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 .
RESPONSE TO AMENDMENT
Claims 15, 18, 21-25, and 28-38 are pending in the application. Claims 1-14, 16, 17, 19, 20, 26, and 27 have been cancelled.
Answers to Applicant's Arguments
Applicant's arguments in the response filed 14 July 2025, regarding the objections made of record, have been fully considered and are deemed persuasive. The objections have been withdrawn in view of applicant's arguments and amendments to the claims.
Applicant's arguments in the response filed 14 July 2025, regarding the 35 U.S.C. §112 rejections made of record, have been fully considered and are deemed persuasive. The rejections have been withdrawn in view of applicant's arguments and amendments to the claims.
Applicant's arguments in the response filed 14 July 2025, regarding the 35 U.S.C. §103 rejections made of record, have been fully considered but are deemed unpersuasive.
Applicant argues that the prior art of Pervan'947 and Ogata either alone or in combination does not disclose that the cured thermosetting resin is permeated, through at least one of the plurality of veneers, into the topside veneer, such that the permeated cured thermosetting resin is visible at a top surface of the at least one of the plurality of veneers. Applicant further argues that the timber pieces of Ogata are not disclosed as begin capable of being permeated by the thermosetting resin, and that Ogata also teaches away from the permeated thermosetting resin from being visible because of a transparent resin layer (ref. #5) being disposed over the surface of the small timber pieces (figure 3 and [Col. 3: li. 38-53] of Ogata). The examiner respectfully disagrees.
Regarding applicant's argument that the timber pieces of Ogata are not veneers. It has been noted by the examiner, that the instant specification of the claimed invention does not provide an explicit definition for a veneer that precludes the multiplicity of timber pieces of Ogata from being considered, by a person of ordinary skill in the art to be, equivalent to the claimed topside veneer. At most, the instant specification recites that the topside veneer have a thickness of less than 2.5 mm or between 0.6 mm and 1.2 mm ([0010] of the filed specification) and be capable of being permeated through by a thermosetting resin as to be visible from the top. Ogata discloses that the multiplicity of timber pieces can have a thickness of 0.2 to 3 mm, preferably 0.2 to 1 mm ([Col. 3: li. 60-68] of Ogata). As such, it is reasonable for a person having ordinary skill in the art to have equated the multiplicity of timber pieces to the claimed topside veneer.
Furthermore, while Ogata does not explicitly recite that --the cured thermosetting resin is permeated, through at least one of the plurality of veneers, into the topside veneer, such that the permeated cured thermosetting resin is visible at a top surface of the at least one of the plurality of veneers--. Ogata does use the same materials and same process as applicants to form the topside veneer of applicant's invention (i.e., the topside veneer is a plurality of veneers, wherein the plurality of veneers comprises neighboring veneers, wherein the neighboring veneers are positioned spaced apart relative to each other on the substrate such that there is a gap between two neighboring veneers, wherein the cured thermosetting resin is permeated, through at least one of the plurality of veneers, into the topside veneer, such that the permeated cured thermosetting resin is visible at a top surface of the at least one of the plurality of veneers; see (figures 1, 2, 8, 13, [Col. 1: li. 6-12 and 46-65], [Col. 3: li. 35-68], [Col. 4: li. 9-57], [Col. 7: li. 56 to Col. 8: li. 4], [Col. 8: li. 12-41], and [Col. 9: li. 9-28]) of Ogata and ([0010]-[0021], [0028], [0029], and [0035]) of the filed specification). (Note: In the instant case, Ogata discloses that the same thermosetting resin (e.g., polyurethane) and the same veneers of wood (e.g., oak) are subjected to a pressure 0.5 to 1.5 MPa (i.e., which meets the greater or equal to 1000 kPa as stipulated in the filed specification). Additionally, it should be noted that the recitation of [Col. 4: li. 9-57] as cited above, was used to show that the aforementioned thermoplastic resin with filler and colorant can wholly permeate the timber pieces disclosed by Ogata, and was not relied upon for the use timber pieces that have already been subjected to dimension stabilization treatment as the aforementioned timber pieces.) Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made that the topside veneer of Ogata inherently possesses the permeated cured thermosetting resin visible at a top surface of the at least one of the plurality of veneers of the topside veneer as claimed. See MPEP §2112.
Additionally, regarding the applicant argument that Ogata's disclosure of a transparent resin layer (ref. #5) being disposed on the exposed surfaces of the timber pieces, teaching away from having the cured thermosetting resin permeated into the topside veneer (timber pieces), such that the permeated, cured, thermosetting resin is visible at a top surface of the veneer (timber pieces). The examiner respectfully disagrees, in that said transparent resin layer (ref. #5) recited by applicant is from a different embodiment disclosed by Ogata, which was not relied upon in the rejections made of record. As such, the teachings of Ogata that were relied upon, wherein there is no transparent resin layer (ref. #5), would not teach away from having the permeated cured thermosetting resin be visible at a top surface of the at least one of the plurality of veneers, as explained above.
Applicant goes on to argue that the having the thermosetting resin permeated through the veneer to the top surface of the veneer has significant technical advantages (e.g., pores, cracks, gaps, and/or flaws in the veneer are filled with resin during the pressing process; the resin of the resin layer may form an inseparable connection between the veneer and the carrier plate; and two production steps (i.e., gluing and smoothening of the veneer) may be performed in one step). The examiner respectfully disagrees.
In that Ogata uses the same materials and same process as applicants to form the topside veneer of applicant's invention (as argued above). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made that the filling of pores, cracks, gaps, and/or flaws in the veneer would also occur during the pressing process of Ogata, that the resin of the resin layer could form an inseparable connection between the veneer and the carrier plate, and two production steps (i.e., gluing and smoothening of the veneer) may be performed in one step.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., the resin of the resin layer may form an inseparable connection between the veneer and the carrier plate; and two production steps (i.e., gluing and smoothening of the veneer) may be performed in one step) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Therefore, in light of applicant's arguments, the examiner contends that the rejections are still valid.
New and Repeated Rejections
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office Action.
Claim Interpretation
This application includes the limitation --connecting means-- in claims 31 and 32 which are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitations use a generic placeholder ("means") that is coupled with functional language ("connecting") without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. The limitation (also referred to as "joining means" in the instant specification) is being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. Paragraphs [0004], [0044], and [0065] of the filed specification describes a joining (connecting) means as a 'groove and tongue', 'click system', 'click joint', or 'locking strips'.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 15, 18, 21-25, and 28-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pervan (EP 2415947 A2) (referred to herein as "Pervan'947") in view of Ogata et al. (US 4,911,969 A).
Regarding Claims 15 and 30: Pervan'947 discloses a floorboard comprising a surface layer (ref. #51; which is considered equivalent to the claimed "topside veneer"), a core (ref. #50; which is considered equivalent to the claimed "substrate"), and a balancing layer (ref. #52; which is considered equivalent to the claimed "balancing layer") below the core on an opposing surface from the surface layer (figures 7A, 7B, and [0046] of Pervan'947). Pervan'947 discloses that the surface layer can be glued to the core, and that the balancing layer can be glued to the core ([0046] of Pervan'947). Specifically, Pervan'947 provides for --a multilayer body comprising: a substrate; a topside veneer; a cured resin between the substrate and the topside veneer, the substrate and the topside veneer being stacked in a vertical direction; and a balancing layer arranged on a bottom side of the substrate-- {instant claim 15} and --a floorboard comprising: a substrate; a topside veneer; a cured resin between the substrate and the topside veneer, the substrate and the topside veneer being stacked in a vertical direction; and a balancing layer arranged on a bottom side of the substrate-- {instant claim 30}
Pervan'947 fails to disclose that the cured resin is --a cured thermosetting resin-- {instant claims 15 and 30} and that --at least one cured thermosetting resin side boarder formed along the entire length of the substrate between a first edge of the topside veneer and a second edge of the substrate, the first and second edges being spaced from each other in a direction perpendicular to the vertical direction and to the length of the substrate, wherein the at least one cured thermosetting resin side border is formed from a portion of the thermosetting resin that has been cured and that adheres to at least one outer side surface of the topside veneer, wherein the topside veneer is a plurality of veneers, wherein the plurality of veneers comprises neighboring veneers, wherein the neighboring veneers are positioned spaced apart relative to each other on the substrate such that there is a gap between two neighboring veneers-- {instant claims 15 and 30}, --wherein the multilayer body is configured to be divided into building panels at the gap-- {instant claim 15}, or --wherein the floorboard is configured to be divided into floor panels at the gap-- {instant claim 30}.
Ogata discloses a decorative sheet comprising a substrate (ref. #1) on which is disposed a small timber-dispersed, colored, opaque resin layer (ref. #4), wherein the resin layer comprises a multiplicity of small pieces of timer (ref. #2; which are considered to be equivalent to the claimed "topside veneer"), with thicknesses of 0.2 to 3 mm, in a colored, opaque resin (ref. #3; which is considered equivalent to the claimed "cured thermosetting resin"; and wherein portions along the sides are considered equivalent to the claimed "at least one thermosetting resin side border") (figures 1, 2, 8, 13, [Col. 1: li. 6-12 and 46-65], and [Col. 3: li. 35-68] of Ogata). Ogata also discloses that the colored, opaque resin is a hardened (cured) thermosetting resin ([Col. 4: li. 51-59] of Ogata). It is also disclosed by Ogata that the small pieces of timber (ref. #2) can have rectangular parallelopiped structures, or cubic shapes, and that they can be positioned/arranged/dispersed uniformly on the surface to have a uniform surface pattern ([Col. 3: li. 54-68], [Col. 7: li. 56 to Col. 8: li. 4], and [Col. 8: li. 30-41] of Ogata); wherein the small pieces of timber can be arranged to account for about 10 to 90% of the surface (figures 9 to 13 and [Col. 8: li. 12-29] of Ogata). Ogata further discloses that the decorative sheet comprises the small pieces of timber surrounded by a cured thermosetting resin at the surface (figure 2, 8, 13, and [Col. 1: li .52-65] of Ogata).
Ogata does not explicitly recite that --the cured thermosetting resin is permeated, through at least one of the plurality of veneers, into the topside veneer, such that the permeated cured thermosetting resin is visible at a top surface of the at least one of the plurality of veneers--. However, Ogata does use the same materials and same process as applicants to form the topside veneer of applicant's invention (i.e., the topside veneer is a plurality of veneers, wherein the plurality of veneers comprises neighboring veneers, wherein the neighboring veneers are positioned spaced apart relative to each other on the substrate such that there is a gap between two neighboring veneers, wherein the cured thermosetting resin is permeated, through at least one of the plurality of veneers, into the topside veneer, such that the permeated cured thermosetting resin is visible at a top surface of the at least one of the plurality of veneers; see (figures 1, 2, 8, 13, [Col. 1: li. 6-12 and 46-65], [Col. 3: li. 35-68], [Col. 4: li. 9-57], [Col. 7: li. 56 to Col. 8: li. 4], [Col. 8: li. 12-41], and [Col. 9: li. 9-28]) of Ogata and ([0010]-[0021], [0028], [0029], and [0035]) of the filed specification). (Note: In the instant case, Ogata discloses that the same thermosetting resin (e.g., polyurethane) and the same veneers of wood (e.g., oak) are subjected to a pressure 0.5 to 1.5 MPa (i.e., which meets the greater or equal to 1000 kPa as stipulated in the filed specification). Additionally, it should be noted that the recitation of [Col. 4: li. 9-57] as cited above, was used to show that the aforementioned thermoplastic resin with filler and colorant can wholly permeate the timber pieces disclosed by Ogata, and was not relied upon for the use timber pieces that have already been subjected to dimension stabilization treatment as the aforementioned timber pieces.) Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made that the topside veneer of Ogata inherently possesses the permeated cured thermosetting resin visible at a top surface of the at least one of the plurality of veneers of the topside veneer as claimed. See MPEP §2112.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have combined the small timber-dispersed, colored, opaque resin layer disclosed by Ogata with the floorboard/multilayer body disclosed by Pervan'947 in order to have --a cured thermosetting resin--, --at least one cured thermosetting resin side boarder formed along the entire length of the substrate between a first edge of the topside veneer and a second edge of the substrate, the first and second edges being spaced from each other in a direction perpendicular to the vertical direction and to the length of the substrate, wherein the at least one cured thermosetting resin side border is formed from a portion of the thermosetting resin that has been cured and that adheres to at least one outer side surface of the topside veneer, wherein the topside veneer is a plurality of veneers, wherein the plurality of veneers comprises neighboring veneers, wherein the neighboring veneers are positioned spaced apart relative to each other on the substrate such that there is a gap between two neighboring veneers; wherein the cured thermosetting resin is permeated, through at least one of the plurality of veneers, into the topside veneer, such that the permeated cured thermosetting resin is visible at a top surface of the at least one of the plurality of veneers-- {instant claims 15 and 30}, and --wherein the multilayer body is configured to be divided into building panels at the gap-- {instant claim 15}, or --wherein the floorboard is configured to be divided into floor panels at the gap-- {instant claim 30}. One of ordinary skill in the art have combined the small timber-dispersed, colored, opaque resin layer disclosed by Ogata with the floorboard/multilayer body disclosed by Pervan'947, from the stand-point of providing a beautiful decorative board in which the figure patterns of small timber pieces appear in the surface thereof ([Col. 1; Li. 46-51] of Ogata).
(Note: In the instant case, the colored, opaque resin of Ogata would be used as the glue disclosed by Pervan'947, multiplicity of small pieces of timer of Ogata would be used as the topside veneer of Pervan'947, and said edge portions of the colored, opaque resin of Ogata would constitute the at least one cured thermosetting resin side border formed by a thermosetting resin adhering to at least one outer side surface of the topside veneer. Furthermore, with regards to the limitations of --wherein the multilayer body is configured to be divided into building panels at the gap-- {instant claim 15} and --wherein the floorboard is configured to be divided into floor panels at the gap-- {instant claim 30}. Ogata's teaching that the small pieces of timber can have rectangular or cubic shapes, be arranged in a uniform pattern, are dispersed in a thermosetting resin, and can account for as little as 10% of the surface (as indicated above), it would have been obvious, to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention, that the multilayer body or floorboard of Pervan'947 in view of Ogata would be capable of being ("configured to be") divided into respective building panels or floor panels at the gap disposed between two neighboring veneers as disclosed by Pervan'947 ([0046] of Pervan'947), and is therefore considered to disclose the claimed limitation.)
Regarding Claim 18: Pervan'947 in view of Ogata discloses that the gap is filled with the cured thermosetting resin (figures 1, 2, 8, and 13 of Ogata).
Regarding Claim 21: Pervan'947 in view of Ogata discloses that the thickness of the topside veneer ranges from 0.2 to 3 mm ([Col. 3: li. 60-68] of Ogata); which overlaps the presently claimed range of --smaller than 2.5 mm--. Ogata differs from the claims by failing to disclose an anticipatory example or a range that is sufficiently specific to anticipate the claimed range. However, it has been held that overlapping ranges are sufficient to establish prima facie obviousness. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have selected from the overlapping portion of the range taught by Ogata, because overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness. See MPEP §2144.05.
Regarding Claims 22 and 33: Pervan'947 in view of Ogata discloses that the substrate is made of a wood material ([0046] of Pervan'947; [Col. 3: li. 37-44] of Ogata).
Regarding Claims 23 and 34: Pervan'947 in view of Ogata discloses that the substrate is made of solid wood, chipboard, or high density fiber board (HDF) ([0046] of Pervan'947; [Col. 3: li. 37-44] of Ogata).
Regarding Claim 24: Pervan'947 in view of Ogata discloses that the cured thermosetting resin comprises a filler ([Col. 4: li. 51-59] of Ogata).
Regarding Claim 25: Pervan'947 in view of Ogata discloses a second cured thermosetting resin between the substrate and the balancing layer ([0046] of Pervan'947).
Regarding Claim 28: Pervan'947 in view of Ogata discloses that the at least one cured thermosetting resin side border of the multilayer body comprises a plurality of cured thermosetting side borders formed by curing thermosetting resin adhering to a plurality of outer side surface of the topside veneer (figures 7A, 7B of Pervan'947; figure 2 of Ogata).
Regarding Claim 29: Pervan'947 in view of Ogata discloses that the multilayer body is rectangular with four cured thermosetting resin side borders (figures 7A, 7B of Pervan'947; figure 2 of Ogata).
Regarding Claim 31: Pervan'947 in view of Ogata discloses that the floorboard comprises connecting means (e.g., locking grooves, or a flexible tongue and a sliding groove) on side borders (figures 1A to 2H, 6A to 7D, [0032], and [0045] of Pervan'947; figure 2 of Ogata). (In the instant case, when the connecting means are formed they would be on and extend through said thermosetting resin side border.)
Regarding Claim 32: Pervan'947 in view of Ogata discloses that the connecting means are formed in the thermosetting resin side border (figures 1A to 2H, 6A to 7D, [0032], and [0045] of Pervan'947; figure 2 of Ogata). (In the instant case, when the connecting means are formed they would be on and extend through said thermosetting resin side border.)
Regarding Claim 35: Pervan'947 in view of Ogata discloses the claimed multilayer body, wherein the plurality of veneers ("small timber pieces") can have rectangular or cubic shapes, be arranged in a uniform pattern, are dispersed in a thermosetting resin so as to be surrounded on all four sides in a top view, and can account for as little as 10% of the surface (figure 2, 8, 9, 13, [Col. 1: li .52-65], [Col. 3: li. 54-68], [Col. 7: li. 56 to Col. 8: li. 4], and [Col. 8: li. 12-41] of Ogata). In the instant case, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, given a rectangular multilayer body having a uniform pattern of rectangular veneers arranged in least three rows and three columns, that when cut along the width and length directions of the multilayer body at the gaps on opposing sides of the middle row/column, there would result at least a central building panel having a width that corresponds to the width of one of the plurality of veneers.
Regarding Claim 36: Pervan'947 in view of Ogata discloses the claimed multilayer body, wherein the plurality of veneers ("small timber pieces") can have rectangular or cubic shapes, be arranged in a uniform pattern, are dispersed in a thermosetting resin so as to be surrounded on all four sides in a top view, and can account for as little as 10% of the surface (figure 2, 8, 9, 13, [Col. 1: li .52-65], [Col. 3: li. 54-68], [Col. 7: li. 56 to Col. 8: li. 4], and [Col. 8: li. 12-41] of Ogata). In the instant case, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, given a rectangular multilayer body having a uniform pattern of rectangular veneers arranged in least three rows and three columns, that when cut along the width and length directions of the multilayer body at the gaps on opposing sides of the middle row/column, there would result at least a central building panel having a length that corresponds to the length of one of the plurality of veneers.
Regarding Claim 37: Pervan'947 in view of Ogata discloses the claimed floorboard, wherein the plurality of veneers ("small timber pieces") can have rectangular or cubic shapes, be arranged in a uniform pattern, are dispersed in a thermosetting resin so as to be surrounded on all four sides in a top view, and can account for as little as 10% of the surface (figure 2, 8, 9, 13, [Col. 1: li .52-65], [Col. 3: li. 54-68], [Col. 7: li. 56 to Col. 8: li. 4], and [Col. 8: li. 12-41] of Ogata). In the instant case, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, given a rectangular floorboard having a uniform pattern of rectangular veneers arranged in least three rows and three columns, that when cut along the width and length directions of the floorboard at the gaps on opposing sides of the middle row/column, there would result at least a central building panel having a width that corresponds to the width of one of the plurality of veneers.
Regarding Claim 38: Pervan'947 in view of Ogata discloses the claimed floorboard, wherein the plurality of veneers ("small timber pieces") can have rectangular or cubic shapes, be arranged in a uniform pattern, are dispersed in a thermosetting resin so as to be surrounded on all four sides in a top view, and can account for as little as 10% of the surface (figure 2, 8, 9, 13, [Col. 1: li .52-65], [Col. 3: li. 54-68], [Col. 7: li. 56 to Col. 8: li. 4], and [Col. 8: li. 12-41] of Ogata). In the instant case, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, given a rectangular floorboard having a uniform pattern of rectangular veneers arranged in least three rows and three columns, that when cut along the width and length directions of the floorboard at the gaps on opposing sides of the middle row/column, there would result at least a central building panel having a length that corresponds to the length of one of the plurality of veneers.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Donald M. Flores, Jr. whose telephone number is (571) 270-1466. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 to 17:00 M-F; Alternate Fridays off.
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, Frank Vineis can be reached at (571) 270-1547. 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.
/DONALD M FLORES JR/
Donald M. Flores, Jr.Examiner, Art Unit 1781