DETAILED ACTION
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office 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 . 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 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.
Drawings
Replacement drawings were received on March 2, 2026. These drawings are approved.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 8, 9, 11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 9,091,064 (Dahl) in view of US 2004/0096288 (Haug).
Regarding claim 8, Dahl discloses a threaded rod connector (3; see Figures 1-3), comprising:
a housing (5) having a cavity (10) for receiving a threaded rod (1) therein, wherein the housing has a mouth (provided at a bottom of housing 5 in Figure 1, adjacent 42) for inserting the threaded rod into the cavity (see Figure 1e); and
a plurality of rod engagement wedge segments (26) which are disposed within the cavity (see Figure 1), wherein each of the plurality of rod engagement wedge segments has a rod contact surface (28) for engaging the threaded rod (see Figures 2);
wherein the housing has a tapered surface (9) which delimits the cavity and which tapers towards the mouth for wedging the plurality of rod engagement wedge segments against the threaded rod (see Figure 2 and column 3, line 64, through column 4, line 22);
wherein at least one of the rod contact surfaces is threadless (see “teeth” in column 4, line 9);
wherein the threaded rod connector is a cast in place anchor (see column 4, lines 23-41) that includes an anchor flange (12) that projects radially outwardly from an outer wall (7) of the housing (see Figure 2, where, once connected, the portion 12 acts as a flange which projects radially outwardly from outer wall 7).
Dahl does not expressly disclose at least one of the rod contact surfaces having a surface roughness Ra of 7.0 µm or greater.
Haug teaches forming contact surfaces of a connector having wedge-shaped contact surfaces with a surface roughness Ra of 7.0 pm or greater in order to prevent damage while still providing a reliable connection (see paragraph [0006]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the threaded rod connector of Dahl such that at least one of the rod contact surfaces having a surface roughness Ra of 7.0 µm or greater, as taught in Haug, in order to prevent damage while still providing a reliable connection.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Dahl and Haug each of the rod contact surfaces (28 of Dahl) is threadless (see “teeth” in column 4, line 9) and has a surface roughness Ra of 7.0 pm or greater (see paragraph [0006] of Haug).
Regarding claim 11, Dahl teaches, in a cross-sectional plane, at least one of the plurality of rod engagement wedge segments (26) tapers towards a center of the cavity (10; see Figure 2 where the outer surface of the wedge segments tapers towards a center of the cavity).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Dahl and Haug teaches a system (see Figures 1-3 of Dahl), comprising:
the threaded rod connector (3 of Dahl) according to claim 8 (see rejection above); and
a threaded rod (1 of Dahl; partial threads provided by the ridges shown on 1 in Figure 2) that is disposed within the cavity (10 of Dahl) of the housing (5 and 12 of Dahl) of the threaded rod connector (see Figures 1-3 of Dahl).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Dahl and Haug, and further in view of US 2019/0234443 (Dahl).
The combination of Dahl and Haug teaches the threaded rod connector according to claim 8, but does not expressly teach a cage which is disposed within the cavity (10 of Dahl), wherein the cage encloses the plurality of rod engagement wedge segments (26 of Dahl) and aligns the plurality of rod engagement wedge segments with respect to one another.
Man teaches a cage (22) which is disposed within the cavity (11a, 11b), wherein the cage encloses the plurality of rod engagement wedge segments (26) and aligns the plurality of rod engagement wedge segments with respect to one another (see Figure 3 vs. Figure 5, and paragraph [0024]). Man teaches this structure provides a means of locating and positioning the wedge segments, which provides a more stable connection (see Abstract and paragraph [0008]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the threaded rod connector of Dahl such that a cage which is disposed within the cavity, wherein the cage encloses the plurality of rod engagement wedge segments and aligns the plurality of rod engagement wedge segments with respect to one another, as taught in Man, in order to provide a means of locating and positioning the wedge segments, which provides a more stable connection.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Dahl and Haug, and further in view of US 8,979,211 (Marshall).
The combination of Dahl and Haug discloses the threaded rod connector according to claim 8, wherein the tapered surface (9) is conical (see Figure 2), but does not expressly disclose the tapered surface has an opening angle of 12° or more.
Marshall teaches of a connector having tapered conical contact surfaces, where the tapered surface has an opening angle (α) of 12° or more (see column 8, lines 61-64) in order to provide a connector that is easy to install and does not have to be tightened during operation (see Abstract). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the threaded rod connector of the combination of Dahl and Haug such that the tapered surface is conical, but does not expressly disclose the tapered surface has an opening angle of 12° or more, as taught in Marshall, in order to provide a connector that is easy to install and does not have to be tightened during operation.
In the interest of compact prosecution, the following alternative rejection of claim 14 is made:
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Dahl and Haug, and further in view of US 9,010,165 (Griggs).
The combination of Dahl and Haug teaches a system (see Figures 1-3 of Dahl), comprising:
the threaded rod connector (3 of Dahl) according to claim 8 (see rejection above); and
a rod (1 of Dahl; partial threads provided by the ridges shown on 1 in Figure 2) that is disposed within the cavity (10 of Dahl) of the housing (5 and 12 of Dahl) of the threaded rod connector (see Figures 1-3 of Dahl).
The combination of Dahl and Haug does not explicitly disclose the rod (1 of Dahl) being a continuously threaded rod, and instead discloses the rod having conventional, discontinuous, rebar threading (see 1 of Dahl in Figure 2).
Griggs teaches it is known in the art of rebar connections to choose between conventional, discontinuous, rebar threading and a continuously threaded rod as it is a matter of design choice which requires little to no additional machining (see column 8, lines 32-44), where a continuously threaded rod provides particular advantages such as increased tensile strength (see column 2, lines 51-54). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the threaded rod connector of the combination of Dahl and Haug such that the rod is a continuously threaded rod, as Griggs teaches it is known in the art of rebar connections to choose between conventional, discontinuous, rebar threading and a continuously threaded rod as it is a matter of design choice which requires little to no additional machining, where a continuously threaded rod provides particular advantages such as increased tensile strength.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 5, filed March 2, 2026, with respect to the previous rejection of claims 8-12 and 14 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made as set forth above.
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 Josh Skroupa whose telephone number is (571)270-3220. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 AM – 3:30 PM ET.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached on (571)270-5281. 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.
/Josh Skroupa/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
March 19, 2026