DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-11, 14-15 are pending.
Claims 12-13 are cancelled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-11 and 14-15 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.
Re claim 1, claim 1 recites, “the spaced ribs” in line 16 and in line 23. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claims. It appears this language is intended to recite, “each spaced rib” and will be interpreted as such.
Re claim 15, claim 15 recites, “the spaced ribs” in line 11 and in line 20. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claims. It appears this language is intended to recite, “each spaced rib” and will be interpreted as such.
Claims 2-11 and 14 are rejected as being dependent on a rejected claim.
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) 1-8, 10-11, 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Spurrell (GB2500626) in view of Murdoch (WO 2019/074632).
Re claim 1, Spurrell discloses a joint edge protection apparatus (1-4) for protecting an edge of a first component formed of settable material (Page 1 lines 14-16) and an edge of a second component formed of settable material (Page 1 lines 4-6) at a joint (at 1), the joint edge protection apparatus (1-4) comprising:
a first anchorage part (2, 9-10) anchorable within (Page 21 lines 7-8) the first component (Page 1 lines 14-16);
a second anchorage part (9-10) anchorable within (Page 21 lines 7-8) the second component (Page 1 lines 14-16);
a first plate (3) coupled to the first anchorage part (9-10), the first plate (3) defining a first abutment surface (3a);
a second plate (4) coupled to the second anchorage part (9-10), the second plate (4) defining a second abutment surface (4a);
wherein the first abutment surface (3a) and the second abutment surface (4a) are shaped to facilitate abutment (Fig. 6) of at least a portion of the second abutment surface (4a) against the first abutment surface (3a),
wherein the second anchorage part (9-10) is movable relative (via movement on Fig. 1-3) to the first anchorage part (9-10) from an abutting configuration (Fig. 1) in which at least a portion of the second abutment surface (4a) is in abutment with (Fig. 1-3) the first abutment surface (3a) to a spaced configuration (Fig. 3) in which the second abutment surface (4a) is spaced relative to (Fig. 3) the first abutment surface (3a),
wherein the first anchorage part (2, 9-10) defines a support surface (2) to support the second plate (4) as the second anchorage part (2, 9-10) is moved between the abutting configuration (Fig. 1) and the spaced configuration (Fig. 3), and
wherein, in the abutting configuration (Fig. 1) an interface between the first abutment surface (3a) and the second abutment surface (4a) is offset (Fig. 1, showing 3 and 4 laterally offset) relative to an interface between (Fig. 1, 3 and 4 are vertically offset from 9-10) the first anchorage part (9-10) and the second anchorage part (9-10) such that the interface of the first abutment surface (3a) and the second abutment surface (4a) is positioned above (Fig. 1) the support surface (2),
but fails to disclose wherein the first anchorage part includes a first series of spaced ribs extending diagonally downward relative to the first plate and; a first lacer bar supported by each of the spaced ribs of the first series of spaced ribs, wherein the first lacer bar extends vertically downward relative to the first plate and includes a first straight lower edge and a first upper edge that tapers to a first series of apexes midway between each of the spaced ribs of the first series of spaced ribs, wherein the second anchorage part includes a second series of spaced ribs extending diagonally downward relative to the second plate and a second lacer bar supported by each of the spaced ribs of the second series of spaced ribs, wherein the second lacer bar extends vertically downward relative to the second plate and includes a second straight lower edge and a second upper edge that tapers to a second series of apexes midway between each of the spaced ribs of the second series of spaced ribs.
However, Murdoch discloses wherein the first anchorage part (see examiner comments) includes a first series of spaced ribs (see examiner comments) extending diagonally downward relative to (Fig. 1) the first plate (see examiner comments) and; a first lacer bar (see examiner comments) supported by each of the spaced ribs (see examiner comments) of the first series of spaced ribs (see examiner comments), wherein the first lacer bar (see examiner comments) extends vertically downward relative to (Fig. 1) the first plate (see examiner comments) and includes a first straight lower edge (see examiner comments) and a first upper edge (see examiner comments) that tapers to (Fig. 1) a first series of apexes (see examiner comments) midway between (Fig. 1) each of the spaced ribs (see examiner comments) of the first series of spaced ribs (see examiner comments), wherein the second anchorage part (see examiner comments; each subsequent citation being as applied to the second anchorage part) includes a second series of spaced ribs (see examiner comments) extending diagonally downward relative to (Fig. 1) the second plate (see examiner comments) and a second lacer bar (see examiner comments) supported by each of the spaced ribs (see examiner comments) of the second series of spaced ribs (see examiner comments), wherein the second lacer bar (see examiner comments) extends vertically downward relative to (Fig. 1) the second plate (see examiner comments) and includes a second straight lower edge (see examiner comments) and a second upper edge (see examiner comments) that tapers to (Fig. 1) a second series of apexes (see examiner comments) midway between (Fig. 1) each of the spaced ribs (see examiner comments) of the second series of spaced ribs (see examiner comments).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the joint edge protection apparatus of Spurrell wherein the first anchorage part includes a first series of spaced ribs extending diagonally downward relative to the first plate and; a first lacer bar supported by each of the spaced ribs of the first series of spaced ribs, wherein the first lacer bar extends vertically downward relative to the first plate and includes a first straight lower edge and a first upper edge that tapers to a first series of apexes midway between each of the spaced ribs of the first series of spaced ribs, wherein the second anchorage part includes a second series of spaced ribs extending diagonally downward relative to the second plate and a second lacer bar supported by each of the spaced ribs of the second series of spaced ribs, wherein the second lacer bar extends vertically downward relative to the second plate and includes a second straight lower edge and a second upper edge that tapers to a second series of apexes midway between each of the spaced ribs of the second series of spaced ribs as disclosed by Murdoch in order to increase bonding, strength, and rigidity of the anchorage parts within the settable material.
Re claim 2, Spurrell as modified discloses the joint edge protection apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first abutment surface (3a) and the second abutment surface (4a) are correspondingly shaped (Fig. 1) to facilitate abutment (Fig. 1) of the second abutment surface (4a) against (Fig. 1) the first abutment surface (3a), such that in the abutting configuration (Fig. 1) the second abutment surface (4a) is in abutment with (Fig. 1) the first abutment surface (3a).
Re claim 3, Spurrell as modified discloses the joint edge protection apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first abutment surface (3a) and the second abutment surface (4a) are each correspondingly shaped (Fig. 1) with a wave shape (Fig. 1; as a wave shape does not have to be curved) to facilitate abutment (Fig. 1) of the second abutment surface (4a) against the first abutment surface (3a).
Re claim 4, Spurrell as modified discloses the joint edge protection apparatus of claim 3, wherein the wave shape (Fig. 1) of the first abutment surface (3a) is matched to (as the language does not require the identical shape) the wave shape (Fig. 1) of the second abutment surface (4a) to facilitate continuous abutment (along the outermost edges thereof) in the abutting configuration (Fig. 1, Fig. 3). In the event the Examiner over broadly construed the phrase, “continuous abutment,” see alternative rejection below.
Re claim 5, Spurrell as modified discloses the joint edge protection apparatus of claim 3, wherein the wave shape (Fig. 1) of the first abutment surface (3a) is mismatched to (Fig. 3, as the shape is not identical, and “mismatched” does not require a different shape) the wave shape (Fig. 1) of the second abutment surface (4a) to facilitate periodic abutment (as Fig. 1-3 show that 3a/4a can move in a manner that they abut and do not abut) in the abutting configuration (Fig. 1, Fig. 3).
Re claim 6, Spurrell as modified discloses the joint edge protection apparatus of claim 1, which is arranged (Fig. 3) such that a gap (11) between the first abutment surface (3a) and the second abutment surface (4a), throughout a range of movement (Fig. 1-3), is located above (Fig. 3) said support surface (2) such that the gap (11) is fully spanned by (Fig. 3) the support surface (2).
Re claim 7, Spurrell as modified discloses the joint edge protection apparatus of claim 6, wherein the gap (11) is fully bridged by (Fig. 3) the support surface (2) such that contaminants are prevented from entering (Fig. 3) the joint (at 1) between the first component (3) and the second component (4).
Re claim 8, Spurrell as modified discloses the joint edge protection apparatus of claim 7, wherein the gap (11) provides a well (at 11, between 3a, 4a and above 2) for application of joint material (joint material may be received therein).
Re claim 10, Spurrell as modified discloses the joint edge protection apparatus of claim 6, wherein said range of movement (Fig. 1-3) corresponds to a gap (11) between the first abutment surface (3a) and the second abutment surface (4a) being between 0 mm and 20 mm (Page 10 lines 13-24).
Re claim 11, Spurrell as modified discloses the joint edge protection apparatus of claim 1, wherein said offset (Fig. 2), in use, results in the interface (between 3a and 4a) between the first abutment surface (3a) and the second abutment surface (4a) being offset from (Fig. 3) a center of the joint (of 11) between the first component (9-10) and the second component (9-10).
Re claim 14, Spurrell as modified discloses the joint edge protection apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first lacer bar (27) is in the form of a rail (Fig. 1-2).
Re claim 15, Spurrell discloses a joint edge protection apparatus (1-4) for protecting an edge of a first component formed of settable material (Page 1 lines 14-16) and an edge of a second component formed of settable material (Page 1 lines 4-6) at a joint (at 1), the joint edge protection apparatus (1-4) comprising:
a first anchorage part (2, 9-10) anchorable within (Page 21 lines 7-8) the first component (Page 1 lines 14-16), the first anchorage part (2, 9-10) including a first plate (3) defining a first interface surface (3a);
a second anchorage part (9-10) anchorable within (Page 21 lines 7-8) the second component (Page 1 lines 14-16), the second anchorage part (2, 9-10) including a second plate (4) defining a second interface surface (4a);
wherein the first interface surface (3a) and the second interface surface (4a) are shaped to facilitate abutment (Fig. 6) of at least a portion of the second interface surface (4a) against the first interface surface (3a),
wherein the second anchorage part (9-10) is movable relative (via movement on Fig. 1-3) to the first anchorage part (9-10) from an abutting configuration (Fig. 1) in which at least a portion of the second interface surface (4a) is in abutment with (Fig. 1-3) the first interface surface (3a) to a spaced configuration (Fig. 3) in which the second interface surface (4a) is spaced relative to (Fig. 3) the first interface surface (3a),
wherein the first interface surface (3a) and the second interface surface (4a) are each shaped (Fig. 1) with a wave shape (Fig. 1; as a wave shape does not have to be curved), and
wherein the wave shape (Fig. 1) of the first interface surface (3a) is mismatched to (Fig. 3, as the shape is not identical, and “mismatched” does not require a different shape) the wave shape (Fig. 1) of the second interface surface (4a) to facilitate periodic abutment (as Fig. 1-3 show that 3a/4a can move in a manner that they abut and do not abut) of the second interface surface (4a) against the first interface surface (3a) in the abutting configuration (Fig. 1, Fig. 3),
but fails to disclose a first series of spaced ribs extending diagonally downward relative to the first plate and, a first lacer bar supported by the first series of spaced ribs, wherein the first lacer bar extends vertically downward relative to the first plate and includes a first straight lower edge and a first upper edge that tapers to a first series of apexes midway between each of the spaced ribs of the first series of spaced ribs, a second series of spaced ribs extending diagonally downward relative to the second plate and a second lacer bar supported by the second series of spaced ribs, wherein the second lacer bar extends vertically downward relative to the second plate and includes a second straight lower edge and a second upper edge that tapers to a second series of apexes midway between each of the spaced ribs of the second series of spaced ribs.
However, Murdoch discloses a first series of spaced ribs (see examiner comments) extending diagonally downward relative to (Fig. 1) the first plate (see examiner comments) and; a first lacer bar (see examiner comments) supported by the first series of spaced ribs (see examiner comments), wherein the first lacer bar (see examiner comments) extends vertically downward relative to (Fig. 1) the first plate (see examiner comments) and includes a first straight lower edge (see examiner comments) and a first upper edge (see examiner comments) that tapers to (Fig. 1) a first series of apexes (see examiner comments) midway between (Fig. 1) each of the spaced ribs (see examiner comments) of the first series of spaced ribs (see examiner comments), wherein the second anchorage part (see examiner comments; each subsequent citation being as applied to the second anchorage part) includes a second series of spaced ribs (see examiner comments) extending diagonally downward relative to (Fig. 1) the second plate (see examiner comments) and a second lacer bar (see examiner comments) supported by the second series of spaced ribs (see examiner comments), wherein the second lacer bar (see examiner comments) extends vertically downward relative to (Fig. 1) the second plate (see examiner comments) and includes a second straight lower edge (see examiner comments) and a second upper edge (see examiner comments) that tapers to (Fig. 1) a second series of apexes (see examiner comments) midway between (Fig. 1) each of the spaced ribs (see examiner comments) of the second series of spaced ribs (see examiner comments).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the joint edge protection apparatus of Spurrell a first series of spaced ribs extending diagonally downward relative to the first plate and, a first lacer bar supported by the first series of spaced ribs, wherein the first lacer bar extends vertically downward relative to the first plate and includes a first straight lower edge and a first upper edge that tapers to a first series of apexes midway between each of the spaced ribs of the first series of spaced ribs, a second series of spaced ribs extending diagonally downward relative to the second plate and a second lacer bar supported by the second series of spaced ribs, wherein the second lacer bar extends vertically downward relative to the second plate and includes a second straight lower edge and a second upper edge that tapers to a second series of apexes midway between each of the spaced ribs of the second series of spaced ribs as disclosed by Murdoch in order to increase bonding, strength, and rigidity of the anchorage parts within the settable material.
Claim(s) 4 is/are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spurrell (GB2500626) in view of Murdoch (WO 2019/074632) and Voet et al (“Voet”) (US 2014/0242863).
Re claim 4 in the alternative, Spurrell discloses the joint edge protection apparatus of claim 3, wherein the wave shape (Fig. 1) of the first abutment surface (3a) is matched to (as the language does not require the identical shape) the wave shape (Fig. 1) of the second abutment surface (4a), but fails to disclose to facilitate continuous abutment in the abutting configuration.
However, Voet discloses a first abutment surfaced (18) matched to (Fig. 6a-7a) a second abutment surface (19) to facilitate continuous abutment (Fig. 7a) in the abutting configuration (Fig. 7a).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the joint edge protection apparatus of Spurrell with the first abutment surfaced matched to the second abutment surface to facilitate continuous abutment in the abutting configuration as disclosed by Voet in order to interlock in the abutting configuration, providing a stronger more rigid connection in said configuration.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spurrell (GB2500626) in view of Murdoch (WO 2019/074632) and Voet et al (“Voet”) (US 2014/0242863).
Re claim 9, Spurrell discloses the joint edge protection apparatus of claim 8, but fails to disclose wherein the joint material is in the form of a joint epoxy and/or sealant.
However, Voet discloses wherein the joint material (22) is in the form of a joint epoxy and/or sealant (22; [0093]; 22 being a sealing member, thus being a sealant).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the joint edge protection apparatus of Spurrell wherein the joint material is in the form of a joint epoxy and/or sealant as disclosed by Voet in order to protect the surfaces of the first and second plate, and to better prevent intrusion of debris therebetween (as evidenced by [0093]).
Examiner Comments
PNG
media_image1.png
400
527
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
502
878
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections 35 USC 102 and/or 103: Applicant’s arguments with respect to all claims have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicant reviews the teachings of the prior art, and subsequently argues the amended language of claim 1 and 15. This language is addressed in view of Murdoch above. Applicant’s arguments concerning Mori and/or Arnold are moot as neither is relied upon in the above rejection.
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 KYLE WALRAED-SULLIVAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8838. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am - 5:00pm.
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 Mattei can be reached on (571)270-3238. 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.
KYLE WALRAED-SULLIVAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3635
/KYLE J. WALRAED-SULLIVAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635