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 Objections
Claims 1-4 and 6-28 are objected to because of the following informalities:
With regard to claim 1: Line 12 of the claim, it appears the phrase “the each” should be --each-- as the phrase includes redundant language.
With regard to claim 10: Line 1 of the claim, it appears “insulative core” should be plural as applicant is referring to more than one prefabricated insulated panel.
With regard to claim 27: Line 16 of the claim, it appears the phrase “the each” should be --each-- as the phrase includes redundant language.
With regard to claim 28: Lines 12-13 of the claim, it appears the phrase “the each” should be --each-- as the phrase includes redundant language.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-4 and 6-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
With regard to claim 1, 27 and 28: There is inadequate support for each prefabricated panel comprising the configuration as presented in the claims. In particular, there is inadequate support for each prefabricated insulated panel comprising both the reinforcing frame and a cavity extending substantially across a width as recited. Examiner notes that figures 3a-3b are directed to an exterior wall panel 122, which may be used as exterior wall panel 22, comprising no cavity. Fig. 3C is directed a demising wall 114, which may be used as demising wall 14, comprising a cavity 156 between two insulative cores 152, where the demising wall comprises individual prefabricated panels 150A-150B. Further, there appears to be inadequate support for the cavity extending substantially across a width of each prefabricated insulated panel (emphasis added).
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-4 and 6-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
With regard to claims 1 and 27: It’s unclear as to how the first cementitious layer is bonded to a first face of the insulative core and the second cementitious layer is bonded to a second face of the insulative core, while the prefabricated wall panels comprise a cavity. Examiner notes that the only reference to a cavity is with respect to fig. 3C comprising a cavity 156 disposed between insulative cores 152 (see also par. [0056]-[0057] of the original specification). Further, as shown in fig. 3C, the demising wall comprises individual prefabricated panels 150A-150B. Clarification is requested.
With regard to claim 10: The scope of the claims are unclear. Claim 1 appears to recite a hybrid embodiment of fig. 3A-3C. Examiner notes that not all the prefabricated insulated panels are the same. If applicant is claiming a cavity (156) of as demising wall, what cavity is referring to in claim 1? Examiner notes that it appears the limitation “a third plurality of the prefabricated panels” in claim 1 should be directed the –a third plurality of prefabricated panels-- to distinguish the third plurality from the prefabricated panels having a reinforcing frame.
With regard to claim 28: It’s unclear as to how the first cementitious layer and the second cementitious layer is bonded to a second face of the insulative core are directly coupled to the insulative core by bonding action, while the prefabricated wall panels comprise a cavity. Examiner notes that the only reference to a cavity is with respect to fig. 3C comprising a cavity 156 disposed between insulative cores 152 (see also par. [0056]-[0057] of the original specification). Further, as shown in fig. 3C, the demising wall comprises individual prefabricated panels 150A-150B. Clarification is requested.
Claims 1-4 and 6-28 are examined as best understood.
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) 1-4, 6-13 and 16-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gibson (US 9,328,506 B2) in view of Balla-Goddard et al. (US 5,743,056) and in further view of Rivet (US 2009/0188188 A1).
With regard to claim 1: Gibson discloses a method of constructing a multi-storey building utilizing a plurality of prefabricated insulated panels (102) (figs. 1-7 and 16-17; col. 5, lines 10-14, 41-43 and 57-62; col. 11, lines 40-47), each prefabricated insulated panel (102) comprising a first cementitious layer (160) (col. 11, lines 49-57), a second cementitious layer (164) (col. 11, lines 49-57), and an insulative core (124, insulation member), and a reinforcing frame (114, 116 and 126) extending around the insulative core (126) (figs. 1-2 and 6), wherein the insulative core (124) is disposed between the first and second cementitious layers (160 and 164) (figs. 1-2 and 16-17; col. 11, lines 40-47), the method comprising:
i) constructing a building foundation (106, slab) (fig. 1; col. 5, lines 18-25);
ii) constructing a plurality of successive storeys of said multi-storey building (col. 5, lines 41-43), wherein a first storey of the plurality of successive storeys is constructed first on said building foundation (106, slab) and subsequent storeys of the plurality of successive storeys are constructed on the previous storey of the plurality of successive storeys thereby constructed (figs. 1; col. 5, lines 18-43); wherein each storey comprises the plurality of prefabricated insulated panels (102) (fig. 1; col. 5, lines 10-14 and 41-43), each storey comprising:
a first plurality of the prefabricated insulated panels (102) comprising prefabricated wall panels (108) forming a load-bearing exterior wall (bearing the subsequent stories and roof) disposed on an outer perimeter of the respective storey (figs. 1-2 and 16-17; col. 5, lines 10-14, 41-43 and 57-62; col. 11, lines 40-47),
a fifth plurality of prefabricated insulated panels (102) comprising prefabricated floor panels (110) forming a floor (figs. 1-4 and 16-17; col. 5, lines 10-14, 41-43 and 57-62; col. 11, lines 40-47),; and
iii) constructing a roof on a last storey of the plurality of successive storeys thereby constructed, the roof comprising a plurality of prefabricated roof panels (112) (figs. 1-4 and 16-17; col. 5, lines 10-14, 41-43 and 57-62; col. 11, lines 40-47).
Examiner submits that the first cementitious layer and the second cementitious layer (col. 11, lines 49-57) are inherently curable as each layer is made of cementitious material.
Gibson discloses that the first cementitious layer (160) is secured to a first face of the insulative core (124) and wherein the second cementitious layer (164) is secured to a second face of the insulative core, the second face opposite the first face (col. 11, lines 42-45). Gibson discloses that the first and second cementitious layers (160 and 164) can be irreversibly coupled to support members (136) before, after, or during manufacturing (col. 11, lines 11-27 and 42-45). Gibson discloses that the first and second cementitious layers (160 and 164) are spaced-spart on opposite surfaces of the insulative core (124) and are not connected by cementitious material or other material within or through an interior of the insulative core (124) of the respective prefabricated insulated panel (102) forming a cavity (140) therebetween and extending across a width of each prefabricated insulated panel and along a length thereof (fig. 6), and wherein the reinforcing frame (114, 116 and 126) is monolithic and formed with the prefabricated panel such that reinforcing frame (114, 116 and 126) is at least partially embedded within the insulative core (124) around a perimeter thereof (figs. 1-2 and 6) capable of providing structural support between the first and second cementitious layers eliminating the need for reinforcing elements within or through the insulative core.
Gibson does not disclose that the first cementitious layer is bonded to a first face of the insulative core and wherein the second cementitious layer is bonded to a second face of the insulative core, the second face opposite the first face.
However, Balla-Goddard et al. discloses a first cementitious layer (56) bonded to a first face of the insulative core (58) and wherein the second cementitious layer (56) is bonded to a second face of the insulative core (58), the second face opposite the first face (figs. 6-7; col. 2, lines 28-37).
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 method of Gibson to have the first cementitious layer bonded to a first face of the insulative core and the second cementitious layer bonded to a second face of the insulative core, the second face opposite the first face such as taught by Balla-Goodard in order to provide a known means of securement for securing the cementitious layers to the insulative core for preventing disengagement. No new or unpredictable results would be obtained from modifying the cementitious layers to be bonded to the insulative core. Such a combination, to one of ordinary skill in the art, would have a reasonable expectation of success, and would be based on ordinary skill and common sense before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Gibson in view of Balla-Goodard et al. does not disclose a second plurality of the prefabricated insulated panels comprising prefabricated wall panels forming core walls wherein the first and second cementitious layers of the second plurality of prefabricated panels comprise a fire resistant material; a third plurality of the prefabricated insulated panels comprising prefabricated wall panels forming demising walls; a fourth plurality of the prefabricated insulated panels comprising prefabricated wall panels forming corridor walls.
However, Rivet discloses a building comprising core walls (separating apartment units), demising (interior) walls and corridor walls (figs. 1-2; par. [0008]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify the method of Gibson previously modified by Balla-Goodard to further include core walls, demising walls and corridor walls such as taught by Rivet in order to create living spaces and access to the living spaces within the building. Gibson as modified by Balla-Goodard and Rivet would disclose the prefabricated insulated panels would form the core wall, demising walls and corridor walls. Examiner notes that the cementitious layers of Gibson are formed from a fire resistant material (fiber cement) (col. 11, lines 49-61).
PNG
media_image1.png
575
725
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1: Gibson (US 9,328,506 B2)
With regard to claim 2: Gibson discloses that the building comprises a foundation wall constructed on the building foundation, the foundation wall comprising a sixth plurality of the prefabricated insulated panels (102) disposed on an outer perimeter of the building, wherein at least one of the first and second cementitious layers (160 and 164) are structurally reinforced and wherein the foundation wall interposes the foundation (106) and the exterior wall of the first storey (fig. 1 and 16-17).
With regard to claim 3: Gibson discloses each of the sixth plurality of the prefabricated insulated panels has a height (length) to width ratio of at least 2.5 to 1 (col. 5, line 66 – col. 6, line 17).
With regard to claim 4: Gibson discloses that one or more of the prefabricated insulated panels (102) each comprise a cross brace (178 and 178a), the cross brace (178 and 178a) comprising a plurality of intersecting diagonal supports (178 and 178a) (figs. 28-29; col. 13, lines 27-39), the cross brace capable of providing structural support for higher loads..
With regard to claim 6: Gibson discloses that each of the plurality of intersecting diagonal supports (178 and 178a) are fixedly connected at different corresponding corners of a frame (114 and 116) disposed about a perimeter of the one or more of the prefabricated insulated panels (102) (fig. 28-29; col. 13, lines 44-47).
With regard to claim 7: Gibson discloses that each of the plurality of intersecting diagonal supports (178 and 178a) comprises hollow structural section metal (abstract).
Gibson in view of Balla-Goodard et al. and Rivet does not disclose that metal is steel.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp, as the selected option was one of a finite number of available metal materials for its inherent material properties including strength and durability. No new or unpredictable results would be obtained from modifying the metal to be made of steel. Such a combination, to one of ordinary skill in the art, would have a reasonable expectation of success, and would be based on ordinary skill and common sense before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
With regard to claim 8: Gibson discloses that the cross brace (178 and 178a) is embedded within the insulative core (124) of each of the one or more prefabricated insulated panels (102) (col. 13, lines 33-39).
With regard to claim 9: Gibson discloses that the one or more prefabricated insulated panels (102) comprising the cross brace (178 and 178a) include each of the first plurality of the prefabricated insulated panels (108) forming the exterior wall (col. 13, lines 27-39).
With regard to claim 10: Gibson as modified by Rivet discloses that the insulative core (124) of the third plurality of the prefabricated insulated panels comprises a cavity (140) capable of providing acoustic dampening (figs. 1-2 of Gibson).
With regard to claim 11: Gibson discloses that the cavity (140) comprises a discontinuity between first and second sections of the insulative core (124) (figs. 1-2).
With regard to claim 12: Gibson discloses that the first and second cementitious layers (160 and 164) of one or more of the prefabricated insulated panels comprise multi-layer coverings (include paint or stucco) (col. 11, lines 65-67).
With regard to claim 13: Gibson view of Balla-Goodard and Rivet does not disclose that the insulative core of one or more of the prefabricated insulated panels comprises mineral wool for providing fire resistance.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp, as the selected option was one of a finite number of available insulation materials in order to provide a desired thermal R value. No new or unpredictable results would be obtained from modifying the insulative core of Gibson to be formed of another known insulative material such as mineral wool. Such a combination, to one of ordinary skill in the art, would have a reasonable expectation of success, and would be based on ordinary skill and common sense before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
With regard to claim 16: Gibson discloses that one or more of the prefabricated insulated panels comprise a waterproof cladding or finish (col. 4, lines 55-60; col. 11, lines 65-67).
With regard to claim 17: Gibson discloses that the frame (114, 116 and 126) disposed about a perimeter of the one or more of the prefabricated insulated panels (102) is coupled to the one or more of the prefabricated insulated panels using a plurality of connectors (cut portions receiving frame) (fig. 5-6), each of the connectors (cut portions receiving frame) comprising an opening for accessing fasteners (engaging portions of frame).
With regard to claim 18: Gibson discloses that the one or more of the prefabricated insulated panels (102) comprising a frame (114, 116 and 126) additionally comprise one or more transverse framing members (126, intermediate support members) coupled to the frame at least indirectly (fig. 14).
With regard to claim 19: Gibson discloses that the one or more transverse framing members (126, intermediate support members) are coupled to the frame at corresponding ones of the plurality of connectors (cut portions) (col. 7, lines 53-60).
With regard to claim 20: Gibson as modified by Balla-Goodard and Rivet discloses that the fifth plurality of the prefabricated insulated panels interpose the first, second, third and fourth plurality of the prefabricated insulated panels on adjacent storeys of said plurality of successive storeys.
With regard to claim 21: Gibson as modified by Balla-Goodard and Rivet discloses corresponding top and bottom ends of the first, second, third and fourth pluralities of the prefabricated insulated panels abut on adjacent storeys of said plurality of successive storeys.
With regard to claim 22: Gibson as modified by Balla-Goodard and Rivet discloses a top end of the first, second, third and fourth pluralities of the prefabricated insulated panels comprises a lip and wherein the lip supports an end of the fifth plurality of the prefabricated insulated panels interposed between the lip and said corresponding prefabricated insulated panel on an adjacent higher storey said plurality of successive storeys.
With regard to claim 23: Gibson discloses that the plurality of prefabricated roof panels (112) is positioned at an angle for creating a sloping roof profile (fig. 1).
With regard to claim 24: Gibson discloses that the plurality of prefabricated roof panels (112) comprises a non-uniform cross-section along both a height and width for creating a sloping roof profile (figs. 16-17).
With regard to claim 25: Gibson discloses that the first and second cementitious layers (160 and 164) of the first plurality of the prefabricated insulated panels are structurally reinforced (fiber cement) (col. 1, lines 49-57).
With regard to claim 26: Gibson as modified by Balla-Goodard and Rivet discloses one or more of: the second plurality of the prefabricated insulated panels; the third plurality of the prefabricated insulated panels; and the fourth plurality of the prefabricated insulated panels; form load-bearing walls (bearing the subsequent stories and roof) .
With regard to claim 27: The system for constructing a multi-storey building on a foundation would have been obvious system constructed by the method of claims 1-13 and 16-26 under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Gibson in view of Balla-Goodard and Rivet. Examiners notes that insulative core of the prefabricated panel comprises a cavity (140) along a longitudinal length of the insulative core (figs. 5-6 and 15-16; col. 8, lines 35-51). Further, it is noted that the prefabricated wall panels (102) of Gibson comprise prefabricated wall panels.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gibson (US 9,328,506 B2) in view of Balla-Goddard et al. (US 5,743,056), Rivet (US 2009/0188188 A1) and in further view of DeFord et al. (US 6,941,720 B2)
With regard to claim 14: Gibson view of Balla-Goddard et al. and Rivet does not disclose one or both of the first and second cementitious layers of one or more of the prefabricated insulated panels comprise perlite for providing fire resistance.
However, DeFord et al. discloses fiber cement additives including perlite (col. 4, line 66 – col. 5, line 11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Gibson previously modified by Balla-Goddard et al. and Rivet to have the cementitious layers include perlite such as taught by DeFord et al. in order to provide increased sound and heat insulative properties.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gibson (US 9,328,506 B2) in view of Balla-Goddard et al. (US 5,743,056), Rivet (US 2009/0188188 A1) and in further view of Thys (US 4,263,737).
With regard to claim 15: Gibson in view of Balla-Goddard et al. and Rivet does not disclose that the one or more of the fifth plurality of the prefabricated insulated panels extends exteriorly of and is cantilevered by one or more of the first plurality of prefabricated insulated panels.
However, Thys discloses a floor region that extends exteriorly of and is cantilevered by a wall (col. 2, lines 36-42).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Gibson previously modified by Balla-Goddard et al. and Rivet to have a floor region that extends exteriorly of and is cantilevered by a wall such as taught by Thys in order to create a balcony allowing for the amenity of outdoor access from a living space located above ground level. As modified, the one or more of the fifth plurality of prefabricated insulated panels extends exteriorly of and is cantilevered by one or more of the first plurality of prefabricated insulated panels.
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gibson (US 9,328,506 B2) in view of Balla-Goddard et al. (US 5,743,056).
With regard to claim 28: Gibson discloses a system for constructing a multi-storey building on a foundation (106, slab) (fig. 1; col. 5, lines 18-25), each storey comprising a plurality of prefabricated panels (102) (figs. 1-7 and 16-17; col. 5, lines 10-14, 41-43 and 57-62; col. 11, lines 40-47), wherein at least come of the prefabricated panels (102) comprise a first cementitious layer (160) (col. 11, lines 49-57), a second cementitious layer (164) (col. 11, lines 49-57), and an insulative core (124, insulation member), and a reinforcing frame (114, 116 and 126) extending around the insulative core (126) (figs. 1-2 and 6), wherein the insulative core (124) is disposed between the first and second cementitious layers (160 and 164) (figs. 1-2 and 16-17; col. 11, lines 40-47),
Gibson discloses that the first cementitious layer (160) is secured to a first face of the insulative core (124) and wherein the second cementitious layer (164) is secured to a second face of the insulative core, the second face opposite the first face (col. 11, lines 42-45). Gibson discloses that the first and second cementitious layers (160 and 164) can be irreversibly coupled to support members (136) before, after, or during manufacturing (col. 11, lines 11-27 and 42-45). Gibson discloses that the first and second cementitious layers (160 and 164) are spaced-spart on opposite surfaces of the insulative core (124) and are not connected by cementitious material or other material within or through an interior of the insulative core (124) of the respective prefabricated panel (102) forming a cavity therebetween and extending across a width of each panel and along a length thereof, and wherein the reinforcing frame (114, 116 and 126) is monolithic and formed with the prefabricated panel such that reinforcing frame (114, 116 and 126) is at least partially embedded within the insulative core (124) around a perimeter thereof (figs. 1-2 and 6) capable of providing structural support between the first and second cementitious layers eliminating the need for reinforcing elements within or through the insulative core.
Gibson does not disclose that the first cementitious layer and the second cementitious layer are directly coupled to the insulative core by bonding action when the at least some of the prefabricated wall panels are formed.
However, Balla-Goddard et al. discloses a first cementitious layer (56) bonded to a first face of the insulative core (58) and wherein the second cementitious layer (56) is bonded to a second face of the insulative core (58), the second face opposite the first face (figs. 6-7; col. 2, lines 28-37).
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 system of Gibson to have the first cementitious layer directly bonded to a first face of the insulative core and the second cementitious layer directly bonded to a second face of the insulative core, the second face opposite the first face such as taught by Balla-Goodard in order to provide a known means of securement for securing the cementitious layers to the insulative core for preventing disengagement. No new or unpredictable results would be obtained from modifying the cementitious layers to be bonded to the insulative core. Such a combination, to one of ordinary skill in the art, would have a reasonable expectation of success, and would be based on ordinary skill and common sense before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Response to Arguments
The previous objection of claims 1-4 and 6-28 has been withdrawn in view of the amendment filed 6/12/26,
Applicant's arguments filed 6/12/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 9 of the response, Applicant states that it would seem that the Examiner is reading limitations into the claim which Applicant is distinguishing from the prior art and not what Applicant is actually claiming.
Examiner respectfully submits that the claims are examined are best understood. Please see the following response to arguments below. If still unclear, Applicant is encouraged to arrange an interview with the Examiner to discuss the issues further.
Applicant argues that Applicant's panel includes a reinforcing frame that is monolithic and partially embedded around the perimeter of the panel to provide strength and support eliminating the need for reinforcing elements disposed through one or more cavities defined between panels or through a single panel. Such a configuration is not shown in the prior art cited by the Examiner. Applicant point outs that FIGS. 3A and 3B show and describe this feature and FIG. 3C shows and describes another embodiment (demising wall) wherein a cavity 156 is formed between two panels, but again, there is no cementitious material or reinforcing elements disposed through cavity 156, rather the reinforcing frame is monolithic and partially embedded around the perimeter of the panel to provide strength and support.
Examiner respectfully submits that there appears to be no individual panel disclosed comprising the claimed structure. Claim 1 recites a panel comprising an insulative core having a first cementitious layer bonded on a first and a second cementitious layer bonded a second face. Examiner notes that figures 3a-3b are directed to an exterior wall panel 122, which may be used as an exterior wall panel 22, comprises no cavity (emphasis added). The exterior wall panel 122 comprises first and second cementitious layers 134 on opposing faces of the insulative core (132) as shown in fig. 3B. Fig. 3C is directed a demising wall 114, which may be used as demising wall 14, comprises two panels 150A, 150B with a cavity 156 between the panels 150A, 150B having only one cementitious layer (154) bonded to the first face of the insulative core (152) of the respective panel. Note the Figure 3C is not disclosed as a panel itself, but a wall comprising two panels (150A and 150B). Examiner submits that all the features of the prefabricated panels of claim 1 are not found in prefabricated panels 122, 150A or 150A. Each claimed prefabricated insulated panels appears to be a hybrid of figures 3-3C.
Examiner acknowledges applicants arguments regarding the scope of the claims, however, questions remain pertaining to the structure being claimed. Applicant has not provided an adequate explanation as to where all the features claimed can be found within a single panel embodiment. Accordingly, the claims are examined as best understood.
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 JESSIE T FONSECA whose telephone number is (571)272-7195. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00am - 3:30pm.
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, Brian Glessner can be reached at (571)272-6754. 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.
/JESSIE T FONSECA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Prosecution Insights