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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Examiner’s Remarks
It is noted that Applicant’s specification discloses “rake shoe 344” and shows element 344 in Figures 2 and 3 as having a flat plate-like bottom, and Applicant further discloses in paragraph [0046] that “FIG. 7E illustrates a front view of the screed rake 100 having a smooth paving surface 360”. Therefore, “rake” will not be limited by the conventional meaning of a tool with teeth or tines, and will be considered as simply a screed.
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 1-6 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 552015 C (hereinafter will be referred to as “DE ‘015”) in view of Oetken et al., US 9,476,168; Frankeny, II, US 2004/0071509 A1; and Frost et al., US 10,156,049 B1.
Regarding claim 1, DE ‘015 teaches a hand-held screed rake comprising:
a screed head (Figure 1) including a first plate (left e in Figure 1) having a concave surface configured to engage a portion of a paving material and urge the paving material in front of or under the screed head ([0002]), and a second plate (base plate d) having a paving surface configured to spread the paving material across a surface to be paved ([0002]), wherein the first plate is angled relative to the second plate (Figure 1); and
a heating element (box a filled with charcoal or the like; [0004]) coupled to the screed head.
While DE ‘015, published in the year 1932, only discloses the heating element being charcoal and fails to disclose a reusable heating element including an electrical heating strip, Oetken discloses that screed plates are commonly heated to prevent the paving material from sticking to the screed plate and that the heater can be an electrical heater that can be optimally positioned on the screed plate or can be heated by other combustible fuel heaters (column 1 line 63 through column 2 line 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify DE ‘015 to substitute the charcoal (which is a combustible fuel) with an alternative modern electrical heater in view of Oetken’s explicit disclosure that they are known alternative heaters for a screed to prevent the paving material from sticking to the second plate. While the resulting combination fails to explicitly disclose that the electrical heater is an electrical heating strip, Frost discloses a heating element for a screed can be an electrical heating strip (column 11 lines 22-24). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the heating element of the resulting combination to be an electrical heating strip in view of Frost’s disclosure as a known heating element for a screed.
While the resulting combination includes an electrical heating strip fails to explicitly disclose a power source, Frankeny teaches a handheld screed and discloses uses a rechargeable battery ([0057]) to provide power. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the resulting combination to include a rechargeable battery coupled to the heating element to provide power to the electrical heater in order for the electrical heater to be able to function. The resulting combination includes a rechargeable battery coupled to the reusable heating element and configured to provide energy used to heat the heating element.
Regarding claim 2, in view of DE ‘015 disclosing that the second plate (base plate d) and the first plate (curved plate e) are used for cutting into a mass of asphalt and smoothing ([0002] and [0004]), and Oetken’s disclosure of heating to prevent paving material from sticking, it is obvious to have the heating element be a first, reusable heating element (electrical heating strip of the resulting combination) and to further comprise a second reusable heating element coupled to the first plate to also prevent asphalt from sticking to it in use.
Regarding claim 3, the resulting combination includes a back plate (right e in Figure 1) coupled to the paving surface and the first plate, (left e), the back plate, the paving surface, and the first plate defining a cavity therebetween, and wherein the first and second reusable heating elements are within the cavity, since DE ‘015 disclosed charcoal to be within the cavity and the charcoal was modified to be the first and second reusable heating elements.
Regarding claim 4, the resulting combination includes an angle between the first and second plates is an acute angle (as shown in DE ‘015’s Figure 1).
Regarding claim 5, the resulting combination includes the hand-held screed rake further comprises a handle (DE ‘015’s c) removably coupled to the screed head (since anything can be considered removable).
Regarding claim 6, Frankeny further discloses that the screed handle can house the rechargeable battery ([0057]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handle of the resulting combination to include the rechargeable battery in view of Frankeny’s suggestion. The resulting combination makes obvious that the rechargeable battery is coupled to the heating element in order to be able to power the heating element.
Regarding claim 22, the resulting combination includes at least one end cap (lid b in Figure 1, which is an end cap for the top end) removably coupled to an end of the screed head and arranged to provide access to the cavity.
Claims 7-11 and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE ‘015 in view of Oetken, Frankeny, and Frost as applied to claim 6, further in view of Lindley, US 2009/0226257 A1.
Regarding claim 7, while the resulting combination fails to disclose the handle further including heater controls configured to control a temperature of the heating element, Lindley teaches a screed with a handle coupled to a user-input device to allow a screed operator to control an operation of the screed ([0018]). In view of the resulting combination including an electric heating element, and in view of Oetken disclosing that it is important to maintain a proper screed temperature (column 1 line 63 through column 2 line 3) to prevent paving material from sticking, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handle of the resulting combination to include a user-input device to allow a screed operator the ability to control a temperature of the heating element since one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the desired temperature of the screed is dependent on the type of paving material amongst other factors such as the weather to maintain a desired proper screed temperature.
Regarding claim 8, in view of Oetken disclosing that it is important to maintain a proper screed temperature (column 1 line 63 through column 2 line 3) to prevent paving material from sticking, it is an obvious modification to have the heating controls be configured to maintain a temperature of the heating element at a temperature configured to prevent paving material from sticking to the screed for as long as the screed is being used, using the battery which is what powers the heating element.
Regarding claim 9, in view of Oetken disclosing that it is important to maintain a proper screed temperature (column 1 line 63 through column 2 line 3) to prevent paving material from sticking, it is an obvious modification to provide enough heat from an ambient temperature (the outside temperature wherever the screed is being used) to reach a temperature configured to prevent paving material from sticking to the screed head. While the resulting combination fails to disclose using power from a power source in a building or a vehicle, the Examiner took Official Notice in the office action dated 11/22/2023 that using power from a power source in a building or a vehicle is old and well-known. Applicant failed to challenge the Official Notice in their arguments. Under the guidelines of MPEP 2144.03, to adequately traverse Official Notice, an applicant must specifically point out the supposed errors in the Examiner’s action including stating why the noticed fact is not considered to be common knowledge or well-known in the art. Since applicant did not adequately traverse the Examiner’s assertion of Official Notice, the facts are now considered to be admitted prior art (MPEP 2144.03). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the resulting combination to power the screed using power from a power source in a building or a vehicle if the battery dies to be able to continue using the screed.
Regarding claim 10, in view of Oetken disclosing that it is important to maintain a proper screed temperature (column 1 line 63 through column 2 line 3) to prevent paving material from sticking, it is an obvious modification to have the heating controls be configured to maintain a temperature of the heating element at a temperature configured to prevent paving material from sticking to the screed for as long as the screed is being used, using the battery which is what powers the heating element.
Regarding claim 11, in view of Oetken disclosing that it is important to maintain a proper screed temperature (column 1 line 63 through column 2 line 3) to prevent paving material from sticking, it is an obvious modification to provide enough heat from an ambient temperature (the outside temperature wherever the screed is being used) to reach a temperature configured to prevent paving material from sticking to the screed head. While the resulting combination fails to disclose using power from a power source in a building or a vehicle, the Examiner took Official Notice in the office action dated 11/22/2023 that using power from a power source in a building or a vehicle is old and well-known. Applicant failed to challenge the Official Notice in their arguments. Under the guidelines of MPEP 2144.03, to adequately traverse Official Notice, an applicant must specifically point out the supposed errors in the Examiner’s action including stating why the noticed fact is not considered to be common knowledge or well-known in the art. Since applicant did not adequately traverse the Examiner’s assertion of Official Notice, the facts are now considered to be admitted prior art (MPEP 2144.03). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the resulting combination to power the screed using power from a power source in a building or a vehicle if the battery dies to be able to continue using the screed.
Regarding claim 15, the elements of the resulting combination from claims 1 and 7 make obvious the method steps claimed. A screed would spread the paving material along the surface to be paved using the head of the hand-held screed rake because that is the purpose of a screed.
Regarding claim 16, in view of Oetken disclosing that it is important to maintain a proper screed temperature (column 1 line 63 through column 2 line 3) to prevent paving material from sticking, it is an obvious modification to have the heating controls be configured to maintain a temperature of the heating element at a temperature configured to prevent paving material from sticking to the screed for as long as the screed is being used, using the battery which is what powers the heating element.
Regarding claim 17, in view of Oetken disclosing that it is important to maintain a proper screed temperature (column 1 line 63 through column 2 line 3) to prevent paving material from sticking, it is an obvious modification to provide enough heat from an ambient temperature (the outside temperature wherever the screed is being used) to reach a temperature configured to prevent paving material from sticking to the screed head using power from a power supply (the battery of the resulting combination).
Regarding claim 18, in view of Oetken disclosing that it is important to maintain a proper screed temperature (column 1 line 63 through column 2 line 3) to prevent paving material from sticking, it is an obvious modification to have the heating controls be configured to maintain the heating element at a temperature configured to prevent paving material from sticking to the screed head using power from a power supply (the battery of the resulting combination).
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE ‘015 in view of Oetken, Frankeny, and Frost as applied to claim 1, further in view of Nottage, US 3,053,311.
Regarding claim 12, while the resulting combination fails to disclose the limitations of the claim, Nottage teaches heated screed tools and discloses alternate embodiments of screeds, with one embodiment including the paving surface comprising a shoe plate (19) and a rake shoe (tines and connected tubular portion) removably coupled to the shoe plate (19). Anything can be removed; this connection is removable in that it can be cut with a power saw. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the resulting combination to have the paving surface comprise a shoe plate and a rake shoe removably coupled to the shoe plate in view of Nottage’s disclosure that an alternate screed may be needed to rake the asphalt if it is unevenly applied or must be spread further (page 1, column 1 lines 64-67).
Regarding claim 13, the resulting combination includes the paving surface comprising a textured pattern based on the tines of the screed.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE ‘015 in view of Oetken, Frankeny, Frost, and Nottage as applied to claim 13, further in view of Garrison, US 4,070,128.
Regarding claim 14, while the resulting combination fails to disclose the textured pattern comprising a waveform or V-shaped pattern, Garrison teaches a screed (“pushing or pulling it through a pavement in a plastic state”; Abstract) and discloses the paving surface of the screed head comprising a textured pattern in the form of a waveform or V-shaped pattern (Figures 1-2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the resulting combination to have the textured patten be a waveform or V-shaped pattern in view of Garrison’s disclosure to yield a pavement that has traction for people or vehicles passing over (Abstract).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE ‘015 in view of Oetken, Frankeny, and Frost as applied to claim 1, further in view of Gallagher, US 11,255,057 B2.
Regarding claim 21, while the resulting combination fails to disclose the claimed limitation, Gallagher teaches a screed and discloses a pair of oppositely disposed end gates provided upon opposite sides of the screed to prevent the paving material from moving beyond the lateral extents of the screed (column 11 lines 46-49). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the resulting combination to further comprise protrusions (end gates) that align with the sides of the first plate since the first plate is facing forward when screeding and arranged to prevent the paving material from spilling out of the sides of the first plate in view of Gallagher’s explicit disclosure as discussed above to keep the paving material in front of the screed so that the paving material does not escape beyond the sides of the screed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s argument (bottom half of the page numbered “9”) that Oetken and Frost disclose screed plate heaters in the context of a paving machine, not in the context of a portable system relating to a screed plate. This is not persuasive since it is irrelevant how the screed plate is powered/moved (by a machine or manually) since a screed plate performs the same function (smooths the top of paving material) regardless, and is also not persuasive since both references are in the screed art, and therefore the teachings are relevant. The primary reference, DE ‘015 already teaches providing heat (in the form of charcoal) to heat the hand-held screed.
Applicant acknowledges that Frost teaches a road paver/finisher with a screed assembly having an electrical heating element but argues Frost does not teach a hand-held screed so one of ordinary skill in the art would not look to modify a hand-held screed with an electrical heating element associated with a road paver/finisher. Applicant’s argument is one of bodily incorporation; the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). The primary reference, DE ‘015, already teaches a hand-held screed with a heating element; the resulting combination makes it obvious to substitute the charcoal from 1932 with a known modern heating element in a screed.
Applicant asserts that similar arguments can be made against the rejection to claim 15; these arguments have been addressed above. Applicant does not provide any arguments to the dependent claims.
Applicant’s new claims 21-22 have been addressed in the rejection above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached Notice of References Cited sheet. Buschmann et al., US 9,447,552 B2 is cited for teaching side plates attached to the outer ends of a screed to prevent material from spilling out of the sides of the screed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHERINE J CHU whose telephone number is 571-272-7819. The examiner can normally be reached M-F generally 9:30-5:30.
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, Christopher Sebesta can be reached at 571-272-0547. 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.
/KATHERINE J CHU/Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/CHRISTOPHER J SEBESTA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights