DETAILED ACTION
This is in response to the application filed on March 28, 2025. 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 Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1-20 stand rejected as set forth below.
Claim Objections
The instances of the word “matable” in claims 6, 11, 19 should be replaced with the word “mateable”.
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, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parry (GB 2577053) in view of Dubarry (FR 1283356).
Regarding claim 1, Parry teaches a frame profile for a fenestration system (fig 3), comprising: a vertical member 38b; a horizontal member 38a joined to the vertical member 38b at a corner joint (joint where 38b and 38a meet); an outer profile cooperatively defined by the vertical and horizontal members 38b, 38a and configured to accommodate a wire extending along the outer profile and transitioning between the vertical and horizontal members at the corner joint (outer profile of 38b, 38a could accommodate a wire).
Parry does not teach a corner clip mounted to the outer profile at the corner joint and operable to transition the wire between the vertical and horizontal members.
Dubarry teaches a corner clip (fig 2).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the frame profile of Parry with the corner clip of Dubarry. The corner clip of Dubarry could attach to the corner of the vertical and horizontal members of Parry. This combination would help to support the connection of the corner of the frame as in Dubarry fig 1.
Regarding claim 2, Parry as modified teaches the frame profile of claim 1; the vertical and horizontal members 38b, 38a (fig 3).
Dubarry in the modification teaches the corner clip (fig 2) comprises: an L-shaped body 5a providing a first extension (vertical portion of 5a) and a second extension (horizontal portion of 5a) extending from the first extension (vertical portion of 5a) at a joint (joint where vertical and horizontal portion of 5a meet); a wire channel 8 defined on an inner surface of each extension (inner surface of vertical and horizontal portion of 5a) and contiguously transitioning between the first and second extensions at the joint (8 contiguous through the vertical and horizontal portion of 5a), wherein the wire channel 8 is sized to receive and transition the wire (8 could be sized to receive and transition a wire).
With the corner clip of Dubarry attached to the corner of the vertical and horizontal members of Parry, a wire could go between the wire channel of Dubarry and the vertical and horizontal members of Parry.
Regarding claim 3, Parry as modified teaches the frame profile of claim 2.
Dubarry in the modification teaches a wire channel 8 that could exhibit a depth greater than a diameter of a wire. (fig 2)
Regarding claim 5, Parry as modified teaches the frame profile of claim 2; a channel defined in the outer profile (channel between 36a, 34a in fig 2).
Dubarry in the modification teaches the corner clip (fig 2); the wire channel 8 is defined by a pair of legs 6, 7 extending parallel to each other.
The pair of legs of Dubarry could be received by the channel of Parry by, for example, sliding the corner clip into the channel.
Regarding claim 6, Parry as modified teaches the frame profile of claim 5; a corresponding mateable feature 36a, 34a provided within the channel (channel between 36a, 34a in fig 2).
Dubarry in the modification teaches wherein at least one leg of the pair of legs 6, 7 provides a mateable feature 16, 17. (fig 2)
The pair of legs of Dubarry could mate with the mateable feature of Parry by, for example, sliding the corner clip into the channel.
Regarding claim 7, Parry as modified teaches the frame profile of claim 1; a channel (channel between 36a, 34a in fig 2) defined in the outer profile (outer profile of 38b, 38a in fig 3).
The channel defined in the outer profile of Parry could receive a wire by, for example, placing a wire by hand into the channel.
Regarding claim 8, Parry as modified teaches the frame profile of claim 7, wherein the outer profile (outer profile of 38b, 38a in fig 2) is cooperatively defined by: a vertical outer side extending between interior and exterior portions of the vertical member (outer side of 38b with interior and exterior portions); and a horizontal outer side extending between interior and exterior portions of the horizontal member (outer side of 38a with interior and exterior portions), and wherein the channel is defined in the vertical and horizontal outer sides (channel between 36a, 34a in fig 2 defined in the outer side of 38b, 38a in fig 3).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parry (GB 2577053) in view of Dubarry (FR 1283356) as applied to claim 2, and further in view of Rossiter et al (“Rossiter”) (US 6,141,926).
Regarding claim 4, Parry as modified teaches the frame profile of claim 2; the outer profile (outer profile of 38b, 38a in fig 3).
Dubarry in the modification teaches wherein the corner clip (fig 2) further comprises one or more longitudinal ribs 9, 10 defined on an outer surface of each extension (9, 10 on outer surface of vertical and horizontal portion of 5a).
Parry does not teach a frame gasket operatively coupled to the outer profile and defining one or more longitudinal ribs that align with the one or more longitudinal ribs of the corner clip.
Rossiter teaches a frame gasket (fig 15) defining one or more longitudinal ribs (112, fig 6).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the frame profile of Parry with the frame gasket of Rossiter. The frame gasket of Rossiter could couple to the outer profile of Parry by, for example, sliding the frame gasket into the outer profile. This would allow the longitudinal ribs of Rossiter to align with the longitudinal ribs of Dubarry. This combination would help to provide a re-entrant shape for retention of marginal edge portions of panel coverings (Rossiter col 11 line 37).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parry (GB 2577053) in view of Dubarry (FR 1283356) as applied to claim 7, and further in view of Zimmer (US 3,778,175).
Regarding claim 9, Parry as modified discloses the frame profile of claim 7; the channel (channel between 36a, 34a in fig 2) in the outer profile (outer profile of 38b, 38a in fig 3).
Parry does not teach a frame accessory wherein the channel is at least partially defined in the frame accessory.
Zimmer teaches a frame accessory (50, fig 8) wherein the channel 57, 58 is at least partially defined in the frame accessory 50.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the frame profile of Parry with the frame accessory of Zimmer. The channel of Parry could be constructed with the frame accessory of Zimmer to allow for two lanes to insert elements into, as shown in Zimmer fig 7 with element 76 and 76’.
Claims 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parry (GB 2577053) in view of Dubarry (FR 1283356) as applied to claim 7, and further in view of Yoshida et al (“Yoshida”) (WO 2014156598).
Regarding claim 10, Parry as modified teaches the frame profile of claim 7; the channel (channel between 36a, 34a in fig 2).
Parry does not teach a wire clip.
Yoshida teaches a wire 10 held by a wire clip 20. (fig 2) (pg 2, second to last paragraph, line 1 “10 formed by bundling a plurality of electric wires”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the frame profile of Parry with the wire clip of Yoshida. The wire clip of Yoshida could be secured within the channel of Parry between members 36a and 34a to aid in connecting electronic devices (Yoshida pg 2, second to last paragraph, line 2).
Regarding claim 11, Parry as modified teaches the frame profile of claim 10; a corresponding retention mechanism 36a, 34a provided within the channel (channel between 36a, 34a in fig 2).
Yoshida in the modification teaches the wire clip 20 comprises: a body 21 providing opposing first and second legs 212 that cooperatively define a wire retention passage 211 sized to receive the wire 10; and a retention mechanism 22 provided on each leg 212. (fig 3)
The retention mechanism on each leg of the wire clip of Yoshida could contact the retention mechanism provided within the channel of Parry to hold the wire clip in the channel.
Regarding claim 12, Parry as modified teaches the frame profile of claim 11.
Yoshida in the modification teaches wherein the wire retention passage 211 exhibits a diameter smaller than a diameter of the wire 10 (fig 3). (pg 5 paragraph 4 line 1 “the width of the recess 21… may be slightly smaller than the outer diameter of the wire harness 10”).
Regarding claim 13, Parry as modified teaches the frame profile of claim 11.
Yoshida in the modification teaches the wire clip 20 is made of rubber or a foam rubber (pg 7 paragraph 6 line 1 “The mounting member 20 is preferably formed of a known nonwoven fabric that can be elastically deformed. As such a nonwoven fabric, what employ | adopted elastic resin (synthetic rubber etc.)”).
Regarding claim 14, Parry as modified teaches the frame profile of claim 11; the channel (channel between 36a, 34a in fig 2), and chamfered surfaces (pg 1 abstract “frame members 12a-d each having a pair of bevelled edges 13a-f to interface with the bevelled edges of a neighbouring frame member”).
Yoshida in the modification teaches each leg 212 of the wire clip 20.
Parry uses beveled edges to help different members interface together, so the wire clip of Yoshida could have chamfered surfaces where necessary for the same purpose.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parry (GB 2577053) in view of Dubarry (FR 1283356) and Yoshida et al (“Yoshida”) (WO 2014156598) as applied to claim 10, and further in view of Rossiter et al (“Rossiter”) (US 6,141,926).
Regarding claim 15, Parry as modified teaches the frame profile of claim 10; the outer profile (outer profile of 38b, 38a in fig 3); a gasket profile contiguous with the channel (channel between 36a, 34a in fig 2).
Parry does not teach a frame gasket.
Rossiter teaches a frame gasket (fig 15).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the frame profile of Parry with the frame gasket of Rossiter. The frame gasket of Rossiter could attach to the outer profile of Parry by, for example, sliding the frame gasket into the channel. This would leave the frame gasket in close contact with the wire and wire clip of Yoshida. This combination would help to provide a re-entrant shape for retention of marginal edge portions of panel coverings (Rossiter col 11 line 37).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parry (GB 2577053) in view of Dubarry (FR 1283356) as applied to claim 7, and further in view of Rossiter et al (“Rossiter”) (US 6,141,926).
Regarding claim 16, Parry as modified teaches the frame profile of claim 7; the outer profile (outer profile of 38b, 38a in fig 3); a gasket profile contiguous with the channel (channel between 36a, 34a in fig 2).
Parry does not teach a frame gasket with a wire retention passage sized to receive a wire.
Rossiter teaches a frame gasket (fig 15) with a wire retention passage 126 sized to receive a wire.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the frame profile of Parry with the frame gasket of Rossiter. The frame gasket of Rossiter could attach to the outer profile of Parry by, for example, sliding the frame gasket into the channel. The wire retention passage of Rossiter could receive a wire. This combination would help to provide a re-entrant shape for retention of marginal edge portions of panel coverings (Rossiter col 11 line 37).
Claims 17, 18, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parry (GB 2577053) in view of Dubarry (FR 1283356) and Yoshida et al (“Yoshida”) (WO 2014156598).
Regarding claim 17, Parry teaches a frame profile for a fenestration system (fig 3), comprising: a first member 38b extending from a second member 38a at a corner joint (joint where 38b and 38a meet); an outer profile (outer profile of 38b, 38a) cooperatively defined by the first and second members 38b, 38a and configured to accommodate a wire extending along the outer profile and transitioning between the first and second members at the corner joint, the wire being received within a channel defined in the outer profile (outer profile of 38b, 38a could accommodate a wire within a channel between 36a, 34a in fig 2).
Parry does not teach a corner clip mounted to the outer profile at the corner joint and operable to transition the wire between the first and second members; and one or more wire clips arranged within the channel, wherein the wire is received within the one or more wire clips to secure the wire within the channel.
Dubarry teaches a corner clip (fig 1) and Yoshida teaches a wire 10 held by a wire clip 20 (fig 2).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the frame profile of Parry with the corner clip of Dubarry and the wire clip of Yoshida. The corner clip of Dubarry could attach to the corner of the vertical and horizontal members of Parry. This combination would help to support the connection of the corner of the frame as in Dubarry fig 1. The wire clip of Yoshida could be secured within the channel of Parry between members 36a and 34a to aid in connecting electronic devices (Yoshida pg 2, second to last paragraph, line 2).
Regarding claim 18, Parry as modified teaches the frame profile of claim 17; the first and second members 38b, 38a (fig 3).
Dubarry in the modification teaches the corner clip (fig 2) comprises: an L-shaped body 5a providing a first extension (vertical portion of 5a) and a second extension (horizontal portion of 5a) extending from the first extension (vertical portion of 5a) at a joint (joint where vertical and horizontal portion of 5a meet); and a wire channel 8 defined on an inner surface of each extension (inner surface of vertical and horizontal portion of 5a) and contiguously transitioning between the first and second extensions at the joint (8 contiguous through the vertical and horizontal portion of 5a), wherein the wire channel 8 is sized to receive and transition the wire (8 could be sized to receive and transition a wire).
With the corner clip of Dubarry attached to the corner of the first and second members of Parry, a wire could go between the wire channel of Dubarry and the first and second members of Parry.
Regarding claim 19, Parry as modified teaches the frame profile of claim 17; a corresponding retention mechanism 36a, 34a provided within the channel (channel between 36a, 34a in fig 2).
Yoshida in the modification teaches the wire clip 20 comprises: a body 21 providing opposing first and second legs 212 that cooperatively define a wire retention passage 211 sized to receive the wire 10; and a retention mechanism 22 provided on each leg 212. (fig 3)
The retention mechanism on each leg of the wire clip of Yoshida could contact the retention mechanism provided within the channel of Parry to hold the wire clip in the channel.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parry (GB 2577053) in view of Dubarry (FR 1283356) and Yoshida et al (“Yoshida”) (WO 2014156598) as applied to claim 17, and further in view of Rossiter et al (“Rossiter”) (US 6,141,926).
Regarding claim 20, Parry as modified teaches the frame profile of claim 17; the outer profile (outer profile of 38b, 38a in fig 3); a gasket profile contiguous with the channel (channel between 36a, 34a in fig 2).
Parry does not teach a frame gasket.
Rossiter teaches a frame gasket (fig 15).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the frame profile of Parry with the frame gasket of Rossiter. The frame gasket of Rossiter could attach to the outer profile of Parry by, for example, sliding the frame gasket into the channel. This would leave the frame gasket in close contact with the wire and wire clip of Yoshida. This combination would help to provide a re-entrant shape for retention of marginal edge portions of panel coverings (Rossiter col 11 line 37).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant' s disclosure. See the attached PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY P HARRIS whose telephone number is (571) 270-5441. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8:00am-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 Mattei can be reached at (571) 270-3238. 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.
/ZACHARY P HARRIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3635
/BRIAN D MATTEI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Prosecution Insights