DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the amendment filed March 17, 2026. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-16 are pending. Claims 1-16 are rejected as set forth below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holt et al. (US Patent No. 7,954,292) (hereinafter Holt) in view of Bado et al. (US Patent No. 6,122,876) (hereinafter Bado).
For claim 1, Holt discloses a cladding panel (fig. 2, 110) comprising: substantially parallel front and back faces, defining a thickness of the panel; two lateral sides, defining a length of the panel; top and bottom edges; the top and bottom edges being configured for complementary connection (126, 130), first and second slits extending along at least a portion of the length of the panel from the back face thereof and near the top edge thereof, the first and second slits having respective first and second openings that are substantially parallel to the bottom edge; the first and second slits being adapted to removably (interlocking complementary surfaces) and jointly receive a wall-mounting clip (50) for attaching the panel to a wall (column 4, lines 1-5).
Holt does not disclose that the first slit being oriented within the thickness towards the top edge and the second slit being oriented towards the bottom edge, the first and second slits being adapted to removably and jointly receive a V-shaped mounting clip from one of the two lateral sides, for attaching the panel to a wall.
Bado discloses a cladding panel (figs. 2-8 ) having first and second slits (14a-b) extending along at least a portion of the length of the panel from the back face thereof and having respective first and second openings (see openings in fig. 4) that are substantially parallel to the bottom edge; the first slit being oriented within the thickness towards the top edge and the second slit being oriented towards the bottom edge, the first and second slits being adapted to removably and jointly receive a V-shaped mounting clip (13, 18) from one of the two lateral sides, for attaching the panel to a wall.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the slits and wall-mounting clip of the cladding panel of Holt and make the first slit oriented towards the top edge and the second slit oriented towards the bottom edge and also make the mounting clip V-shaped as made obvious by Bado to increase the gripping strength of the V shaped mounting clip to the cladding panel.
For claim 2, the combination discloses that at least one of the first and second slits extends along the full length of the panel (Bado fig. 1, 13).
For claim 3, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to extend at least one of the first and second slits (Bado fig. 2, 14a-b) from at least one of the two lateral sides and end at a distance from the at least one of the two lateral sides since this merely involves changing the size of the slits to accommodate a clip with a smaller length or to provide a lateral stop for the clip.
For claim 4, the combination discloses that the complementary connection is a tongue and groove connection (Holt fig. 2, 126, 130).
For claim 5, the examiner takes official notice that it would be obvious to add a brick-like finish to the front face of the cladding panel.
Claims 6-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holt in view of Bado and further in view of Wolf et al. (US Pub 2011/0239578) (hereinafter Wolf).
For claim 6, Holt discloses a cladding system (figs. 3-5) comprising: at least one cladding panel (10), each having generally parallel front and back faces defining a thickness of the at least one cladding panel, two lateral sides, defining a length of the at least one cladding panel, and top and bottom edges; the top and bottom edges (36, 40) being configured for complementary connection, the at least one cladding panel including first and second slits extending along at least a portion of the length of the at least one cladding panel from the back face thereof and near the top edge thereof, the first and second slits having respective first and second openings that are substantially parallel to the bottom edge and at least one mounting clip (50) that is adapted to be removably receivable (interlocking complementary surfaces) in the first and second slits from one of the two lateral sides of the at least one cladding panel (column 4, lines 1-5), for attaching the at least one cladding panel to a wall in a parallel relationship (Fig 2), wherein the mounting clip includes a wall-mounting portion for securing the mounting clip to an underlying wall surface and being configured to rest against an underlying wall surface and to support the cladding panel at a predetermined parallel relationship from the wall when the legs of the clip are received in the first and second slits (Fig 2).
Holt does not disclose that the first slit is oriented towards the top edge and the second slit is oriented towards the bottom edge or that the mounting clip is V-shaped and supports the cladding panel at a predetermined spaced-apart relationship from the wall when the legs of the clip are received in the first and second slits so as to yield an air gap therewith.
Bado discloses a cladding panel (figs. 2-8 ) having first and second slits (fig. 4, 14a-b) extending along at least a portion of the length of the panel from the back face thereof and having respective first and second openings (see openings in fig. 4) that are substantially parallel to the bottom edge; the first slit being oriented within the thickness towards the top edge and the second slit being oriented towards the bottom edge, the first and second slits being adapted to removably and jointly receive a V-shaped mounting clip (13) from one of the two lateral sides.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the slits and mounting clip of the cladding panel of Holt and make the first slit oriented towards the top edge and the second slit oriented towards the bottom edge and also make the mounting clip V-shaped as made obvious by Bado to increase the gripping strength of the V-shaped mounting clip to the cladding panel.
Wolf teaches a mounting clip (16) includes a wall mounting portion (21) for securing the mounting clip to an underlying wall surface and being configured to rest against an underlying wall surface and to support the cladding panel at a predetermined spaced-apart parallel relationship from the wall so as to yield an air gap therewith (Fig 3) [0035]. 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 wall mounting clip of Holt to include a spacing protrusion as taught by Wolf, in order to provide an air space behind the cladding to be able to drain out any water that penetrates the system, as is well known in the art. When the protrusion of Wolf is added to the wall mounting clip of Holt, a predetermined spaced-apart parallel relationship will exist between the underlying wall and the panel when the legs of the clip are received in the first and second slits so as to yield an air gap therebetween.
For claim 7, the combination discloses that the panel is used in a building and it would be obvious to use some of the panels as a windowsill panel, each having generally parallel front and back faces defining a thickness of the at least one windowsill panel, two lateral sides, defining length of the at least one windowsill panel, top and bottom edges (Holt fig. 2), and third and fourth slits (Bado fig. 2, 14a b) extending along at least a portion of the length of the at least one windowsill panel from the back face thereof and having respective third and fourth openings that are substantially parallel to the bottom edge of the at least one windowsill panel; the third slit being oriented within the thickness of the at least one windowsill panel towards the top edge thereof and the fourth slit being oriented towards the bottom edge of the at least one windowsill panel; wherein the at least one V-shaped mounting clip (fig. 4, 13) is further adapted to be removably receivable in the third and fourth slits from one of the two lateral sides of the at least one windowsill panel, for attaching the at least one windowsill panel to the wall.
For claim 8, the combination discloses that the complementary connection is a tongue and groove connection (Holt fig. 2, 126, 40).
For claim 9, the examiner takes official notice that it would be obvious to add a brick-like finish to the front face of the cladding panel. For claim 10, the combination discloses that at least one of the first and second slits extends along the full length of the panel (Bado fig. 1, 13).
For claim 11, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to extend at least one of the first and second slits (Bado fig. 2, 14a-b) from at least one of the two lateral sides and end at a distance from the at least one of the two lateral sides since this merely involves changing the size of the slits to accommodate a clip with a smaller length or to provide a lateral stop for the clip.
For claim 12, the modified clip will have a wall-mounting portion (Holt fig. 2, 155) and a substantially V-shaped panel-mounting portion (Bado fig. 2, 14a-b) extending from the wall mounting portion.
For claim 13, the modified clip will have a wall-mounting portion (Holt fig. 2, 155) that includes at least one tongue having a fastener-receiving hole (fig. 1, 53) therein.
For claim 14, the combination discloses that the substantially V-shaped panel-mounting portion can include a planar portion (Bado fig. 4, 13) extending from the wall mounting portion so as to define an obtuse angle therewith, and two tabs (14a-b), each extending from the planar portion on a respective lateral side of the panel-mounting portion so as to define a V-shape with the planar portion of Holt et al.
Claim(s) 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holt in view of Bado in view of Wolf as set forth in the rejection of claim 6, and further in view of Neumann (US Patent No. 4,299,069).
For claim 15, the combination does not disclose least one starter strip that is configured for both mounting to the wall and for complementary receiving the bottom edge of the at least one cladding panel. Neumann discloses the obviousness of adding a starter strip (fig. 2, 46) to a cladding system that is configured for both mounting to the wall (42) and for complementary receiving the bottom edge of the at least one cladding panel (51).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to add a starter strip to the system of the combination as made obvious by Neumann to strengthen the base of the cladding.
For claim 16, discloses that the at least one starter strip (Neumann fig. 2, 46) includes a substantially flat wall-mounting portion (48), including first fastener-receiving holes (50), and a ground contacting portion (base which 51 extends from) that extends from the wall-mounting portion substantially perpendicularly therefrom; the ground-contacting portion being configured for said complementary receiving the bottom edge of the at least one cladding panel and it would be obvious to include second fastener receiving holes since first fastener receiving holes are disclosed since a duplication of already disclosed elements is known to one of ordinary skill.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed March 17, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to the applicant’s argument that Holt does not teach or suggest the claimed slit configuration, the examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). As stated above, Holt discloses the structure of the panel with receiving slits and a mounting clip that is received in the slits. Bado teaches the slits can be angled to form a V-shape which provides a more secure connection between the clip and the panel. Applicant argues that Holt teaches away from a removable connection and the mounting clip could not support lateral insertion and removal of a V-shaped mounting clip. The examiner respectfully disagrees as Holt clearly states in column 4, lines 1-6 that they can be attached in a variety of ways, which include interlocking complementary surfaces. The V-shaped mounting clip of Bado is exactly that, interlocking complementary surfaces. As interlocking complementary surfaces would support laterally insertable mounting clips Holt does not teach away from any such combination.
In response to the applicant’s argument that Bado does not disclose a mounting clip, the examiner again points to applicant’s arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Holt discloses a panel with a wall mounting clip attached via two prongs inserting into slits. Bado teaches a clip attached to a panel with two prongs inserted into slits forming a V-shape. Thus, the combination teaches a panel attached to a wall mounting clip with two V-shaped prongs inserted into slits.
In response to the applicant’s argument that there is no motivation to combine Holt and Bado, the examiner respectfully disagrees. Holt specifically discloses in paragraph 4, lines 1-6 that the mounting clip can be attached in a variety of ways including interlocking complementary surfaces, which is exactly what the V-shaped insertion member of Bado is, an interlocking complementary surfaces. The examiner maintains as stated above that such a combination would make for a more secure connection than the parallel slits and provide the interlocking complementary surfaces so envisioned by Holt.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 6 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on all of the reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The amendment to include that the wall mounting clip includes a wall-mounting portion for securing the mounting clip to an underlying wall surface…so as to yield an air gap therewith is taught by the newly cited reference Wolf. When combined, the mounting clip of Holt will include a wall-mounting portion (protrusion 21) of Wolf that will provide a spaced-apart parallel air gap behind the panel so as to allow for drainage as is well known in the art.
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 Brian Mattei whose telephone number is (571)270-3238. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8:00 to 5:00.
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, Namrata Boveja can be reached at 571-272-8105. 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.
/BRIAN D MATTEI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Prosecution Insights