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 .
This is the first action on the merits.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 12-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rodems US 20190063125 A1, in view of Hanel EP 2740868 A1.
Regarding Claim 1, Rodems teaches: A corner drive (Fig 1: 10) for a locking system for a vent window comprising: a body (Fig 1: 12) configured to be attached to a window frame (Fig 3: 22) at a corner of the window frame (Fig 3: 62), the body comprising: a first drive track (Fig 1: 48 that is aligned with first axis 32) substantially aligned with a first axis (Fig 1: 32) and defining a first guide channel (Fig 5: 50, P0045, this is the lower 50); a second drive track (Fig 1: 48 that is aligned with second axis 30) substantially aligned with a second axis (Fig 1: 30) perpendicular to the first axis and defining a second guide channel (Fig 5: 50, P0045, this is the upper 50); and a corner section (Fig 3: 28) joining the first drive track and the second drive track (shown in Fig 3), the corner section comprising bearing surface (Fig 3: 77) aligned with the first guide channel and the second guide channel (understood when comparing Fig 3 to Fig 5 and P0045); a transfer spring (Fig 3: 16) at least partially slidably disposed against the bearing surface (P0050) and having a first end (Fig 3: 84) slidable along the first axis (Fig 3: shows first end 84 of transfer spring connected to arm 20, and as such, slides with arm 20 along first axis 32 as described in P0056) and a second end (Fig 3: 82) slidable along the second axis (Fig 2: shows first end 82 of transfer spring connected to arm 18, and as such, slides with arm 18 along second axis 30 as described in P0056); a first adjustment arm (Fig 3: 20) received in the first guide channel (shown in Figs 5, and 1-3, and described in P0045, and P0055-56, this being the lower guide channel) and moveable or slidable along the first axis (shown in Figs 5, and 1-3, and described in P0045, and P0055-56, slideable along lower horizontal axis 32 that is the first axis), the first adjustment arm having a first proximal end (Fig 3: lower 86, and described in P0053) coupled to the first end of the transfer spring (shown in Fig 3, lower 86 that is the first proximal end is coupled to first end of transfer spring 84 and described in P0053); a second adjustment arm (Fig 3: 18) received in the second guide channel (shown in Figs 5, and 1-3, and described in P0045, and P0055-56, this being the upper guide channel) and moveable or slidable along the second axis (shown in Figs 5, and 1-3, and described in P0045, and P0055-56, slideable along the upper vertical axis 30 that is the second axis), the second adjustment arm having a second proximal end (Fig 2: upper 86, and described in P0053) coupled to the second end of the transfer spring (shown in Fig 1 and described in P0053, upper 86 that is the second proximal end is coupled to second end of transfer spring 82); and wherein at least one of the first adjustment arm and the second adjustment arm is configured to be coupled to a lock bar (P0040, P0054, P0057) of the locking system (P0040, P0054, P0057). Rodems does not explicitly teach: wherein at least one of (i) a first length of the first adjustment arm is adjustable within a first adjustment range and (ii) a second length of the second adjustment arm is adjustable within a second adjustment range. Hanel teaches that it is known in the art wherein at least one of (i) a first length of a first adjustment arm (Hanel: Fig 19-20b: 30, 93) is adjustable within a first adjustment range (Fig 20a-20b; P0052-53, the range is the width of the eccentric 95) and (ii) a second length of a second adjustment arm (Hanel: Fig 19: 31, 93, P0052, the second adjustment arm is 31, but is adjustable as shown in Fig 20a-20b with first adjustment arm 30, 93 as way of demonstration and described in P0052-53) is adjustable within a second adjustment range (Fig 20a-20b; P0052-53, the range is the width of the eccentric 95). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the adjustment arms of Rodems, to include the adjustment mechanism of Hanel, resulting in adjustable arms to provide the adjustability to compensate for tolerance issues, thereby increasing ease of installation (Hanel: P0053).
Regarding Claim 2, Rodems, in view of Hanel, teaches: The corner drive of claim 1, wherein at least one of the first length of the first adjustment arm and the second length of the second adjustment arm is infinitely adjustable within the first adjustment range and the second adjustment range, respectively (Hanel: Figs 20a-20b and P0053 describes the length adjustment via rotation of eccentric 95, this is a stepless adjustment and it is understood by the Examiner that this is what is meant by infinitely adjustable. P0052 also describes that the embodiment shown in Fig 20a-20b applies to both first adjustment arm 30 and second adjustment arm 31 respectively).
Regarding Claim 3, Rodems, in view of Hanel, teaches: The corner drive of claim 1, wherein the first length of the first adjustment arm is adjustable within the first adjustment range (Hanel: P0052-53, describes that the embodiment shown applies to both first adjustment arm and second adjustment arm respectively, therefore the first adjustment range applies to the first adjustment arm); and wherein the second length of the second adjustment arm is adjustable within the second adjustment range (P0052-53, describes that the embodiment shown applies to both first adjustment arm and second adjustment arm respectively, therefore the second adjustment range applies to the second adjustment arm).
Regarding Claim 4, Rodems, in view of Hanel, teaches: The corner drive of claim 3, wherein the first length of the first adjustment arm is infinitely adjustable within the first adjustment range (Hanel: P052-53, the eccentric 95 is used to provide infinite adjustability of the first length of the first adjustment arm 30 as it is stepless, also shown in Figs 20a-20b); and wherein the second length of the second adjustment arm is infinitely adjustable within the second adjustment range (Hanel: P052-53, the eccentric 95 is used to provide infinite adjustability of the first length of the first adjustment arm 30 over the first adjustment range as it is stepless, while the adjustment is shown in Figs 20a-20b for first adjustment arm 30, P0052 described that the adjustability is the same for both arms, therefore 20a-20b also depicts the infinite adjustability of the second length of second adjustment arm within the second adjustment range).
Regarding Claim 5, Rodems, in view of Hanel, teaches: The corner drive of claim 1, wherein at least one of the first adjustment arm and the second adjustment arm comprises: an outer adjustment bar (Hanel: Fig 20a-20b: 30) and an inner adjustment bar (Hanel: Fig 20a-20b: 93); wherein the outer adjustment bar comprises one of the first proximal end (Hanel: Fig 19, end of 30 where 28 is connected) and the second proximal end (Hanel: 19, end of 31 where 29 is located); wherein the inner adjustment bar is received in the outer adjustment bar (Hanel: shown in Fig 20a-20b); wherein the inner adjustment bar is moveable relative to the outer adjustment bar along one of the first axis and the second axis (Hanel: Fig 19 shows the first and second axis of first and second adjustment arm 30 and 31, respectively the horizontal and vertical axis; Fig 20a-20b demonstrates the relative movement of the inner adjustment bar 93 with outer adjustment bar 30); and wherein a position of a distal end of the inner adjustment bar (Fig 20b, end of 93 where 101 is located is the distal end) relative to the one of the first proximal end and the second proximal end is adjustable (Hanel: seen in Figs 20a-20b and demonstrated by arrow 100, and described in P0053).
Regarding Claim 6, Rodems, in view of Hanel, teaches: The corner drive of claim 5, wherein the outer adjustment bar comprises a first coupling member (Hanel: Fig 20a shows first coupling member 34, this is used to attach outer adjustment bar to transfer link 21 via a fastener 28 as shown in Fig 19. It is the position of the examiner that the transfer link functions the same as the transfer spring by transferring the motion from 30 to 31 or vice versa, and that the attachment to it via fastener is also the same) attached to one of the first end of the transfer spring (Hanel: Fig 19, outer adjustment member 30 is attached to top left end of transfer link 21, this being the first end, via 28 fastening through 34) and the second end of the transfer spring (Hanel: Fig 19, outer adjustment member 31 is attached to bottom right end of transfer link 21, this being the second end, via 29 fastening through 34); and wherein the inner adjustment bar comprises a second coupling (Hanel: Fig 20a-20b: second coupling 101 is shown fixed to inner adjustment bar 93) configured to be coupled to the lock bar of the locking system (Hanel: Fig 20a-20b show that second coupling 101 is connected to Rodems: P0040, P0054, P0057).
Regarding Claim 12, Rodems, in view of Hanel, teaches: The corner drive of claim 1, wherein: the first drive track is configured to be attached to a base frame of the window frame (Rodems: Fig 3, the first drive track 48 that is aligned with first axis 32 is attached to bottom horizontal portion of window frame 22, that is the base) and the second drive track is configured to be attached to side jamb of the window frame (Rodems: Fig 3, the second drive track 48 that is aligned with second axis 30 is attached to side vertical portion of window frame 22, that is the side jamb).
Regarding Claim 13, Rodems, in view of Hanel, teaches: The corner drive of claim 12, further comprising a plurality of holes (Hanel: Fig 2: 15, 17) and a corresponding plurality of screws (Hanel: Fig 3: 50); wherein each screw of the plurality of screws threadably engages a corresponding hole of the plurality of holes (Hanel: shown in Fig 3); and wherein the first drive track and the second drive track are each configured to be attached to the window frame by the plurality of holes and the corresponding plurality of screws (Hanel: shown in Fig 3). The combination does not teach: a plurality of Euro-nuts, wherein each screw of the plurality of screws engages a corresponding euro-nut of the plurality of Euro-nuts; and wherein the first drive track and the second drive track are each configured to be attached to the window frame by the plurality of Euro-nuts and the corresponding plurality of screws. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, using KSR Rationale E, to modify the combination so that the plurality of screws in Hanel, engage a plurality of Euro-nuts to fasten the first and second drive tracks to the window frame. Various fasteners are known in the art with a finite selection available to choose from, thereby making it obvious to try as choosing from a finite selection of fasteners yields the predictable result of fastening the drive tracks to the window frame. Further, De Vries US 20090108591 A1 explains that it is known in the art to select from various fastening elements based on the requirements of the component being fastened.
Regarding Claim 14, Rodems, in view of Hanel, teaches: The corner drive of claim 1, wherein the corner insert comprises a lubricant (Rodems: P0053) and a polymer comprising acetal homopolymer (CH2O)n) (Rodems: P0053).
Regarding Claim 15, Rodems, in view of Hanel, teaches: A vent window (Rodems: P0040) comprising the window frame (Rodems: 22), wherein the window frame comprises a head frame (Rodems: P0040 and Fig 3, it is the position of the Examiner that it would be inherent for the window frame to also have a top side of the frame that is the head frame to complete the entirety of the window frame), a left side jamb (Rodems: Fig 3, left side of window frame 22 is the left side jamb), a right side jamb (Rodems: P0040 and Fig 3, it is the position of the Examiner that it would be inherent for the window frame to also have a right side jamb to complete the entirety of the frame) and a base frame (Rodems: Fig 3, bottom side of window frame 22 is the base frame); a vent operator (Rodems: P0040); and a window locking system operatively coupled to the vent operator (Rodems: P0040, P0054, P0057) and comprising the corner drive according to claim 1.
Regarding Claim 16, Rodems, in view of Hanel, teaches: The vent window of claim 15, wherein the corner drive according to claim 1 is attached to the window frame (Rodems” shown in Fig 3), wherein the first drive track is attached to the base frame of the window frame (Rodems: shown in Fig 3) and the second drive track is attached to one of the left side jamb (Rodems: shown in Fig 3) and the right side jamb of the window frame.
Regarding Claim 17, Rodems, in view of Hanel, does not explicitly teach: A method for installing a corner drive according to claim 1 in a vent window having a locking system comprising: attaching the corner drive according to claim 1 at a corner of a window frame of the vent window; adjusting at least one of the first length of the first adjustment arm and the second length of the second adjustment arm; and coupling at least one of the first adjustment arm and the second adjustment arm to a lock bar of the locking system. However, regarding claim 17, The Examiner notes that the instant method step limitations are considered obvious over the prior art, Rodems US 20190063125 A1, in view of Hanel EP 2740868 A1, in view of rejections of the structural limitations previously set forth (see rejections of claim 1 above). When the method steps essentially set forth the provision and use of an apparatus, as intended by its structure, then such method steps are considered obvious when the structure of the apparatus has been demonstrated as obvious (or anticipated) by the prior art.
Regarding Claim 18, Rodems, in view of Hanel, does not explicitly teach: The method of claim 17, wherein the step of adjusting at least one of the first length of the first adjustment arm and the second length of the second adjustment arm comprises adjusting both the first length of the first adjustment arm and the second length of the second adjustment arm. However, regarding claim 18, The Examiner notes that the instant method step limitations are considered obvious over the prior art, Rodems US 20190063125 A1, in view of Hanel EP 2740868 A1, in view of rejections of the structural limitations previously set forth (see rejections of claim 1 above). When the method steps essentially set forth the provision and use of an apparatus, as intended by its structure, then such method steps are considered obvious when the structure of the apparatus has been demonstrated as obvious (or anticipated) by the prior art.
Regarding Claim 19, Rodems, in view of Hanel, does not explicitly teach: The method of claim 19, wherein the step of attaching the corner drive comprises: attaching the first drive track to a base rail of the window frame with a first fastener and the second drive track to one of a left side jamb and a right side jamb of the window frame with a second fastener; and wherein the first fastener and the second fastener comprise one of (i) a machine screw and a Euro-nut and (ii) a self-tapping screw. However, regarding claim 19, The Examiner notes that the instant method step limitations are considered obvious over the prior art, Rodems US 20190063125 A1, in view of Hanel EP 2740868 A1, in view of rejections of the structural limitations previously set forth (see rejections of claim 13 and 15-16 above). When the method steps essentially set forth the provision and use of an apparatus, as intended by its structure, then such method steps are considered obvious when the structure of the apparatus has been demonstrated as obvious (or anticipated) by the prior art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-11 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.
Regarding Claim 7, none of the prior art discloses or renders obvious a corner drive having the combination of features recited in claim 7. The closest prior art of record, the combination of Rodems US 20190063125 A1 and Hanel EP 2740868 A1, teaches a corner drive having much of the claimed structure but fails to teach: wherein the outer adjustment bar comprises a downwardly open cross-section defined by an upper wall, two opposing side walls each extending downwardly from an opposite lateral side of the upper wall, and two longitudinally extending side rails; wherein each of the two longitudinally extending side rail extends from a lower end of a respective side wall of the two opposing side walls and projects laterally outwardly from a longitudinal axis of the outer adjustment bar; and wherein the two longitudinally extending side rails of the outer adjustment bar are telescopingly received in at least one of the first guide channel of the first drive track and the second guide channel of the second drive track.
Regarding Claims 8-11, these claims are objected to due to their dependency on claim 7.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER F CALLAHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5847. The examiner can normally be reached Mon through Thur 7:30am-5:30pm.
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, Christine Mills can be reached at 571-272-8322. 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.
/C.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3675
/CHRISTINE M MILLS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675