DETAILED ACTION
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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hilsey (US Patent No. 4,290,246) in view of Irmscher et al. (US Patent No. 4,787,186) and further in view of Dean (4030262).
For claim 1, Hilsey discloses a system for connecting an assembly of panels (figs. 9a-b), the system comprising a plurality of precast concrete panels (40, 41), each precast concrete panel arranged in an upright manner and having an upper edge and a lower edge connecting an integral planar front face, an integral planar rear face (fig. 1 shows the planar front face and fig. 12 shows the planar rear face), at least one of the upper edge or lower edge having at least one recess (45) formed therein, the at least one recess being contained within the upper edge or the lower edge so as not to extend into the front face or rear face of the panel; a connecting device (44) for connecting the assembly of panels, the connecting device comprising: a body configured to be received within the at least one recess formed in the upper edge or lower edge of each pre-cast concrete panel and comprising at least two arm members (Hilsey discloses the obviousness of making each arm member comprise a plurality of leg members for anchoring the connecting device into the panels (see fig. 14a, 72d-e), moreover it is merely a duplication of already disclosed elements), each of the arm members and leg members being formed integral to each other thereby forming a single unit that connects adjacent pre-cast concrete panels, and wherein when the pre-cast concrete panels are assembled in an upright, adjacent manner, such that the integral planar front face, integral planar rear face or integral vertically extending edge of one pre-cast concrete panel is positioned adjacent the integral planar front face, integral planar rear face or integral vertically extending edges of one or more adjacent pre-cast concrete panel, the connecting device is received in the recess (46, 47) located in the upper or lower edge of the adjacent pre-cast concrete panels thereby joining the adjacent pre-cast concrete panels together at the upper or lower edges thereof, wherein the recess comprises a plurality of vertical tubular portions, each vertical tubular portion is configured to receive a leg member of the single unit body and each vertical tubular portion has a cross-sectional area that is larger than a cross-section of each of the leg members (inherent) to allow for insertion of the leg members into the vertical tubular portion such that when assembled the at least one recess is not visible from a front or rear face of the assembled pre-cast concrete panels.
Hilsey does not disclose that the recess has a container ‘cast’ (product by process limitation) therein that contains a settable material, or that the vertically extending edges are planar.
Irmscher et al. discloses a connecting device (figs. 1-4) comprising a body configured to be received within a recess formed at an edge of a precast concrete panel, wherein the recess (22) comprises a container (12) containing a settable material (16) and the connecting device is configured to fit wholly within the container such that the settable material present in the vertical tubular portions secures the connecting device within the tubular portions (fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to cast a container containing settable material in the recess of Hilsey as made obvious by Irmscher et al. to increase the strength of the connection between the connecting device and the concrete panels.
In regard to the planar vertically extending edges, Dean teaches that it is known to connect planar vertically extending edges of concrete panels with a connecting device 10, 20 as shown in figures 1-6. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the edges of Hilsey’s device planar because they would be easier to manufacture and easier to connect because one would not have to line up the projection and recess. Also, both Dean and Hilsey are both using concrete panels for building buildings, i.e. figure 12 of Hilsey shows his panels used to build a building and Dean’s panels are also used to build buildings. Thus, they are in the same field of endeavor and, as shown by both references, panels with and without tongues and grooves are well-known.
For claim 2, the combination discloses that the connecting device has a planar upper surface that is configured to be wholly received within the recess (Hilsey fig. 9b, upper surface of 44 is flush with upper surface of concrete panels).
For claim 3, the combination discloses that each of the legs extends laterally away from the body of the connecting device.
For claim 4, the combination discloses that the single unit body of the connecting device (44) further comprises opposing end portions of a beam for connecting a pair of the panels (40, 41) positioned edge-to-edge thereby forming a panel of extended dimension (Hilsey fig. 9B).
For claim 5, Hilsey does not specifically disclose that at least two arms of the connecting device are arranged to extend at right angles from one another for forming the assembly of the pre-cast concrete panels having a substantially right-angled corner.
Dean discloses a connecting device (fig. 3, 30) having at least two arms of the connecting device arranged to extend at right angles from one another for forming the assembly of the pre-cast concrete panels having a substantially right-angled corner.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to make at least two arms of the connecting device of the combination extend at right angles from one another as made obvious by Dean to connect two concrete panels at a corner.
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hilsey (US Patent No. 4,290,246) in view of Irmscher et al. (US Patent No. 4,787,186) and Dean (4030262) as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 and further in view of Witschi (US Patent No. 4,959,940).
For claim 6, the combination discloses that each leg extends in a direction laterally from the single unit body of the connecting device and is receivable in the container of the panels, but does not disclose panels arranged on opposite sides of the arms of the connecting device thereby connecting the panels to form a panel of extended dimension.
Witschi discloses the obviousness of adding multiple legs to opposite sides of an arm of a connecting device (fig. 1, 3) for joining two panels (1, 2) so that the panels are arranged on opposite sides of the arms of the connecting device.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to arrange panels on opposite sides of the arms of the connecting device of the combination as made obvious by Witschi so that multiple panels can be stacked to increase the height of the assembly.
Response to Arguments
In response to the applicant’s argument that it would not be obvious to make Hilsey’s vertical edges planar because they are designed to be water tight, the examiner respectfully disagrees. First, the examiner would like to point out that a new ground of rejection was made for claims 1-6 that was necessitated by the applicant’s amendment. Second, although Hilsey’s does want to produce a water-tight joint between his panels, the tongue and groove are not really the structure that is making the joint water-tight. The water tight feature is achieved by the addition of a waterproofing material, such as a sealing strip 49 placed in a small cavity 48. The tongue and groove do not provide the water tight seal. The material 49 is what does this function. Hilsey also discloses that the water-tight seal could be achieved by brushing a sufficient thickness of a viscous sealing substance on either or both of the mating edges of adjacent slabs before they are joined. (col. 8, lines 50-53). The examiner contends that brushing a viscous material onto a surface could be performed on a planar surface in the same manner as a tongue and groove surface. Both would have the same end result of a water-tight joint between panels. Therefore, the examiner contends that the panels of Hilsey would be perfectly capable of providing a water-tight seal between adjacent edges if they were planar or tongue and groove since, as pointed out above, the tongue and groove does not provide the water tight feature. This feature is produced by applying sealing means to the joint. Also, once modified to have planar edges as taught by Dean, the panels could easily be attached at right angles in the same manner taught by Dean and pointed out in the above rejection.
In regard to applicant’s arguments pertaining to the combination of Irmscher and Hilsey, the examiner respectfully disagrees. Irmscher’s teaching is relevant to the Hilsey device. Hilsey places a rod into a hole in a concrete panel. Irmscher also places a rod into a hole in a concrete structure. Irmscher teaches how to sufficiently hold that rod member in the concrete structure so that it will not pull out and fail. This teaching is directly applicable to Hilsey because once the rod is placed in the hole, one would not want it to pull out. The openings in Irmscher’s device allows the adhesive to flow out of the tubular portion and bond with the surrounding concrete/cement of the block. If the adhesive was contained only inside the tubular member, there would be no bond produced between the tubular member and the concrete/cement member. Therefore, it would be very likely to pull out when a force was applied to the rod member. However, since the holes are in the tubular member, the adhesive can form a strong bond between the tubular member and the concrete/cement member. Thus, the rod will be much less likely to pull out of Hilsey’s concrete panel.
Thus, for the reasons set forth above, the examiner contends that the rejection of claims 1-6 is proper and the claims stand rejected.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Brian E Glessner whose telephone number is (571)272-6754. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8:00 to 4:00.
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, Namrata Boveja can be reached at 571-272-8105. 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.
/BRIAN E GLESSNER/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Prosecution Insights