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 .
Status of Application
Claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined in this application. This communication is the first action on the merits. The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 10/07/2024 has been considered by the Examiner.
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 11-12 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.
A) The dimensions in both Claim 11 & Claim 12 do not specify what direction the dimensions are for. For the purposes of examination, “0.1 mm and 1.0 mm” has been construed to be 0.1-1.0mm thick, and “0.25mm” has been construed to be 0.25 mm thick.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-10 & 13-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Number 4,957,036 to Fujihara.
A) As per Claims 1, 14-15 & 18, Fujihara teaches an air register (Fujihara: Figure 8) comprising:
an air vent housing (Fujihara: Figures 8, Item 1) that defines an inlet that is fluidically coupled to an outlet via a cavity; and
an airflow redirector assembly positioned at the outlet and configured to adjust airflow from the cavity along an axis, wherein the airflow redirector assembly comprises
a first frame (Fujihara: Figure 8, Items 3 with portion of Item 1 connecting ends of Items 3), a second frame (Fujihara: Figure 8, Item 9) configured to translate relative to the first frame along the axis, and a plurality of flexible vanes (Fujihara: Figure 8, Items 2) that are coupled to each of the first frame and the second frame,
wherein each of the plurality of flexible vanes is configured to flex when the second frame translates relative to the first frame (Fujihara: Col. 9, lines 10-37), and
wherein the first airflow redirector assembly is configured to rotate about relative to the air vent housing about an axis of rotation that is parallel to the axis (Fujihara: Col. 9, lines 10-37).
B) As per Claims 2, 16 & 19, Fujihara teaches that each of the plurality of flexible vanes includes a first end that is fixedly coupled to the first frame (Fujihara: Figure 8, upper end of Item 2 attached to Item 3) and a second end that is slidingly coupled to the second frame (Fujihara: Figure 8, lower part of Item 2 attached to Item 11 with Item 5).
C) As per Claims 3, 17 & 20, Fujihara teaches that the second end of each of the plurality of flexible vanes is sandwiched between a set of nibs formed in or on the second frame (Fujihara: Figure 8, Item 5 is sandwiched between nibs forming each slot 11).
D) As per Claim 4, Fujihara teaches that the second frame is configured to translate relative to the first frame between a first extreme and a second extreme via a neutral position (Fujihara: Col. 9, lines 10-37).
E) As per Claim 5, Fujihara teaches that the plurality of flexible vanes is configured to direct airflow in a first direction along the axis when the second frame is positioned at the first extreme (Fujihara: Col. 9, lines 10-37).
F) As per Claim 6, Fujihara teaches that the plurality of flexible vanes is configured to direct airflow in a second direction along the axis that is opposite the first direction when the second frame is positioned at the second extreme (Fujihara: Col. 9, lines 10-37).
G) As per Claim 7, Fujihara teaches that the plurality of flexible vanes is linear when the second frame is positioned at the neutral position (Fujihara: Col. 9, lines 10-37).
H) As per Claim 8, Fujihara teaches that the plurality of flexible vanes is curved when the second frame is positioned at the first extreme or at the second extreme (Fujihara: Col. 9, lines 10-37).
I) As per Claim 9, Fujihara teaches that the second frame is configured to translate relative to the first frame via a third frame that is fixedly coupled to said first frame (Fujihara: Figure 8, Item 6 & 17) Col. 9, lines 10-37).
J) As per Claim 10, Fujihara teaches that the third frame defines one or more channels configured to receive at least a part of the second frame (Fujihara: Figure 8, channel Item 9 fits into on rear of Item 6 between Items 17).
K) As per Claim 13, Fujihara teaches that a second airflow redirector assembly configured to adjust the airflow along a second axis that is transverse to said axis (Fujihara: Figure 8, Items 17).
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.
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) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujihara.
A) As per Claims 11-12, Fujihara teaches all the limitations except explicitly that each of the plurality of flexible vanes is about 0.25 mm.
However, However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to make the thickness about 0.25mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art (thin louvers), discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves (MPEP 2144.05 II. A) only routine skill in the art.
In addition, it is observed that thickness is a result effective variable because the thinner, the more flexible but the thicker, the stronger and more robust the system. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the thickness 0.25mm, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. All of the following documents teach flexible louver systems.
A) US Patent Number 5,238,448 to Komori
B) US Patent Number 5,176,571 to Fujihara
C) US Patent Number 5,129,858 to Komori
D) US Patent Number 5,056,420 to Komori
E) US Patent Number 2,735,351 to Abrahamsen
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALLEN SCHULT whose telephone number is (571)272-8511. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM.
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, HELENA KOSANOVIC can be reached at 571-272-9059. 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.
/Allen R. B. Schult/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights