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.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on May 29, 2026 has been entered.
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 4,368,606 (Hoshino) and US 9,562,321 (Manabe).
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 the threadless rod contact surfaces having a groove structure consisting of parallel grooves that forms a surface roughness Ra of 7.0 µm or greater.
Hoshino teaches it is known in the art of threaded rod connectors to form a threadless rod contact surface (22) with a groove structure consisting of parallel grooves in order to obtain the same effect as a threaded connection in a faster period of time (see column 2, lines 27-31, and column 2, line 68, through column 3, line 9). 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 the threadless rod contact surfaces have a groove structure consisting of parallel grooves, as taught in Hoshino, in order to obtain the same effect as a threaded connection in a faster period of time.
The combination of Dahl and Hoshino does not expressly teach the rod contact surfaces forming surface roughness Ra of 7.0 µm or greater.
Manabe teaches it is known in the art of wedge-type rod connectors to form contact surfaces (42) with a surface roughness Ra of 7.0 µm or greater in order to provide a high fixing load (see column 4, lines 30-34). 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 Hoshino such that at least one of the rod contact surfaces having a surface roughness Ra of 7.0 µm or greater, as taught in Manabe, in order to provide a high fixing load.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Dahl, Hoshino, and Manabe each of the rod contact surfaces (28 of Dahl; 22 of Hoshino) is threadless (see “teeth” in column 4, line 9 of Dahl; column 2, lines 27-31, and column 2, line 68, through column 3, line 9 of Hoshino) and has a surface roughness Ra of 7.0 pm or greater (see column 4, lines 30-34 of Manabe).
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, Hoshino, and Manabe 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, Hoshino, and Manabe, and further in view of US 2019/0234443 (Dahl).
The combination of Dahl, Hoshino, and Manabe 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 the combination of Dahl, Hoshino, and Manabe 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, Hoshino, and Manabe, and further in view of US 8,979,211 (Marshall).
The combination of Dahl, Hoshino, and Manabe discloses the threaded rod connector according to claim 8, wherein the tapered surface (9 of Dahl) is conical (see Figure 2 of Dahl), 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, Hoshino, and Manabe 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, Hoshino, and Manabe, and further in view of US 9,010,165 (Griggs).
The combination of Dahl, Hoshino, and Manabe 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, Hoshino, and Manabe 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, Hoshino, and Manabe 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 with respect to amended independent claim 8 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 (US 2004/0096288 to Haug) 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 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
June 16, 2026
Prosecution Insights