to the vehicle door, and pushing or sliding the plurality of inserts (as modified by Gatham ‘014) on or in the top first side of the perimeter into a window seal to secure the screen assembly to the vehicle window of the vehicle door.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grat US 2007/0144688 and Gatham US 2009/0195014 as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Lederle et al US 2005/0274060.
In regard to claim 8, Grat ‘688/Gatham ‘014 fail to disclose the screen assembly further comprises a carry bag for storing the screen assembly when not in use.
Lederle et al ‘060 disclose the screen assembly further comprises a carry bag for storing the screen assembly when not in use (paragraph [0036]). 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 Grat ‘688/Gatham ‘014 to include a carry bag as taught by Lederle et al ‘060 for the purpose of convenient storage to keep the device free or dirt, oil or other contaminants. (paragraph [0036])
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grat US 2007/0144688 and Gatham US 2009/0195014 as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Munchin Brica Magnetic Stretch to Fit Sun Shade.
In regard to claim 13, Grat ‘688/Gatham ‘014 fail to disclose further comprising the step of pulling the perimeter at the bottom second side, the left third side, the right fourth side, the fifth perimeter side and the sixth perimeter side distally to tighten the screen assembly over the window.
Munchkin Brica Magnetic Stretch to Fit Sun Shade video, the step of pulling the perimeter at to tighten the screen assembly over the window. (video from :19-:25)
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 perform the pulling of the perimeter of the screen assembly as taught by Munchkin Brica Stretch to Fit Sun Shade for the purpose of maximizing the coverage and ensuring a tight fit.
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