DETAILED ACTION
The following Non-Final Office Action is in response to the application filed 4/4/2025.
Status of the claims: Claims 1-10 are hereby examined below.
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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show the zipper teeth as described in the specification and recited in claim 5 or the screen edge having a thickness greater than the non-edge thickness as recited in claim 4. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 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 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 –
Claims 1-3 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by White US 5,450,701.
In regard to claim 1, White ‘701 discloses a screen framing system comprising:
a first elongate frame member (26, Fig. 4) having a first cavity formed within at least a portion of a first length of said first elongate frame member (26, Fig. 4), said first cavity having a first opening (at 138, Fig. 4) formed on a first end of said first elongate frame member; a second elongate frame member (28, Fig. 4) having a second cavity (122, Fig. 4) formed within at least a portion of a second length of said second elongate frame member, said second cavity having a second opening formed on a second end of said second elongate frame member; a hollow interlock member (24, Fig. 1) having a main body with an aperture (54, Fig. 4) formed through said main body of said hollow interlock member, and also having an elongate tab (116, Fig. 4) formed on and extending away from said main body; and an elongate wedge member (36, Fig. 4) having a distal end configured for removable attachment to said aperture (54) of said hollow interlock member and said second opening of said second cavity (122) ,wherein a distal end of said elongate tab (116) is configured for removable attachment to said first opening of said first cavity of said first elongate frame member (26),wherein each of said first elongate frame member (26) and said second elongate frame member (28) have a respective channel (152, Fig. 5) formed along at least a portion of a respective interior edge of said first elongate frame member (26) and said second elongate frame member (28).
In regard to claim 2, White ‘701 discloses a flexible screen member (30), said flexible screen member (30) having at least a first edge and a second edge, wherein said first edge of said screen member is configured to be removably attached to said respective channel formed on said first elongate frame member, and wherein said second edge of said screen member is configured to be removably attached to said respective channel formed on said second elongate frame member. (column 4, 42-52)
In regard to claim 3, White ‘701 discloses wherein each of said respective channels (152) has a channel width (shown below), and wherein each of said respective channels has a channel opening (with an opening width (at folded edge) that is less than said channel width.
PNG
media_image1.png
435
417
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regard to claims 7-8, White ‘701 discloses wherein said elongate wedge member (36) has a width (of 66, Fig. 3), along at least a portion of a length of said elongate wedge member, that tapers in thickness.
In regard to claim 9, White ‘701 discloses wherein said flexible screen member (30) comprises a flexible solar screen fabric.
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 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over White US 5,450,701 in view of Cooper EP 1491712.
In regard to claim 4 White ‘701 discloses the flexible screen member (30) has a non-edge thickness. White ‘701 fails to disclose wherein said first edge and said second edge of said flexible screen member each have an edge thickness that is greater than said thickness of said non-edge thickness.
Cooper ‘712 discloses said flexible screen member (102) has a non-edge thickness, and wherein said first edge and said second edge of said flexible screen member each have an edge thickness (at 114) that is greater than said thickness of said non-edge thickness.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of White ‘701 to substitute the bead of White ‘701 make the first and second side edge comprise a greater thickness than the non edge thickness as taught by Cooper ‘712 as such is shown to be a known mechanism for retaining a screen within a frame to resist removal.
In regard to claim 5, White ‘701 a modified by Cooper ’712 disclose wherein zipper teeth (114) are attached to said first edge and said second edge of said flexible screen member.
In regard to claim 6, White ‘701 as modified by Cooper ‘712 disclose wherein said edge thickness (of 114) is greater than said channel opening (shown in Fig. 4 of Cooper ‘712).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over White US 5,450,701.
In regard to claim 10, White ‘701 fails to specifically disclose a third elongate frame member having a third cavity formed within at least a portion of a third length of said third elongate frame member, said third cavity having a third opening formed on a third end of said third elongate frame member, and a fourth elongate frame member having a fourth cavity formed within at least a portion of a fourth length of said fourth elongate frame member, said fourth cavity having a fourth opening formed on a fourth end of said fourth elongate frame member.
However, the examiner takes Official Notice that it is old and well known to include a third and fourth frame member with the same construction as the first and second frame member in order to form a complete frame for holding a screen and one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have known to use such a frame.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEREMY C RAMSEY whose telephone number is (571)270-3133. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Wed 7:00-3:30.
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.
/JEREMY C RAMSEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3634
/DANIEL P CAHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights