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 .
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 1-15 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.
In regard to claim 1, the use of the word “subsequently” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what it entitles. Is the claim attempting to recite method steps making it a product-by-process claim? Or is “subsequently” imparting specific characteristics to the limitations. In which case, renders the scope of the claim is unclear.
In regard to claims 2, 4, 8, 14 and 15, the phrase “in particular” renders the claim indefinite because it is not known if the limitations recited after the phrase are part of the claim subject matter or not.
In regard to claim 11, the claim is indefinite because it is unclear what the scope of the “sword” being claimed is. This appears to be a literal translation from non-English. For examining purposes and based on the disclosure in the drawings the “sword” being claimed is assumed to be a flange.
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, 3, 5-8, 11, 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pedersen US 2021/0198938 A1 (hereinafter ‘Pedersen’).
In regard to claim 1, Pedersen teaches a door leaf for a door system (see [0001] and fig. 2a) comprising a main component (4), a carrier profile (26/27) and a strap (10),
wherein the main component has an upper face, a front face, a lower end face and a rear end face, wherein the carrier profile is attached to the upper end face (see fig. 4a), and
wherein the strap has a first end and a second end, the strap is attached to the carrier profile with the first end (via 29, see [0083]), subsequently extends along the front face, the lower end face and the rear end face of the main component and is subsequently attached to the carrier profiled with the second end (see fig. 4a).
In regard to claim 3, Pedersen teaches the claimed invention wherein the door leaf comprises at least one tensioning mechanism (32) attached to the carrier profile (see [0083]) wherein the strap is connected to the carrier profile via the at least one tensioning mechanism (see fig. 4a).
In regard to claims 5-7, Pedersen teaches the claimed invention wherein the door leaf comprises at least one spacer (14) located between the strap and one of the faces of the main component, and extends downwardly partly along and abutting the respective end faces of the main component (see fig. 4a).
In regard to claim 8, Pedersen teaches the claimed invention wherein the door leaf comprises at least one utility profile (58, 59, 60) attached to the front face (see [0102]).
In regard to claim 11, Pedersen teaches the claimed invention wherein the utility profile attached to the lower end face comprises a sword (19) extending downward (see 112, 2nd rejection above).
In regard to claims 13 and 14, Pedersen teaches the claimed invention wherein the strap has a smaller width than the main component (see fig. 4c and 9b) and the main component is a glass element (see [0064]).
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 2, 4, 9, 10, 12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pedersen.
In regard to claim 2, Pedersen teaches the claimed invention wherein the main component is attached to the carrier profile by an adhesive connection capable of carrying the whole weight of the main component (see “glued together” [0086]). Note that one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious that the adhesive is capable of carrying the whole weight of the main component so as to keep the frame assembled and functioning as disclosed in [0097].
In regard to claim 4, Pedersen teaches the claimed invention wherein the tensioning mechanism comprises teeth (hooks 29) for engaging with a stop (openings in the strap) fixed relative to the carrier profile. Pedersen does not explicitly teach the tensioning mechanism is a spool. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the instant application, to provide a spool as the tensioning mechanism because spools are notoriously well known in the art mechanisms used for storing straps and the use of conventional materials to perform their known function is prima facie obvious.
In regard to claims 9 and 10, Pedersen teaches the utility profile may contain sealing means (see [0103]). Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious before the effective filling date of the instant application, to provide a receptacle for the sealing means so as to ensure the sealing means stay in place and provide sealing.
In regard to claim 12, Pedersen teaches its frame members are made of plastic (see [0088]). Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious before the effective filling date of the instant application, to provide the utility profile also made in plastic because plastic is economic and effective way of producing lengths of elements (See [0088]).
In regard to claim 15, Pedersen teaches a door system (fig. 2a), and although not explicitly disclosed, it would have been obvious to provide a door header in the system so as to provide proper structural support.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAOLA AGUDELO whose telephone number is (571)270-7986. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM - 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, Brian E 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.
/PAOLA AGUDELO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Prosecution Insights