Woodworking – Process – Securing
Reexamination Certificate
2000-09-12
2002-10-08
Friedman, Carl D. (Department: 3635)
Woodworking
Process
Securing
C052S748100, C052S233000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06460583
ABSTRACT:
STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT
Not Applicable.
REFERENCE TO A “MICROFICHE APPENDIX”
Not Applicable
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
1. Field of the Invention
Prefabricated building panels built out of wood planks and logs whose tongue and groove wood components are almost free of splits and checks and whose joints between the components are so tight that they are waterproof.
2. Description of Related Art
I made a wide search and had a Washington, D.C. professional search the records for any patents granted that would anticipate my invention. Nothing close to my invention was found and I reported none in my initial application Ser. No. 09/259,627—Feb. 26, 1999. However, the examiner in his first action on this application listed and discussed several previously granted patents that had teaching in the field of my invention. I am now responding on each of these inventions in respect to the examiner's discussions. But none of this art refers to using tangential shrinkage in wood to tighten joints between wood planks.
2a. Johnson U.S. Pat. No. 4,443,990, Apr. 24, 1984. By making shrinkage relief saw slits on each side of logs and close to being in line with the heart, Johnson teaches as I have done a means to avoid almost all chances of splits or checks forming from shrinkage known as tangential shrinkage. As this is a practice widely used in the art, I made no claim for invention here. However, Johnson does not refer to tangential shrinkage being used to seal joints between other logs, in fact a second or additional logs or planks are not mentioned.
2b. Choiniere et al, U.S. Pat. No. 5,400,845, Mar. 28, 1995. The inventors here teach a fastener that ties logs together that is unique and is now used widely in the field by log home builders who, like myself, buy these special screws from the assignee of this patent. However, these screws are not used in a manner so that setting is hindered, in fact, the use of a lubricant to aid settling is taught. If the screws extended to the 80% point in the thickness of the lower logs there would be a better chance that the threads of the screws would be locked into a fixed position in the lower logs as these logs shrink from radial shrinkage. Also, if the head of the screws were set tightly to the logs above the screw heads and the screw heads were wider, settling of the logs would be hindered as these screw heads would literally “hang up” the logs above them. Then, my main claim of tightened joints between logs from tangential shrinkage is not even addressed.
2c. Fell, U.S. Pat. No. 3,863,409, Feb. 4, 1975. Fell presents a joint sealing means that puts the weight of the log on two parallel pointed tongues extending along each side of the undersides of the logs. Also, the added weight of the logs above will tend to crush the points or crush the points into the surface of the logs below. The pointed tongues would work better, but all log houses use the weight of the log plus the weight of the logs above to seal joints between the logs. However, this does not always work, the surface of the logs are covered with knots or cut off branches. These knots or branches do not shrink lengthwise as the logs shrink radially and branches between logs pop out and actually hang the logs up creating spaces on each side of the knots through which the wind whistles into the house. My sealing system differs entirely. Elongated tongue and grooves join the tiers of logs together. Tangential shrinkage forces the tongue of the lower log and the side of the groove of the upper log tightly (almost to the point of crushing the wood) together. Because my logs are hung up on the screw heads, they do not settle, but each log individually shrinks slightly radially but not enough to pull the tongues out of the grooves so my wall remains airtight. Some of the radial shrinkage will be recovered as the logs swell more radially in wet weather, so inclement weather makes my wall airtight. My invention works on entirely different principals and is not anticipated by the Fell invention.
2d. Wrightman U.S. Pat. No. 5,020,289, Jun. 4, 1991. Here a log wall is sealed against air or water infiltration between logs using a form of weather stripping that can be compressed 50% and recover. It has secondary seals referred to as a caulk, which can stand 25% compression. This is not a wood crushing against wood seal and though it is excellent and advanced log house art, it does not anticipate my invention.
2e. Peter Sing U.S. Pat. No. 5,485,794, Jan. 23, 1996. I personally know Mr. Sing and appreciate his continuing research and development in the field of cedar joinery. Mr. Sing has developed some very good joinery art, but this patent covers mostly pallet construction that requires no seals between components. A floor is shown with no connections between the flooring pieces such as ordinary tongue and grooves that are used with most floors. Walls are illustrated, but no claims are made on walls and no reference is made to sealed joints between wall siding components. Besides his patent does not apply to sealed joints between components. I personally know Mr. Sing's products and he does not try for sealed joints between components in his operations. This patent does not anticipate my invention.
2f. Little U.S. Pat. No. 5,887,331, Mar. 30, 1999. This is a system to tie down polymer plastic decking planks (not wood planks) to under framing using metal clips. No mention is made of sealing joints between planks and it appears that the planks are outside decking where it is preferable that rain can drain throughout the deck between the planks and not risk puddling. Plastic is free of shrinkage and warping problems and there is no way you can turn these otherwise undesirable features that wood has into useful purposes. This invention does not anticipate my invention and is dated after my patent was filed (Mar. 30, 1999 vs. Feb. 26, 1999).
2g. Hubbard U.S. Pat. No. 5,577,356, Nov. 26, 1996. Mr. John Hubbard is a neighbor and he and his buildings are well known to me. I should also mention that I know the building system covered in Mr. Hubbard's invention. I have viewed buildings under construction and I am continuing to examine buildings that have been standing for up to three years. I have recently and also two years ago, examined his operation from a view of purchasing his company. Mr. Hubbard has conveyed to me the various points of his R&D work including this patent, which he calls his “Phoenix” building. The invention states that the use of an adhesive between touching surfaces is preferred. The builders I saw building these houses were not using adhesives, however, there are signs that an adhesive has been used in a finished building I viewed, but the adhesive was dry and had cracked and, in one case, it had been supplemented by a caulking, which was also drying out. Horizontal tongue and groove joints can and do leak. The joints I have seen were not tight (not so tight that the planks have to be driven together with a 5 kg. mallet as do my plank walls). Weather and resultant alternate shrinkage and swelling had opened up the joints. Most of the horizontal timbers shown in his patent drawings have rounded edges presenting an open vee to the weather. Horizontal rain driven by strong winds force water into tongue and groove joints and a siphon action sucks the water up and over the tongues and into the buildings. Water stains on the inside of the timbers in one of the buildings I viewed clearly showed the ingress of rain or melted snow.
The Phoenix building as introduced in this invention illustrates the use of laminated timbers and posts. Wood must be thoroughly kiln dried before glue lamination and it is correct to assume the wood is dry and would not be subject to the warping and cupping that is necessary for my very tight joint system to happen. Mr. Hubbard's invention relies on an adhesive or caulking to seal out water and does not mention any help from cupping or warping to keep out rain. This invention does not anticipate my invention.
B
Jensen & Puntigam PS
Slack Naoko
LandOfFree
Method of forming a watertight plank section by interlocking... does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Method of forming a watertight plank section by interlocking..., we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Method of forming a watertight plank section by interlocking... will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-2935374