Flexible or portable closure – partition – or panel – Nonframed plural edged held fabric
Reexamination Certificate
2000-08-31
2001-10-02
Purol, David M. (Department: 3634)
Flexible or portable closure, partition, or panel
Nonframed plural edged held fabric
C160S368100, C049S050000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06296041
ABSTRACT:
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS
Not Applicable.
BACKGROUND—FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The invention relates to window guards, specifically adjustable barriers for preventing children, pets or objects from inadvertently passing through an open window.
BACKGROUND—DESCRIPTION OF THE PRIOR ART
During the warmer months of spring and summer, a parent of a small child is often reluctant to open the windows of an apartment or house for fear the child will fall out, or throw objects outside. Although several attempts have been made to resolve this concern, a window guard which is mechanically efficient, simple to install, and capable of being removed quickly in an emergency, has yet to be designed. Furthermore, a window guard which can be effectively installed in a wide variety of window frames, irrespective of style or design, has yet to surface.
In the past, inventors have designed a multitude of window guards to prevent intrusion. Examples include U.S. Pat. No. 4,837,974 to Jokel, U.S. Pat. No. 5,070,647 to Spialter, and U.S. Pat. No. 5,339,567 to Pierpont et al. While the prior art may inhibit trespassing through a window opening from the outside, it was not intended or designed to protect children, pets or objects from falling out.
Inventors have also created adjustable barriers for preventing children from falling down stairs or entering a restricted space. Examples include U.S. Pat. No. 4,787,174 to Brown, U.S. Pat. No. 5,060,421 to Castelli and U.S. Pat. No. 4,884,614 to Spurling. Unfortunately, none of the aforementioned apparatus are designed or intended to be used effectively in a window.
Thereafter, several partial attempts have been made to design a child barrier for a window opening, including U.S. Pat. No. 4,437,265 to Turro et al., U.S. Pat. No. 5,916,074 to Tracy., and U.S. Pat. No. 5,570,543 to Bishop. The prior art by both Turro et al. and Tracy consists of a framework of overlapping bars mounted within a window frame. Neither device provides a means for enclosing the area between the bars. Consequently, neither the Turro et al. nor the Tracy guard can prohibit a small object or pet from passing through the device itself. In fact, the concern exists that an opening between the bars could be created which would still allow a small child to pass through.
While the U.S. Pat. No. 5,916,074 to Bishop offers improved window coverage, the design fails to meet a greater need: the ability to remove the apparatus quickly and easily, allowing occupants or emergency personnel to pass through the window opening, in a time of emergency. One reason for this drawback is the removal of the Bishop window guard is a two handed operation. Needless to say, the use of two hands to unseat the device may not be feasible, or even possible, depending upon the occupant and the type of emergency. Secondly, the Bishop guard is designed with the locking mechanism present on only one side of the apparatus. Thus, if the device is installed with the locking mechanism on the inside, the means for removal would be inaccessible to emergency personnel trying to gain access from the outside, and vise versa.
Finally, another shortcoming of the Bishop guard is the dependency upon springs to provide enough friction to secure the device in place. If, through repeated installation and removal, the springs lose tension, or become disengaged from the locking mechanism, the results could be tragic.
An alternative design for a window guard can be found in U.S. Pat. No. 5,454,415 to Bolling, et al. As seen in
FIG. 1
, the Bolling reference is dependent upon a U-shaped bracket
104
and an L-shaped bracket
106
to attach the Bolling window screen
102
to a double hung window. The drawbacks of the design are threefold:
First, window units vary greatly in design. In order to utilize the Bolling, et al. apparatus, one must have a double hung window with a window sash which opens upwards in a frame. The prior art is not adaptable to alternative window styles such as French windows, which open inwards or outwards on a set of vertical hinges. Thus, the prior art of Bolling, et al. is limited or made useless by the introduction of a an alternative window design.
Second, window frames are manufactured in a multitude of sizes. Although the Bolling, et al. reference claims it is adjustable, the correct installation of the L-shaped bracket is dependent upon a window frame having certain predetermined dimensions. For example, the sill must have a slope and depth which will allow the bracket
106
to fit as intended. While the prior art may be adjustable in width, specific elements necessary for its correct installation are limited in their adaptability; thus limiting the scope of the prior art by Bolling, et al..
Lastly, the Bolling, et al. reference shares the same shortcomings as that of both Turro et al. and Tracy. While rail bar
108
A and rail bar
108
B of the Bolling et al. design transverse the entire width of the window frame, the screen element
110
does not completely shield the window opening. Thus, object, pets, or even a small child can still pass through the window, via the space between the edges of the screen and the sides of the window frame.
Thus, the prior art fails to provide a means for resolving an important safety concern: the prevention of children, pets or objects from passing through a window opening or section thereof. The prior art does not illustrate a window guard which is truly adaptable to a multitude of window frame sizes and/or styles; while exhibiting a means for removing the guard quickly at a time of peril. Consequently, the need for such a window guard remains unfulfilled.
SUMMARY
The Window Net Child Safety Guard is an effective means of preventing children, objects or pets from passing through a window opening. The Window Net is mechanically efficient; able to be removed quickly and easily in an emergency; and adaptable to a wide variety of window frame sizes and styles.
OBJECTS AND ADVANTAGES
Accordingly, several objects and advantages of the Window Net Child Safety Guard are as follows:
(a.) to provide an effective means of preventing children, objects or pets from passing through a window opening or section thereof;
(b.) to provide an adjustable window guard which can be securely installed in window frames of varying sizes and styles;
(c.) to provide a window guard which can be removed rapidly and with minimal effort, by an adult, at any time;
(d.) to provide an improved window guard comprised of a minimal number of mechanical elements; thereby eliminating parts used previously which could fail, or prove difficult to install or maintain by the average person.
Further objects and advantages are to provide a window guard apparatus which does not impede airflow, or substantially affect one's view through the window opening; is constructed of a minimal amount of parts for inexpensive manufacture and ease of use; and is capable of withstanding the normal structural demands placed on a barrier by an average child, five years old or under. Still further objects and advantages will become apparent from a consideration of the ensuing description and drawings.
REFERENCES:
patent: 1325227 (1919-12-01), Blankennagel
patent: 2094299 (1937-09-01), McQuarrie
patent: 2459884 (1949-01-01), Kopf
patent: 2622285 (1952-12-01), Roos
patent: 2840158 (1958-06-01), Lee
patent: 4272922 (1981-06-01), Prager
patent: 4437265 (1984-03-01), Turro et al.
patent: 4787174 (1988-11-01), Brown
patent: 4837974 (1989-06-01), Jokel
patent: 4884614 (1989-12-01), Spurling
patent: 5054837 (1991-10-01), Chapman
patent: 5060421 (1991-10-01), Castelli
patent: 5070647 (1991-12-01), Spialter
patent: 5207260 (1993-05-01), Commesso
patent: 5339567 (1994-08-01), Pierpont et al.
patent: 5454415 (1995-10-01), Bolling et al.
patent: 5531258 (1996-07-01), Poulson et al.
patent: 5570543 (1996-11-01), Bishop
patent: 5620036 (1997-04-01), Grous
patent: 5628355 (1997-05-01), Gist
patent: 5787955 (1998-08-01), Dargie
patent: 5797218 (1998-08-01), Holland
patent: 5916074 (1999-06-01), Tracy
patent: 6044892 (2000-04-01), Epste
LandOfFree
Window net child safety guard does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Window net child safety guard, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Window net child safety guard will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-2560452