DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4-6, 8-9, 11-12, 14-16, 18-20, and 22 – are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Normand (2010/0058687).
Claim 1 Normand teaches a wall element comprising an inner surface (Fig. 17 shows the wall inside surface, “surface” defined (first definition) as a plane surface, the stud side edges and tube 108 face lying in and forming the wall inside planar (plane) surface), an outer surface (Figs. 17A shows the wall inside (left) surface, “surface” defined (second definition) as the exterior boundary of an object, the wall exterior surface being the outside surface of the wall sheathing shown, fig. 17A), studs 106 and a first cavity 110 and a second cavity (the unfilled space formed by the sheathing and adjacent stud), wherein the studs are located between the inner planar surface and outer surface formed by the sheathing, and wherein the first cavity and the second cavity are also located between the inner surface and outer surface (the first cavity is between the inner surface and outer surface because 110 is between the planar surface and the sheathing, and the second cavity is between the inner surface and outer surface because the second cavity as defined is between the planar surface (the second cavity being at the outer bound of the planar surface) and the sheathing), and wherein the first cavity but not the second cavity is designed to be filled with reinforced concrete, fig. 5, to form a load bearing beam and column, and wherein the first cavity is sealed (sealed because of the continuous tube 108) such that concrete cannot enter the second cavity, and wherein the first cavity spans from a top to a bottom and/or from side to side of the wall element.
4. Normand teaches the wall element according to claim 1, Normand further comprising anchoring points for attachments (nails could be driven into the stud major faces).
5-6. Normand teaches the wall element according to claim 1, Normand further comprising first a second wall elements in flow communication and supporting a slab element (all the wall and floor slab elements are in flow communication prior to pouring concrete to form the columns and beams).
8. Normand teaches the wall element according to claim 5, Normand further teaching the slab element is positioned to lay on top of an inner edge of the first and second wall elements, fig. 5.
9. Normand teaches the wall element according to claim 5, Normand further teaching the slab element is a slab formwork element, fig. 6.
11. Normand teaches a method for installing a unit construction system comprising the steps: installing wall elements 100; positioning slab elements 200; pouring concrete such that the concrete fills up a first cavity 110 in the wall elements but not a second cavity (the unfilled space formed by the sheathing and adjacent stud) in the wall elements to form a load bearing beam and column wherein the first cavity is sealed such that concrete cannot enter the second cavity.
12. Normand teaches the method according to claim 11, Normand further teaching the step of positioning the slab elements comprises a positioning of the slab elements to be in flow communication with the wall elements, fig. 16.
14. Normand teaches the method according to claim 11, Normand further comprising inserting a reinforcement into the first cavity, fig. 2, 19.
15. Normand teaches the method according to claim 11, Normand further comprising the step of placing the slab element comprises laying the slab element on top of an inner edge of the wall element because slab 200, fig. 6, must be generally on wall inner edge so the column and beam forms can be in communication.
16. Normand teaches the method according to claim 11, Normand further comprising the step of placing the slab element comprises placing a slab formwork element, fig. 6.
18. Normand teaches the unit construction system comprising the wall element according to claim 5, Normand further teaching the first cavity is separate from the second cavity, fig. 5.
19. Normand teaches the unit construction system comprising the wall element according to claim 5, Normand further teaching the second cavity is designed to receive insulation, fig. 5.
20. Normand teaches the unit construction system comprising the wall element according to claim 5, Normand further teaching the first cavity comprises less than an entire inner space of the wall element (the second cavity takes up some of the wall inner space), and the first cavity is designed to be completely filled with concrete.
22. Normand teaches the unit construction system comprising the wall element according to claim 5, Normand further teaching reinforcement elements, 19, fig. 2, are inserted into the first cavities of the wall elements, and wherein the reinforcement elements comprise at least one of vertical reinforcements and horizontal reinforcements, and wherein the first cavities of adjacently placed wall elements are aligned, fig. 5.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 3, 7, and 13 - are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Normand (2010/0058687).
3. Normand teaches the wall element according to claim 1, Normand, fig. 17, further teaching the first cavity is located along an edge area of the wall element, and wherein the first cavity is designed to be aligned and combined with a corresponding first cavity of another wall element to form a sealed combined cavity whereby the wall element and the another wall element are connected by concrete designed to be filled into the combined cavity (Normand shows the concrete along the edge in figure 17). Should Applicant disagree that fig. 17 shows the first cavity is located along an edge area of the wall element, and wherein the first cavity is designed to be aligned and combined with a corresponding first cavity of another wall element to form a sealed combined cavity whereby the wall element and the another wall element are connected by concrete designed to be filled into the combined cavity, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the first cavity to be located along an edge area of the wall element, and wherein the first cavity is designed to be aligned and combined with a corresponding first cavity of another wall element to form a sealed combined cavity whereby the wall element and the another wall element are connected by concrete designed to be filled into the combined cavity for wall strength.
7. Normand teaches the wall element according to claim 5, Normand, fig. 17, further comprising a third wall element according to claim 1, wherein the first and second wall element first cavity is in an edge area of the first and/or second wall element and forms a combined cavity together with the third wall element, and wherein the combined cavity is sealed and designed to be filled with reinforced concrete (Normand shows the concrete along the edge in figure 17). Should Applicant disagree that fig. 17 shows a third wall element according to claim 1, wherein the first and second wall element first cavity is in an edge area of the first and/or second wall element and forms a combined cavity together with the third wall element, and wherein the combined cavity is sealed and designed to be filled with reinforced concrete, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Normand to further comprise a third wall element according to claim 1, wherein the first and second wall element first cavity is in an edge area of the first and/or second wall element and forms a combined cavity together with the third wall element, and wherein the combined cavity is sealed and designed to be filled with reinforced concrete for wall strength.
13. Normand teaches the method according to claim 11, Normand further teaching the step of installing the wall elements comprises alignment of partial cavities in the respective wall elements to form a cavity (Normand shows the concrete along the edge in figure 17). Should Applicant disagree that Normand further teaches the step of installing the wall elements comprises alignment of partial cavities in the respective wall elements to form a cavity it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Normand to further comprise the step of installing the wall elements comprises alignment of partial cavities in the respective wall elements to form a cavity for strength.
Claims 2, 10, 17, and 21 - are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Normand in view of Stolz (2,143,288).
2. While Normand teaches the studs as the form just as the inventive wall element does also, Normand does not expressly teach the first cavity is at least partially set up by the inner surface and outer surface and at least one stud. Stolz teaches it is known to pour concrete directly between studs (figure 3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the Normand first cavity to be at least partially set up by the inner surface and outer surface and at least one stud as taught by Stolz to be able to have columns in other wall locations.
10. Normand does not teach further comprising a guide, designed to position the first and/or second wall element. Stolz teaches a guide, 29, designed to position first and/or second wall elements. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Normand to further comprise a guide designed to position the first and/or second wall element for accuracy.
17. Normand does not teach further comprising the step of placing a guide prior to the step of installing the wall elements and the step of installing the wall elements comprises installing the wall elements by means of the guide. Stolz comprises the step of placing a guide prior to the step of installing wall elements and the step of installing the wall elements comprises installing the wall elements by means of the guide 29. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Normand to further comprise the step of placing a guide prior to the step of installing the wall elements and the step of installing the wall elements comprises installing the wall elements by means of the guide for accuracy.
21. While Normand teaches the studs as the form just as the inventive wall element does also, Normand does not expressly teach the Normand first cavity is defined by the inner surface, the outer surface, and at least one of the studs. Stolz teaches it is known to pour concrete directly between studs (figure 3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the Normand first cavity to be defined by the inner surface, the outer surface, and at least one of the studs as taught by Stolz to be able to have columns in other wall locations.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL J KENNY whose telephone number is (571)272-9951. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Zhong (2012/0233936), figs. 10-13, 41-44, and 66 teach the claimed wall element but no second cavity or studs as recited.
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.
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.
/DANIEL J KENNY/Examiner, Art Unit 3633
/BRIAN E GLESSNER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3633