DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the configuration including “a first end of the arcuate central portion is defined a planar window bead engagement portion”, as claimed in claim 7, as well as “a glazing panel carried within the window frame; a window bead which secures the glazing panel to the window frame”, and “a window engagement portion via which the mounting clip may be detachably coupled to a window, wherein the window engagement portion of the mounting clip is located between the window bead and the glazing panel”, as claimed in claim 15, must be shown or the features canceled from the claims. Examiner notes that the claimed structural elements of “a planar window bead engagement portion”, “a glazing panel”, and “a window bead” are not shown in the Figures, and the configuration, orientation, etc. of these elements is therefore unclear. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1 and 15 recite “an outer frame that defines an aperture”, and “a first orientation in which completely obscure an aperture defined by the door frame”, followed by “in which they partially obscure the aperture”. This is unclear since multiple “apertures” are claimed and it is therefore unclear which aperture is being referred to by the term “the aperture”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 recites “wherein the arcuate body defines an interior cavity”. This is unclear since “the arcuate body” lacks proper antecedent basis (i.e. claim 7, from which claim 8 depends recites “a resiliently deformable body” and “an arcuate central portion”, but no “arcuate body” is previously recited in the claims, and the term is therefore unclear). Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-7 and 9-14 are objected to as depending from a base claim with an objection.
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 7-11 and 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 7 recites “wherein the plane of the engagement portion is substantially orthogonal to the plane of the support platform”. This renders the claim indefinite, since “the plane of the engagement portion” lacks proper antecedent basis and is unclear (i.e. both “a window engagement portion” and “a planar window bead engagement portion” are previously recited in the claims, and it is therefore unclear which “plane” and which “engagement portion” is being referred to in the claim). Examiner notes that consistent terminology and phraseology must be maintained in the claims. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 recites “a window bead which secures the glazing panel to the window frame” and “wherein the window engagement portion of the mounting clip is located between the window bead and the glazing panel”. This renders the claim indefinite, as it is unclear how “the window engagement portion of the mounting clip” can be “located between the window bead and the glazing panel” when the window bead “secures the glazing panel to the window frame”. Additionally, this structure is not shown in the Figures or sufficiently described in the specification in such a way that it is clear what exactly is being claimed (i.e. no “window bead” or “window engagement portion of the mounting clip located between the window bead and the glazing panel” is shown in the drawings, and the structure is entirely unclear). Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 8-11 are rejected as depending from a rejected base claim.
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 1-6 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by WO2021/156515 (hereinafter Greening).
Regarding claim 1, Greening discloses a shutter assembly including a shutter-style window covering; and at least one mounting clip (element 50), wherein the shutter-style window covering includes an outer frame (element 8) that defines an aperture; and at least one shutter door (element 4) which includes a door frame (considered either element 6 or combination of elements 10, 12, 14, 16) and a plurality of vanes (element 18) that are rotatably coupled to the door frame, wherein the vanes have a first orientation in which completely obscure an aperture defined by the door frame, and a second orientation in which they partially obscure the aperture; wherein the or each shutter door is hingedly coupled to the outer fame (See at least Figure 4, See at least Abstract, page 4, lines 13-22, page 9, lines 28-32); wherein the outer frame defines at least one mounting clip receiving portion (See Figure 4, considered at least area of element 60 surrounding aperture of element 8); wherein the or each mounting clip is detachably coupled to a respective one of the mounting clip receiving portion; and wherein the clip includes a window engagement portion (at least element 56) via which the mounting clip may be detachably coupled to a window (Examiner notes that the term “window” is extremely broad, and the assembly of elements 4, 6, and 8 is considered to fully satisfy the term “window”).
Regarding claim 2, Greening discloses wherein the window covering outer frame comprises a top frame member, a bottom frame member and a pair of opposed side frame members (Figure 1, elements 34, 36, 32a, 32b).
Regarding claim 3, Greening discloses wherein the or each shutter door frame comprises a top rail, a bottom rail and a pair of opposed stiles (Figure 1, considered combination of elements 28, 30, 24, 26, or combination of elements 10, 12, 14, 16).
Regarding claim 4, Greening discloses wherein the vanes are rotatably coupled to the opposed stiles (See Figure 1, multiple element 18 are considered to be both rotatably coupled to elements 10 and 12, as well as rotatably coupled to element 6 via hinge 20).
Regarding claim 5, Greening discloses wherein the vanes are connected together via a connecting element (element 64) such that rotation of one of the vanes results in a corresponding rotation of all of the vanes, or movement of the connecting element results in the rotation of all of the vanes together.
Regarding claim 6, Greening discloses wherein the mounting clip forms a friction fit or a snap fit within the mounting clip receiving portion (See at least page 5, lines 6-9, “Each fixing clip may include a resiliently deformable leg which either provides the desired frictional force between the inner frame and the outer frame or which engages a respective channel or detent to provide a snap fit engagement between the inner frame and the outer frame”).
Regarding claim 12, Greening discloses wherein the window covering outer frame defines a plurality of mounting clip receiving portions See at least Figures 1 and 5, multiple element 50s are installed and received around element 8, and the “plurality of mounting clip receiving portions” are considered the multiple sections of element 60 received by element 54 of each clip) and each mounting clip receiving portion has associated with it a respective mounting clip.
Regarding claim 13, Greening discloses wherein the top frame member and the bottom frame member of the outer frame each define at least one respective mounting clip receiving portion (See at least Figures 1 and 5, each of elements 32a, 32b, 34, and 36 include a respective element 60 for receiving element 50).
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 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2021/156515 (hereinafter Greening) in view of Sarazen, Jr. et al. (US 4,669,371) (hereinafter Sarazen)
Regarding claim 7, as best understood, Greening discloses wherein the mounting clip comprises a resiliently deformable body (See at least page 5, lines 6-9), wherein the body defines an central portion (See Figures 1 and 5, considered area of element 54 including junction between elements 52 and orthogonal portion including element 56); at a first end of the central portion is defined a planar window bead engagement portion (element 52); and at a second end of the central portion is defined a planar support platform (considered planar portion of element 50 including element 56); and wherein the plane of the engagement portion is substantially orthogonal to the plane of the support platform. Although the central portion of element 50 is not explicitly shown as being “an arcuate central portion”, Sarazen teaches that it is known in the art to configure a shutter assembly (See at least column 3, lines 9-18, “One or more shutter elements 37 is mounted within air passageway 36 for movement between open and closed positions”) including at least one mounting clip (element 10), and a plurality of vanes (multiple element 37) that are rotatably coupled to a frame, wherein the mounting clip forms a friction fit or a snap fit within a mounting clip receiving portion (See Figure 3), wherein the mounting clip comprises a resiliently deformable body, wherein the body defines an arcuate central portion (See Figure 4, multiple arcuate portions are shown, including junction between elements 13 and 22); at a first end of the arcuate central portion is defined a planar engagement portion (element 22); and at a second end of the arcuate central portion is defined a planar support platform (element 13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the central portion of the clip of Greening such that the junctions between the multiple planar surfaces are provided with radiused corners/angles (i.e. arcuate), since radiused corners are known in the art to improve safety (i.e. reduce sharp edges), reduce structural stress (which would be desirable for the resilient clip), and improve visual aesthetics, and since radiused corners/angles would function as intended for the purpose of Greening. Examiner further notes that it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the art in this way, since it has been held that changes in shape, form, or configuration of components of a device are obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular shape, form, or configuration would be found significant to a person of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). Such modifications are not critical to the design and would have produced no unexpected results. In addition, the prior art element performs the function specified in the claim in substantially the same manner as the function is performed by the corresponding element described in the specification, and such structure are considered art recognized equivalent structures and would have functioned at least equally as well. It would have been obvious to modify the device in this way for the purpose of providing an alternative arrangement that would have functioned at least equally as well.
Regarding claim 8, Greening as modified by Sarazen for claim 7 above discloses wherein the arcuate body defines an interior cavity (See Figure 5, considered recessed portion of element 50 where corner of element 28 is received); the planar engagement portion extends inwards towards the interior cavity; and the planar support platform extends outwards away from the interior cavity (Examiner notes that both element 52 and portion including element 56 are considered to “extend” in a three-dimensional manner, and therefore each of these structures are considered to extend both towards and away from the “cavity”).
Regarding claim 9, Greening as modified by Sarazen for claim 7 above discloses wherein the arcuate central portion defines an arc of 90 degrees (See Figures 1 and 5, elements 52 and portion including element 56 are oriented at a right angle with respect to each other).
Regarding claim 10, Greening as modified by Sarazen for claim 7 above discloses wherein the support platform includes an outwardly extending locating lug (element 56) which is received within a corresponding aperture defined by the mounting clip receiving portion (See page 9, lines 1-17, “each fixing clip 50 includes a resiliently deformable tongue 56 that includes a lug at its distal end. The lug of the tongue 56 engages a receiving channel (not shown) defined by the projecting portion of the side wall.” and “The engagement of the lug of the tongue 56 with the corresponding receiving channel prevents the rearward displacement of the clip 50 relative to the outer frame member 32a, 32b, 34, 36. In this way, the clip is fixed relative to the outer frame members 32a, 32b, 34, 36”).
Regarding claim 11, Greening does not explicitly disclose wherein the resiliently deformable body is formed from steel. Sarazen, however, teaches that it is known to construct the mounting clip form steel (see column 3, lines 49-52, “Mounting means 10 is illustrated in FIGS. 1, 2, 4 and 4A as a spring clip, which is preferably made of a resilient material such as spring steel or any other suitable metal or plastic.”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the mounting clip of Greening such that it was constructed from spring steel, as taught by Sarazen, since spring steel would be an obvious and logical material choice for the clip of Greening, due to the desirable material properties of spring steel for use as a resilient mounting clip, and since the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v.Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). Also see In reLeshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960)
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2021/156515 (hereinafter Greening).
Regarding claim 14, Examiner believes that Greening discloses wherein the shutter assembly includes two shutter doors (See Figures 7a and 7b), wherein each shutter door is hingedly coupled to a respective one of the side frame members (See page 10, lines 27-30, “Figures 7a and 7b show a third embodiment of the invention in which an inner frame assembly 106 receives a pair of opposed shutter doors 104a, 104b. The arrangements between the shutter doors 104a, 104b and the inner frame 106, and between the inner frame 106 and the outer frame 108 are the same as described hereinabove”). However, if Applicant disagrees because explicit detail with regard to the two-door embodiment is not shown, Examiner notes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct a shutter assembly that includes two shutter doors, as shown in Figures 7a and 7b, configured generally in the manner of the single door embodiment as shown in Figures 1-5 (i.e. including fixing clips, hinges, inner and outer frame, vanes with operating rod, etc.), since Greening explicitly discloses an embodiment of the shutter assembly including two shutter doors such that “arrangements between the shutter doors 104a, 104b and the inner frame 106, and between the inner frame 106 and the outer frame 108 are the same as described hereinabove”, and construction and assembly of the two door embodiment in a manner similar to the single door embodiment would be logical and obvious, and within the scope of the invention as explicitly disclosed by Greening.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2021/156515 (hereinafter Greening) in view of Blanchett et al. (US 4,335,552) (hereinafter Blanchette)
Regarding claim 15, as best understood, Greening discloses a window comprising a window frame; a glazing panel carried within the window frame (See page 5, lines 31-34, “there is provided a window including a window frame, a glazing element and a shutter assembly as defined anywhere herein in connection with the first aspect of the invention, wherein the outer frame of the shutter assembly is secured to the window frame”. Also see claim 11); a shutter assembly including a shutter-style window covering; and at least one mounting clip (element 50), wherein the shutter-style window covering includes an outer frame (element 8) that defines an aperture; and at least one shutter door (element 4) which includes a door frame (considered either element 6 or combination of elements 10, 12, 14, 16) and a plurality of vanes (element 18) that are rotatably coupled to the door frame, wherein the vanes have a first orientation in which completely obscure an aperture defined by the door frame, and a second orientation in which they partially obscure the aperture; wherein the or each shutter door is hingedly coupled to the outer fame (See at least Figure 4, See at least Abstract, page 4, lines 13-22, page 9, lines 28-32); wherein the outer frame defines at least one mounting clip receiving portion (See Figure 4, considered at least area of element 60 surrounding aperture of element 8); wherein the or each mounting clip is detachably coupled to a respective one of the mounting clip receiving portion; and wherein the clip includes a window engagement portion (at least element 56) via which the mounting clip may be detachably coupled to a window (Examiner notes that the term “window” is extremely broad, and the assembly of elements 4, 6, and 8 is considered to fully satisfy the term “window”); and wherein the window covering frame is coupled to the mounting clip via a coupling defined between the or each mounting clip receiving portion and the respective mounting clip (See at least Figure 4, Examiner notes that element 60 and element 50 are connected via a direct structural engagement or “coupling”) .
Greening does not explicitly disclose a window bead which secures the glazing panel to the window frame, wherein the window engagement portion of the mounting clip is located between the window bead and the glazing panel. Blanchette, however, teaches that it is known in the art to configure a window bead (element 10) for securing a glazing panel (element 12) within a window frame (element 13) (See at least column 3, lines 42-47, “after the insulated window 12 is placed in its frame, the glazing bead 10 of the present invention is then used to help secure the window 12 in its frame 13, to help seal against the entry of wind and rain, and to help give a smart appearance to the installed window 12”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the window assembly of Greening such that it includes a window bead for securing the glazing panel within the window frame, as taught by Blanchette, as this would help to ensure that the glazing panel remains in securely in place when installed, while also providing an aesthetically desirable appearance and sealing against the entry of wind and rain. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the window engagement portion of the mounting clip such that it is at least partially located between the window bead and the glazing panel, because this would be a logical an obvious assembly location for this structure, and since it has been held that changes in shape, form, or configuration of components of a device are obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular shape, form, or configuration would be found significant to a person of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). Such modifications are not critical to the design and would have produced no unexpected results. In addition, the prior art element performs the function specified in the claim in substantially the same manner as the function is performed by the corresponding element described in the specification, and such structure are considered art recognized equivalent structures and would have functioned at least equally as well. It would have been obvious to modify the device in this way for the purpose of providing an alternative arrangement that would have functioned at least equally as well. Examiner notes further notes that that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the window engagement portion of the mounting clip such that it is at least partially located between the window bead and the glazing panel, since it is prima facie obvious to choose from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success (MPEP 2143(E)).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN B REPHANN whose telephone number is (571)270-7318. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-4:30pm.
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, 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.
/JUSTIN B REPHANN/Examiner, Art Unit 3634
