DETAILED ACTION
The Amendment filed on 07/23/2026 has been entered. Claim(s) 1, 5, 7, 12, and 13 have been amended and claim(s) 16 has been cancelled. Therefore, claims 1-15 are now pending in the application.
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 of this title, 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) 1-5 and 8-15, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han (KR 101812020 B1) with Espacenet translation in view of Rieder et al. (AU 3565302 A).
Regarding claim 1, Han teaches a concrete strip (concreate girder; para 1), the strip comprising conventional concrete (para 1) and a reinforcement of post-tension steel strands (para 3), said post-tension steel strands - having a diameter ranging from 5 mm to 20 mm (15.2 mm; para 63), - having a tensile strength higher than 1700 MPa (2400 MPA; para 63), wherein the strip has a thickness (figure 6), wherein further the length of the strip is according to the formula: length of the strip > 30 times strip thickness (as illustrated, the strip length is clearly at least 30 times the thickness; figure 6), wherein tension is applied to said post-tension steel strands only after the concrete has been cast (because the system is post-tensioned, it is understood that tension would be applied to said post-tension steel strands only after the concrete has been cast).
Han does not specifically disclose a reinforcement of fibers and said fibers being either steel fibers and being present in a dosage ranging from 5 kg/m3 to 90 kg/m3 or being other non-steel fibers and being present in a dosage ranging from 0.6 kg/m3 to 25 kg/m3, and wherein the fibres are distributed over the thickness of the strip.
Rieder et al. discloses a reinforcement of fibers (concrete reinforcing fibers; abstract) wherein said fibers being non-steel fibers (polypropylene; col. 16, line 14) and being present in a dosage ranging from 0.6 kg/m3 to 25 kg/m3 (col. 17, line 1), and wherein the fibres are distributed over the thickness of the strip (col. 5, lines 20-30).
Therefore, from the teaching of Rieder et al., 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 post-tensioned concrete structure of Han to include a reinforcement of fibers and said fibers being either steel fibers and being present in a dosage ranging from 5 kg/m3 to 90 kg/m3 or being other non-steel fibers and being present in a dosage ranging from 0.6 kg/m3 to 25 kg/m3, and wherein the fibres are distributed over the thickness of the strip, as taught by Rieder et al., in order to further reinforce the concrete structure for more durability, increased load capacity, and optimized tensile strength depending on the design requirements of the structure.
Regarding claim 2, Han teaches the strip is indoors and/or outdoors (it is understood that a girder is capable of being installed outdoors for a bridge; para 1).
Regarding claim 3, Han teaches the strip does not contain steel mesh and/or steel nets within the body of the strip in the width direction (Han does not specifically disclose steel mesh and/or steel nets within the body of the strip in the width direction).
Regarding claim 4, Rieder et al. in the combination discloses said fibers are other non-steel fibers selected from the group consisting of non-steel based fibers (polypropylene; col. 16, line 14).
Regarding claim 5, Han teaches the strip length is > 25 m (40m; para 49).
Regarding claim 8, Han teaches the post tensioning strands are draped (figure 6).
Regarding claim 9, Rieder et al. in the combination discloses the fibers are substantially homogenously or homogeneously distributed in the strip (col. 5, line 25).
Regarding claim 10, Han teaches the post-tension steel strands are used for unbonded post-tensioning (para 117).
Regarding claim 11, Han does not specifically disclose a combination of the post-tension steel strands and steel fibers increase fatigue load bearing capacity for the same number of load repetitions by 25 to 500 %, and/or the trip has a load bearing capacity of at least 20 kN/m2. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to contrive any number of desirable ranges wherein a combination of the post-tension steel strands and steel fibers increase fatigue load bearing capacity for the same number of load repetitions by 25 to 500 %, and/or the trip has a load bearing capacity of at least 20 kN/m2, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Further, it has been held that by discovering an optimum value of a result, the effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Refer to MPEP § 2144.05. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to contrive any number of desirable ranges wherein a combination of the post-tension steel strands and steel fibers increase fatigue load bearing capacity for the same number of load repetitions by 25 to 500 %, and/or the trip has a load bearing capacity of at least 20 kN/m2, in order to maximize the load capacity and therefore increase the life span of the concrete structure.
Regarding claim 12, Han teaches a method for casting a long strip (concreate girder construction methods; para 1), comprising the steps of: using conventional concrete (para 1) and a reinforcement of post-tension steel strands (para 3), said post-tension steel strands - having a diameter ranging from 5 mm to 20 mm (15.2 mm; para 63), - having a tensile strength higher than 1700 MPa (2400 MPA; para 63), casting the strip that has a thickness (figure 6), wherein the length of the strip is according to the formula: length of the strip > 30 times strip thickness (as illustrated, the strip length is clearly at least 30 times the thickness; figure 6), and applying tension to said post-tension steel strands only after the concrete has been cast (because the system is post-tensioned, it is understood that tension would be applied to said post-tension steel strands only after the concrete has been cast).
Han does not specifically disclose a reinforcement of fibers and said fibers being either steel fibers and being present in a dosage ranging from 5 kg/m3 to 90 kg/m3 or being other non-steel fibers and being present in a dosage ranging from 0.6 kg/m3 to 25 kg/m3, and wherein the fibres are distributed over the thickness of the strip.
Rieder et al. discloses a reinforcement of fibers (concrete reinforcing fibers; abstract) wherein said fibers being non-steel fibers (polypropylene; col. 16, line 14) and being present in a dosage ranging from 0.6 kg/m3 to 25 kg/m3 (col. 17, line 1), and wherein the fibres are distributed over the thickness of the strip (col. 5, lines 20-30).
Therefore, from the teaching of Rieder et al., 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 post-tensioned concrete structure of Han to include a reinforcement of fibers and said fibers being either steel fibers and being present in a dosage ranging from 5 kg/m3 to 90 kg/m3 or being other non-steel fibers and being present in a dosage ranging from 0.6 kg/m3 to 25 kg/m3, and wherein the fibres are distributed over the thickness of the strip, as taught by Rieder et al., in order to further reinforce the concrete structure for more durability, increased load capacity, and optimized tensile strength depending on the design requirements of the structure.
Regarding claim 13, Han teaches the strip length is > 25 m (40m; para 49).
Regarding claim 14, Han teaches wherein the strip is made without casting multiple layers (multiple layer casting is not disclosed).
Regarding claim 15, Han does not specifically disclose a combination of the post-tension steel strands and steel fibers increase fatigue load bearing capacity for the same number of load repetitions by 25 to 500 %, and/or the trip has a load bearing capacity of at least 20 kN/m2. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to contrive any number of desirable ranges wherein a combination of the post-tension steel strands and steel fibers increase fatigue load bearing capacity for the same number of load repetitions by 25 to 500 %, and/or the trip has a load bearing capacity of at least 20 kN/m2, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Further, it has been held that by discovering an optimum value of a result, the effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Refer to MPEP § 2144.05. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to contrive any number of desirable ranges wherein a combination of the post-tension steel strands and steel fibers increase fatigue load bearing capacity for the same number of load repetitions by 25 to 500 %, and/or the trip has a load bearing capacity of at least 20 kN/m2, in order to maximize the load capacity and therefore increase the life span of the concrete structure.
Claim(s) 6 and 7, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han (KR 101812020 B1) with Espacenet translation in view of Rieder et al. (AU 3565302 A) and further in view of Lambrechts et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2013/0269572).
Regarding claim 6, Han as modified does not specifically disclose said steel fibers comprise anchorage ends at both ends, said anchorage ends each comprise three or four bent sections.
Lambrechts et al. teaches said steel fibers for reinforcing concrete (abstract) comprise anchorage ends at both ends (abstract), said anchorage ends each comprise three or four bent sections (figure 4).
Therefore, from the teaching of Lambrechts et al., 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 modified concrete structure of Han such that said steel fibers comprise anchorage ends at both ends, said anchorage ends each comprise three or four bent sections, in order to improve the performance of the fibers depending on the dosage required for the design requirements of the structure for enhanced efficiency.
Regarding claim 7, Han does not specifically disclose the steel fibers are present in the strip in a dosage ranging from 7 kg/m3 to 75 kg/m3.
Lambrechts et al. teaches said steel fibers for reinforcing concrete (abstract) wherein the steel fibers are present in the strip in a dosage ranging from 7 kg/m3 to 75 kg/m3 (40kg/m3; para 191).
Therefore, from the teaching of Lambrechts et al., 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 modified concrete structure of Han to include steel fibers are present in the strip in a dosage ranging from 7 kg/m3 to 75 kg/m3, in order to improve the performance of the fibers depending on the dosage required for the design requirements of the structure for enhanced efficiency.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments and amendments have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
New reference(s) Han (KR 101812020 B1) and Rieder et al. (AU 3565302 A) have been added to overcome the newly added limitations. Applicant’s amendment regarding the fibres that are distributed over the thickness of the strip overcomes the previous grounds of rejection in view of Khayrullin et al. and the ASTM Publication, and the rejection has been withdrawn. The new amendments are overcome in view of new references Han and Rieder et al.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR F HIJAZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5790. The examiner can normally be reached on 8-6 EST Monday-Friday.
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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/OMAR F HIJAZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Prosecution Insights