DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
Claims 2-12 and 14 as filed on 06/17/2026 are pending and herewith considered as indicated below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
11. Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In regards to Claim 5, “The longitudinal direction” as used in line 3, lacks proper antecedent basis. It appears the longitudinal direction is intended to recite “direction”.
In regards to Claim 8, “the attached adjustable formwork” in method step C lacks proper antecedent basis, it appears the attached adjustable formwork is intended to recite “an attached adjustable formwork”
In regards to Claim 8, “the formwork” in method step D lacks proper antecedent basis, it appears the formwork is intended to recite “a formwork”
In regards to Claim 8, “the material” in step G lacks proper antecedent basis, it appears the material is intended to recite “liquid material”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
14. 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.
Claim(s) 8, 2-7, 9-12, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brewka et al (US 20080173788 A1) (Herein with Brewka) in view of Jang Yun Gun (KR 20210023098 A)(Herein with Gun) and Hagerich et al. (US 20220195741 A1)(Herein with Hagerich).
In regards to Claim 8, Brewka discloses a method [Claims 15-16] for producing a wall element [Unnumbered, Fig 1, Abstract](see examiners comments), comprising the steps of
A) setting up [Fig 1, showing an adjustable form work set up] an adjustable formwork (10) which comprises at least one at least one formwork panel (10) [Fig 1],
B) constructing [Fig 1, Showing a constructed system] a system [Unnumbered, Fig 1] (see examiners comments) for producing a wall element [Unnumbered, Fig 1, Abstract](see examiners comments) parallel to the adjustable formwork (10), the system [Unnumbered, Fig 1] (see examiners comments) comprising at least one at least one formwork panel (10) [Fig 1] , at least one connection component (128) [Fig 1
wherein the at least one formwork panel (10) [Fig 1] comprises a framework (14) [Fig 1] and a formwork skin (12) [Fig 3], wherein the framework (14) [Fig 1] has a plurality of longitudinal struts (28) [Fig 1] and a plurality of cross struts (30) [Fig 1], wherein the longitudinal struts (28) [Fig 1] and the cross struts (30) [Fig 1] are arranged substantially perpendicular to one another [Fig 1], wherein the undercut [Unnumbered, Fig 2] (see examiners comments) is provided for the form-fitting and frictionally engaged connection (128) to the formwork interface [Unnumbered, Fig 6] (see examiners comments) of a connection component (128) [Fig 1],
wherein the at least one connection component (128) [Fig 1] comprises at least one frame interface [Unnumbered, Fig 6] (see examiners comments) which is provided for releasable connection (132, bolts are known to be removeable) [Fig 4] to the frame section [Abstract] and comprises at least one formwork interface [Unnumbered, Fig 6] (see examiners comments) which is provided for releasable connection (132, 134) to the at least one formwork panel (10) [Fig 1], wherein the formwork interface [Unnumbered, Fig 6] (see examiners comments) comprises at least one clamping element [Unnumbered, Fig 4] (see examiners comments) and the clamping element [Unnumbered, Fig 4] (see examiners comments) comprises at least two gripping arms (144, 166) [0045], wherein at least one of the gripping arms (144, 166) [0045] is designed to be movable [Fig 4] relative to another gripping arm (144, 166) [0045], wherein the distance between the at least two gripping arms (144, 166) [0045] is designed to be adjustable [0045, “Slides downwardly along the pins”] [Fig 7],
wherein the at least one connection component (128) [Fig 1] is connected, via the at least one frame interface [Unnumbered, Fig 6] (see examiners comments) to the at least one frame section [Abstract] and at least one connection component (128) [Fig 1] is connected via the at least one formwork interface [Unnumbered, Fig 6] (see examiners comments) to the at least one at least one formwork panel (10) [Fig 1],
C) fastening [Fig 2, Showing Fastening] a reinforcement [0009] (15) to the attached adjustable formwork (10) [Fig 1], wherein the reinforcement (15) is fastened from the frame section (10, Gun, as modified and introduced below) [Fig 1],
D) rotating the system [Unnumbered, Fig 1] (see examiners comments) until the at least one formwork panel (10) [Fig 1] and the adjustable formwork (10) delimit the spatial region in which the wall element [Unnumbered, Fig 1, Abstract](see examiners comments) is provided, and wherein the reinforcement [0009] (15) is arranged between the adjustable formwork (10) [Fig 1] and formwork skin (12) [Fig 3], and wherein the frame section (10) [Fig 1] is arranged on the side of the at least one formwork panel (10) [Fig 1] opposite the adjustable formwork (10) [Fig 1],
E) preparing [Fig 10, paragraph 0058, showing the formwork prepared] the formwork (10) [Fig 10] for the filling of a liquid material (116) [0043 and 0058] between the adjustable formwork (10) and the closing formwork (10) [Fig 10],
F) filling [Fig 10, paragraph 0058, showing and detailing formwork filled with liquid material] the formwork (10) with a liquid material (116) [0043],
G) curing [Fig 10, paragraph 0058, showing and detailing the formwork cured with liquid material] the material (116) [0043], whereby it forms the wall element [Unnumbered, Fig 1, Abstract](see examiners comments) together with the reinforcement [0009, Hagerich] (15),
H) removing (not shown, paragraph 0012 and 0058 detailing removal) adjustable formwork (10) and system [Unnumbered, Fig 1] (see examiners comments).
However, Brewka fails to disclose at least one frame section
wherein the frame section comprises a plurality of vertical posts and a plurality of horizontal bars and the frame section extends in three spatial directions.
wherein the gripping arms of the clamping element engage in the undercut on the framework of the at least one formwork panel at least in regions, as a result of which at least one connection between the formwork interface and the at least one formwork panel is present,
and the formwork skin can be releasably fastened to the framework, wherein, in a connected state, the formwork skin rests on at least a portion of the longitudinal struts and the cross struts wherein at least a part of the longitudinal struts and/or cross struts has an undercut which is oriented in the longitudinal direction of the longitudinal struts and/or cross struts.
wherein this connection can be arbitrarily positioned along the undercut, whereby the relative position between the connection component and the at least one formwork panel is designed be adjustable in a direction parallel the running direction of the undercut,
wherein, when the system is constructed, the frame section supports and positions the at least one formwork panel and the system can be used in a free-standing manner.
However, 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 clamping element and connection of Brewka to rearrange the gripping arms of the clamping element and the connection component in order to use the gripping arms of the clamping element as part of the formwork interface and the connection element as park of the framework interface. It has been held that rearrangement of parts is considered within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019. When modified, the gripping arms of the clamping element engage in the undercut on the framework of the at least one formwork panel at least in regions, as a result of which at least one connection between the formwork interface and the at least one formwork panel is present, wherein this connection can be arbitrarily positioned along the undercut, whereby the relative position between the connection component and the at least one formwork panel is designed be adjustable in a direction parallel the running direction of the undercut. Furthermore, allowing for the gripping arms to be set and engage in the undercuts, allowing for movement if necessary.
Furthermore, Gun discloses at least one frame section (10) [Fig 1]
wherein the frame section (10) [Fig 1] comprises a plurality of vertical posts (40,41) [Fig 2] and a plurality of horizontal bars [Unnumbered, Fig 2] (see examiners comments) and the frame section (10) [Fig 1] extends in three spatial directions [Fig 2] ,
wherein, when the system [Unnumbered, Fig 1, Brewka] (see examiners comments) is constructed, the frame section (10) [Fig 1] supports and positions the at least one formwork panel (10, Brewka) [Fig 1] and the system [Unnumbered, Fig 1, Brewka] (see examiners comments) can be used in a free-standing manner [Fig 2, showing free standing].
Based on the prior art relied upon above, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the formwork system as disclosed by Brewka to include the frame section; wherein the frame section comprises a plurality of vertical posts and a plurality of horizontal and the frame section extends in three spatial directions, wherein the frame section can be used as a free-standing frame section after being separated from the at least one formwork panel as disclosed by Gun. When modified, the framework would connect to the formwork system by clamping element sporadically placed for connection (as modified above) with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide access to complete the formwork for the wall element.
Furthermore, Hagerich discloses
and the formwork skin (12, Brewka) [Fig 3] can be releasably fastened (15) to the framework (14, Brewka) [Fig 1], wherein, in a connected state, the formwork skin (12, Brewka) [Fig 3] rests on at least a portion [Fig 1, Brewka] of the longitudinal struts (28, Brewka) [Fig 1] and the cross struts (30, Brewka) [Fig 1], wherein at least a part of the longitudinal struts (28, Brewka) [Fig 1] and/or cross struts (30, Brewka) [Fig 1] has an undercut [Unnumbered, Fig 2, Brewka] (see examiners comments) which is oriented in the longitudinal direction [Fig 2, Brewka] of the longitudinal struts (28, Brewka) [Fig 1] and/or cross struts (30, Brewka) [Fig 1]
Based on the prior art relied upon above, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of producing a wall element by Brewka to further include and the formwork skin can be releasably fastened to the framework, wherein, in a connected state, the formwork skin rests on at least a portion of the longitudinal struts and the cross struts, wherein at least a part of the longitudinal struts and/or cross struts has an undercut which is oriented in the longitudinal direction of the longitudinal struts and/or cross struts as disclosed by as disclosed by Hagerich. When modified, When modified, the formwork skin would connect to the formwork system by anchoring elements (rivets) placed for connection with a reasonable expectation of success in order to enhance durability during liquid curing as well as ease of transportation when used repeatedly.
Additionally, the language “when and can be” is language that suggests or makes optional the subsequent limitation or limitations. Language that suggests or makes optional but does not require steps to be performed or does not limit a claim to a particular structure does not limit the scope of a claim or claim limitation. See § MPEP 2103 (C).
In regards to Claim 2, Brewka as modified discloses the method [Claims 15-16] according to claim 8, wherein a support element (152,154) [Fig 7] is provided which is connected to the formwork interface [Unnumbered, Fig 6] (see examiners comments) and the frame interface [Unnumbered, Fig 6] (see examiners comments) , wherein the formwork interface [Unnumbered, Fig 6] (see examiners comments) and the frame interface [Unnumbered, Fig 6] (see examiners comments) are arranged at a distance from one another on the support element (152,154) [Fig 7], and the support element (152,154) [Fig 7] has a longitudinal axis and the formwork interface [Unnumbered, Fig 6] (see examiners comments) and the frame interface [Unnumbered, Fig 6] (see examiners comments) are arranged at a distance from one another along the longitudinal axis [Fig 3], and wherein the longitudinal axis is oriented substantially parallel [Fig 3] to the surface of the formwork skin (12) [Fig 3] or substantially perpendicular to the surface of the formwork skin (12) [Fig 3].
In regards to Claim 3, Brewka as modified discloses the method [Claims 15-16] according to claim 2, wherein two frame interfaces [Unnumbered, Fig 6] (see examiners comments) and two formwork interfaces [Unnumbered, Fig 6] (see examiners comments) are provided, which are each arranged at a distance [Fig 4] from one another on a common support element (152,154) [Fig 7] and the clamping element [Unnumbered, Fig 4] (see examiners comments) has an unlocking mechanism [0045, “Self-Locking”] [Fig 6] which can be actuated by a simple linear or rotational movement [0045] , wherein the form fitting and frictionally engaged connection between the formwork interface [Unnumbered, Fig 6] (see examiners comments) and the at least one formwork panel (10) [Fig 1] can be canceled by actuating the unlocking mechanism [0045, “Self-Locking”] [Fig 6].
Additionally, the language “can be” is language that suggests or makes optional the subsequent limitation or limitations. Language that suggests or makes optional but does not require steps to be performed or does not limit a claim to a particular structure does not limit the scope of a claim or claim limitation. See § MPEP 2103 (C).
In regards to Claim 4, Brewka discloses the method [Claims 15-16] according to claim 8, wherein the direction of movement [Fig 5, Showing two separate variants] of at least one of the gripping arms (144, 166) [0045] of the clamping element [Unnumbered, Fig 4] (see examiners comments) is oriented substantially parallel [Fig 5, Right Connection Parallel to frame interface as modified] to the connection direction of the frame interface [Unnumbered, Fig 6] (see examiners comments) and/or substantially parallel to the surface of the formwork skin (12) [Fig 3], and/or the direction of movement of at least one of the gripping arms (144, 166) [0045] of the clamping element [Unnumbered, Fig 4] (see examiners comments) is oriented substantially perpendicular to the connection direction of the frame interface [Unnumbered, Fig 6] (see examiners comments) and/or perpendicular to the surface of the formwork skin (12) [Fig 3].
In regards to Claim 5, Brewka discloses the method [Claims 15-16] according to claim 8, wherein the undercut [Unnumbered, Fig 2] (see examiners comments) on the framework (14) [Fig 1] of the at least one formwork panel (10) [Fig 1] is designed as a groove [Fig 2] which is oriented in the longitudinal direction [Fig 2] of the longitudinal struts (28) [Fig 1] and/or cross structs (30) [Fig 1], wherein the groove [Fig 2] has a U-shaped, rectangular [Fig 2] or curved cross-section.
In regards to Claim 6, Brewka discloses the method [Claims 15-16] according to claim 8, wherein at least two connection components (128) [Fig 1] are provided and each connection component (128) [Fig 1] has at least two formwork interfaces [Unnumbered, Fig 6] (see examiners comments), and the at least one formwork panel (10) [Fig 1] has a plurality of cross struts (30) [Fig 1] with an undercut [Unnumbered, Fig 2] (see examiners comments) arranged thereon at least in regions [Fig 6], wherein the distance between the at least two formwork interfaces [Unnumbered, Fig 6] (see examiners comments) on the connection component (128) [Fig 1] corresponds to an integer multiple of the distance between two adjacent cross struts (30) [Fig 1] of the at least one formwork panel (10) [Fig 1].
In regards to Claim 7, Brewka as modified discloses the method [Claims 15-16] according to claim 8. wherein the connection component (128) [Fig 1] forms a vertical post [Fig 7, Showing Vertical Configuration] of the frame section (10, Gun) [Fig 1] in functional combination [When modified] , and the frame interface [Unnumbered, Fig 6] (see examiners comments) is formed by at least one interface [Connection Component as modified] which corresponds to a connection interface [As modified] within the frame section (10, Gun) [Fig 1] in terms of shape and size.
Furthermore, the language “corresponds to” is not interpreted to mean matches or is the same. Merriam Webster defines corresponds to as “to compare closely” or “to be equivalent”.
In regards to Claim 9, Brewka as modified discloses the method [Claims 15-16] according to claim 8. Gun discloses the system [Unnumbered, Fig 1, Brewka] (see its corrected examiners comments) is constructed on the underlying surface [Fig 1 showing underlaying surface] as in the application or the is placed on the underlying surface [Fig 1 showing underlaying surface] for construction.
In regards to Claim 11, Brewka as modified discloses the method [Claims 15-16] according to claim 8. Gun discloses wherein the system [Unnumbered, Fig 1, Brewka] (see examiners comments) is used in a free-standing manner [Fig 2, showing free standing] without additional support elements (152,154, Brewka) [Fig 7].
In regards to Claim 12, Brewka as modified discloses the method [Claims 15-16] according to claim 2, and the support element (152,154) [Fig 7]. However, fails to disclose wherein the support element is rod-shaped.
However, it would have been obvious as a matter of choice to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the support element of Brewka to have rod in shape in order to provide a simple, easy to manufacture shape. In general, it has been held that a mere change in shape of a component is within the level of ordinary skill in the art absent persuasive evidence that a particular configuration of the claimed shape is significant. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149.
In regards to Claim 14, Brewka as modified discloses the method [Claims 15-16] according to claim 8, wherein in method step E), anchors (62) are introduced which connect the adjustable formwork (10) and the at least one formwork panel (10) [Fig 10] to one another.
15. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brewka et al (US 20080173788 A1) (Herein with Brewka) in view of Jang Yun Gun (KR 20210023098 )(Herein with Gun) and Hagerich et al. (US 20220195741 A1)(Herein with Hagerich) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Philippe (US 20020003061 A1).
In regards to Claim 10, Brewka as modified discloses the method [Claims 15-16]
according to claim 8, in method step B).
However, fails to disclose the system is anchored in the ground or a support is attached to the system and points from the formwork panel into the side opposite the frame section.
Furthermore, Philippe discloses
the system [Unnumbered, Fig 1, Brewka] (see examiners
comments) is anchored in the ground or a support [Multiple elements combined] (see Fig 1, See
examiners comments) is attached to the system [Unnumbered, Fig 1, Brewka] (see examiners comments) and points from the formwork panel into the side opposite [Fig 1, Showing back side] the frame section (10, Gun) [Fig 1].
Based on the prior art relied upon above, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the formwork system in the method step B as disclosed by Brewka to include a support attached to the system and points from the formwork panel into the side opposite the frame section as disclosed by Philippe. When modified, the support system allows for an additional redundancy support mechanism during installation, allowing for support on both the frame side as well as the side opposite the frame.
Examiners Comments
PNG
media_image1.png
358
366
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Gun, Figure 2
PNG
media_image2.png
376
455
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig 2, Berwka
PNG
media_image3.png
503
572
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Brewka, Fig 1
PNG
media_image4.png
482
501
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Brewka, Figure 6
Response to Arguments
1. Objections to the Claims: Applicant' s argument with respect to the claim objections is persuasive and objection to the claims is hereby withdrawn.
2. Objections to the Drawings: Applicant' s argument with respect to the drawings is not persuasive and objection to the drawings is hereby maintained.
3. Double Patenting Rejection: Applicant' s argument with respect to the double patenting rejection is persuasive and the double patenting rejection is hereby withdrawn.
4. Claim Rejections 35 USC 112: Applicant' s argument with respect to the claims rejected under 35 USC 112 is partially and rejection of the claims pursuant to 35 USC 112 is hereby partially withdrawn but for those listed in the above, to which no response or amendment is provided.
5. Claim Rejections 35 USC 103: Applicant' s arguments with respect to all claims have been considered but are not persuasive.
In regards to Claims 1-9 and 11-14 Applicant recites, the proposed modification as disclosed in the office action is for the purpose of modifying the operation of Brewka.
Examiners Response: The modification would not modify the operation of Brewka. As disclosed in Brewka [Abstract] “A forming panel is provided which is particularly useful as a large, crane-set forming panel for forming concrete walls”. Additionally, as disclosed throughout Brewka, the gripping arms and connection element is used for scaffolding [See Paragraph 0045 “As may be seen in 5 and 6, the bracket arm 144 may be of different lengths, such that a bracket arm 144A may be provided which is longer than bracket arm 144 for holding a wider support such as a scaffold, or for holding a waler 146 or a strongback 148 in overlapping relationship as shown in FIGS. 1, 2 and 5.” And “This configuration provides a self-locking feature which helps to securely hold a waler, strongback, scaffold or other support against the frame of the forming panel unless a positive upward force is applied against a bottom edge 176. A hole 178 is provided at the outboard edge of the bracket arms 146 and 146A to permit an adjustable wall brace or other form hardware to be conveniently mounted by a pin or other fastener to the support bracket when mounted on the frame of the forming panel 10. By loosening the bolts and nuts 132 and 134, the shiftable waler bracket 126 may be shifted along the bolt slot for selective positioning along the rear side of the forming panel 10.”]. The purpose of the gripper arm and connection element is specifically used for connecting the wall element to a scaffold/framework.
Additionally, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
Conclusion
16. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ZAKARIA K. AL-ASWAR whose telephone number is (571)272-6335. The examiner can normally be reached M through F 7:30 to 5PM.
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 Mattei can be reached at 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 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.
/Z.K.A./Examiner, Art Unit 3635
/KYLE J. WALRAED-SULLIVAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Prosecution Insights