DETAILED ACTION
Continuation Reissue Application
The instant reissue application is a continuation reissue of earlier reissue Application No. 17/091,656 and, thus, is a second application for reissue of US Patent No. 10,156,050 B1. See MPEP 1451, 35 USC 251(b), and 37 CFR 1.177.
Earlier reissue Application No. 17/091,656 was concluded with the issuance of US Reissued Patent No. RE49,588 E on July 25, 2023.
Maintenance Fees
MPEP 2504 explains that, for maintenance fees due on or after January 16, 2018, separate maintenance fees must be paid in:
Each reissued patent in force on (i.e., issued before) the maintenance fee due date. This includes all reissued patents that replace the same original patent.
An original patent that is not surrendered because one or more applications for reissue of that original patent are still pending on the maintenance fee due date.
USPTO records show that the four-year maintenance fee has been timely filed and, thus, maintenance fee payments are up to date for original US Patent No. 10,156,050 B1. No maintenance fee is yet due for US Reissued Patent No. RE49,588 E.
Status of Submission
This Office action is responsive to applicant’s response filed on October 21, 2025, which has been entered.
Claims Subject to Examination
New reissue claims 17-20, 22, 24, 25, 27, 28, 30-33, 35, 37, 38, 40, 41, 43-46, 48, 50, 51, 53, 54, 56-59, 61, 63, 64, 66 and 67 are subject to examination. Patent claims 1-16 and reissue claims 21, 23, 26, 29, 34, 36, 39, 42, 47, 49, 52, 55, 60, 62, 65 and 68 have been canceled.
Objections to Amendments – Formalities
The specification amendments filed on October 21, 2025 are objected to because they fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.173(b)(1), (d) and (g). Changes to the specification must be made by submission of the entire text of any new or rewritten paragraph, with all amendments made relative to the patent specification, which was in effect as of the date of filing the reissue application. Matter to be omitted must be enclosed in single brackets. Matter to be added must be underlined. The precise point in the specification where any new or rewritten paragraph is located must be identified.
The specification amendments are improper because:
The amendments are made relative to the prior amendment filed on February 28, 2025. All amendments must be made relative to the patent specification, which was in effect as of the date of filing the reissue application. That is, all bracketing and underlining must show changes made relative to the patent specification in effect on the filing date of the reissue application (not relative to a prior amendment).
The instruction given with respect to the new paragraphs added after the title is complete. Rather than simply stating “In col. 1, at l. 4, after the title”, the instruction should indicate that the text that follows is to be added to the specification.
The amendments must be placed into compliance with 37 CFR 1.173(b)-(g) in response to this Office action.
Original Disclosure – Definition
The instant application seeks reissue of US Patent No. 10,156,050 B1, which issued from US Application No. 16/120,239. The “original disclosure” is the disclosure of Application No. 16/120,239 as filed on September 1, 2018. Any subject matter added to the disclosure during either the prosecution of the instant reissue application or the earlier-concluded prosecution of Application No. 16/120,239 does not constitute part of the “original disclosure”.
Prohibition of New Matter
35 USC 132(a) prohibits any amendment that introduces new matter into the disclosure of the invention.
35 USC 251(a) prohibits the introduction of new matter into the application for reissue.
Objection to Amendment – New Matter
The amendment filed on October 21, 2025 is objected to under 35 USC 132(a) and 35 USC 251(a) because it improperly introduces new matter for the reasons given below.
New reissue claim 17 recites “wherein the coupling element comprises a curving configuration and provides a pressure-connective, a secure attachment or a coupling of the coupling element…” (ll. 11-12). According to the patent specification, the coupling element may be any number of elements having a curving or angular configuration integrated into the screed plate enabling a pressure-connective, secure attachment or coupling of the coupling element to the conductor front side. However, the new claim limitation differs from this disclosure by more broadly reciting “a pressure-connective, a secure attachment or a coupling”. For example, this new claim limitation defines (or at least implies) a distinction between “a pressure-connective” and “a secure attachment”, but such a distinction is not supported by the original disclosure. Further, this new claim limitation defines (or at least implies) a distinction between “a pressure-connective” and “a coupling”, but such a distinction is not supported by the original disclosure.
New reissue claim 17 recites “wherein the screed plate is configured to receive indirect heat from a heating element” (l. 16). The original disclosure describes (i) a heating element 151 located between a plate bottom 127 of a material matting apparatus 122 and a top side of a structural/conductor plate 121, (ii) the heating element 151 being immediately against the top side of the plate 121 so as to provide direct heat to the plate 121, and (iii) the plate 121 heat-conductively attaches at its bottom side to the screed plate top side 104 to provide indirect heat to the screed plate 101. Thus, the heating element 151 is disclosed as being located in a specific manner relative to the structural/conductor plate 121, and the plate 121 is disclosed as being attached in a particular fashion to the screed plate 101, such that the heating element 151 and the plate 121 function together to provide indirect heat to the screed plate. However, the original disclosure fails to describe the screed plate as being “configured to receive” (i.e., as being structured in some particular fashion so as to be equipped to receive) indirect heat from a heating element.
New reissue claim 18 recites “further comprising two screed plate attaching means positioned at the screed backside”. According to the patent specification, the screed plate has at least two screed plate attaching means located on the screed top side. See col. 2, ll. 29-30; col. 5, ll. 41-43. However, there is no support in the original disclosure for the attaching means being “positioned at the screed backside”. The newly claimed “positioned at the screed backside” encompasses constructions in which the attaching means is at the screed backside such that (i) no space exists between the attaching means and the screed backside, and (ii) the attaching means is not located at and/or does not extend from the screed top side. There is no support in the original disclosure for such constructions. Thus, the scope of the claim exceeds the scope of the original disclosure.
New reissue claim 24 recites “wherein the screed plate is configured to receive indirect heat from a heating element” (l. 14). See the explanation above with respect to claim 17.
New reissue claim 27 recites “wherein the coupling element comprises a curving configuration and provides a pressure-connective, a secure attachment or a coupling of the coupling element…” See the explanation above with respect to claim 17.
New reissue claim 30 recites “a heating element configured to provide indirect heat to a screed plate” (l. 2). The original disclosure describes (i) a heating element 151 located between a plate bottom 127 of a material matting apparatus 122 and a top side of a structural/conductor plate 121, (ii) the heating element 151 being immediately against the top side of the plate 121 so as to provide direct heat to the plate 121, and (iii) the plate 121 heat-conductively attaches at its bottom side to the screed plate top side 104 to provide indirect heat to the screed plate 101. Thus, the heating element 151 is disclosed as being located in a specific manner relative to the structural/conductor plate 121, and the plate 121 is disclosed as being attached in a particular fashion to the screed plate 101, such that the heating element 151 and the plate 121 function together to provide indirect heat to the screed plate. However, the original disclosure fails to describe the heating element as being “configured to provide” (i.e., as being structured in some particular fashion so as to be equipped to provide) indirect heat to a screed plate. Instead, the disclosure describes a heating element that is located in order to function to provide heat to a structural/conductor plate, with the plate being attached to the screed plate in order to function to provide (conduct) the heat to a screed plate. The scope of the current claim language exceeds this supporting disclosure by allowing for the heating element to be structured in a specific way so as to deliver indirect heat to a screed plate in any and every possible manner, including apart from conducting the heat through an intermediate plate.
New reissue claim 30 recites “the screed plate engageable with the structural-conductor plate proximal to the conductor bottom side of the structural-conductor plate” (ll. 8-9). According to the patent specification, (i) the coupling element enables a pressure-connective coupling of the coupling element to the structural/conductor plate, (ii) the conductor front side securely and freely receives the appropriately matching and paired coupling element, and (iii) the coupling element may be any number of elements having a curving or angular configuration integrated into the screed plate enabling a pressure-connective, secure attachment or coupling of the coupling element to the conductor front side. See col. 2, ll. 47-49 and 58-60; col. 6, ll. 16-21 and 45-49. Further, according to the patent specification, (i) the screed plate has at least two screed plate attaching means located on the screed top side, (ii) the structural/conductor plate comprises at least two screed plate retaining means located on the conductor bottom side, and (iii) the at least two retaining means securely receive the appropriately matching and paired at least two attaching means. See col. 2, ll. 29-30, 43-45 and 56-58; col. 5, ll. 41-43; col. 6, ll. 7-9 and 41-45. However, there is no support in the original disclosure for the screed plate being engageable with the structural/conductor plate “proximal to the conductor bottom side”. The newly claimed “proximal to the conductor bottom side” encompasses constructions in which the screed plate is engageable with the structural/conductor plate at a location near the conductor bottom side but spaced some distance from the conductor bottom side. There is no support in the original disclosure for such a construction. Thus, the scope of the claim exceeds the scope of the original disclosure.
New reissue claim 30 recites “wherein the coupling element comprises a curving configuration and provides a pressure-connective, a secure attachment or a coupling of the coupling element…” (ll. 21-23). See the explanation above with respect to claim 17.
New reissue claim 31 recites “further comprising two screed plate attaching means positioned at the screed backside”. See the explanation above with respect to claim 18.
New reissue claim 37 recites “a heating element configured to provide indirect heat to a screed plate” (l. 2). See the explanation above with respect to claim 30.
New reissue claim 37 recites “a conductor front side extending from a first edge of the conductor top side to a first edge of the conductor bottom side; a conductor backside opposite the conductor front side, the conductor backside extending from a second edge of the conductor top side to a second edge of the conductor bottom side” (ll. 6-9). According to the patent specification, the structural/conductor plate comprises a conductor top side and an opposing conductor bottom side, and further comprises a conductor front side and an opposing conductor back side. See col. 6, ll. 3-6. However, there is no support in the original disclosure for the conductor front side “extending from a first edge of the conductor top side to a first edge of the conductor bottom side”, or for the conductor back side “extending from a second edge of the conductor top side to a second edge of the conductor bottom side”. The specification makes no mention of first and second edges of the conductor top side, or first and second edges of the conductor bottom side. The specification is silent as to the extent of the conductor front side and the extent of the conductor back side. Fig. 6 depicts the conductor front and back sides, but does not label edges of the conductor top and bottom sides and does not establish that the conductor front and back sides necessarily extend between such edges.
New reissue claim 37 recites “the screed plate selectively engageable with the structural-conductor plate” (l. 10). However, the patent specification makes no mention of the screed plate being “selectively engageable with” the structural/conductor plate. The “selectively engageable with” limitation indicates that, and encompasses constructions in which, the user or some other agency is able to make a selection as to how and/or when the screed plate is engaged with the structural/conductor plate. This subject matter does not find support in the original disclosure.
New reissue claim 37 recites “the screed plate selectively engageable with the structural-conductor plate proximal to the conductor bottom side of the structural-conductor plate” (ll. 10-11). As explained above with respect to claim 30, there is no support in the original disclosure for the screed plate being engageable with the structural/conductor plate “proximal to the conductor bottom side”. The newly claimed “proximal to the conductor bottom side” encompasses constructions in which the screed plate is engageable with the structural/conductor plate at a location near the conductor bottom side but spaced some distance from the conductor bottom side. There is no support in the original disclosure for such a construction. Thus, the scope of the claim exceeds the scope of the original disclosure.
New reissue claim 40 recites “wherein the coupling element comprises a curving configuration and provides a pressure-connective, a secure attachment or a coupling of the coupling element…” See the explanation above with respect to claim 17.
New reissue claim 43 recites “a heating element configured to provide indirect heat to a screed plate” (l. 2). See the explanation above with respect to claim 30.
New reissue claim 43 recites “the screed plate including: a paving surface side; and a plurality of mounds, hummocks or topographical highs extending from the paving surface side” (ll. 3-6). According to the patent specification, Fig. 7 shows diamond-shaped open spaces that represent mounds, moguls, hummocks or topographical highs of the crisscross pattern 133 in the plurality of corrugations 131. See col. 7, ll. 30-38. However, there is no support in the original disclosure for the mounds, hummocks or topographical highs “extending from” a paving surface side of the screed plate. It would appear from the patent specification and drawings that the mounds, hummocks or topographical highs define a paving surface side (rather than extend from a paving surface side) of the screed plate.
New reissue claim 43 recites “wherein the coupling element comprises a curving configuration and provides a pressure-connective, a secure attachment or a coupling of the coupling element…” (ll. 16-17). See the explanation above with respect to claim 17.
New reissue claim 44 recites “further comprising two screed plate attaching means positioned at the screed backside”. See the explanation above with respect to claim 18.
New reissue claim 50 recites “a heating element configured to provide indirect heat to a screed plate” (l. 2). See the explanation above with respect to claim 30.
New reissue claim 50 recites “the screed plate including: a paving surface side; and a plurality of mounds, hummocks or topographical highs extending from the paving surface side” (ll. 3-6). See the explanation above with respect to claim 43.
New reissue claim 53 recites “wherein the coupling element comprises a curving configuration and provides a pressure-connective, a secure attachment or a coupling of the coupling element…” See the explanation above with respect to claim 17.
New reissue claim 56 recites “a heating element configured to provide indirect heat to a screed plate” (l. 2). See the explanation above with respect to claim 30.
New reissue claim 56 recites “the screed plate including: a paving surface side; and a plurality of mounds, hummocks or topographical highs extending from the paving surface side” (ll. 3-6). See the explanation above with respect to claim 43.
New reissue claim 56 recites “wherein the coupling element comprises a curving configuration and provides a pressure-connective, a secure attachment or a coupling of the coupling element…” (ll. 15-16). See the explanation above with respect to claim 17.
New reissue claim 57 recites “further comprising two screed plate attaching means positioned at the screed backside”. See the explanation above with respect to claim 18.
New reissue claim 58 recites “at least two screed plate retaining means located on the screed plate”. There is no support in the original disclosure for the retaining means being “located on the screed plate”. Instead, the attaching means are disclosed as being located on the screed plate, and the retaining means are disclosed as being located on the bottom side of the structural/conductor plate.
New reissue claim 63 recites “a heating element configured to provide indirect heat to a screed plate” (l. 2). See the explanation above with respect to claim 30.
New reissue claim 63 recites “the screed plate including: a paving surface side; and a plurality of mounds, hummocks or topographical highs extending from the paving surface side” (ll. 3-6). See the explanation above with respect to claim 43.
New reissue claim 63 recites “wherein the screed plate is releasably attachable to the
screed assembly” (1. 7). However, there is no support in the original disclosure for the screed
plate being broadly “releasably attachable to the screed assembly”. This newly claimed
limitation encompasses constructions in which the screed plate is capable of releasable
attachment to any and all possible components or portions of a screed assembly. In contrast, the
original disclosure only describes an embodiment in which the screed plate has (i) a coupling
element constructed to coupleably engage a front side of a structural/conductor plate, and (ii)
attaching means constructed to coupleably engage retaining means on a bottom side of the
structural/conductor plate. Thus, the scope of the claim greatly exceeds the scope of the original
disclosure.
New reissue claim 66 recites “wherein the coupling element comprises a curving configuration and provides a pressure-connective, a secure attachment or a coupling of the coupling element…” See the explanation above with respect to claim 17.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter added to the claims.
Reissue Oath/Declaration
The reissue declaration filed on May 4, 2023 is defective because applicant used the wrong form. Form PTO/SB/51 was for use with reissue applications filed prior to September 16, 2012. Form PTO/AIA /05 needs to be used for reissue applications filed on or after September 16, 2012 in order to fully comply with all of the requirements of 37 CFR 1.175 (which also requires compliance with 37 CFR 1.63, 1.64 or 1.67). See MPEP 1414-1414.02.
The reissue declaration filed on May 4, 2023 is also defective because it fails to specifically and properly identify at least one error which is relied upon to support the reissue application. See 37 CFR 1.175 and MPEP 1414-1414.01.
As required by 37 CFR 1.175(a), the reissue oath/declaration must specifically identify at least one error pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 251 being relied upon as the basis for reissue. In identifying the error, it is sufficient that the reissue oath/declaration identify a single word, phrase, or expression in the specification or in an original claim, and how it renders the original patent wholly or partly inoperative or invalid. It is not sufficient to merely state that applicant seeks to broaden or narrow the scope of a patent claim. Further, a statement in the reissue oath/declaration of “…failure to include a claim directed to…” and then reciting all the limitations of a newly added claim would not be considered a sufficient error statement because applicant has not pointed out what the other claims lacked that the newly added claim has, or vice versa.
The reissue declaration filed in the instant application on May 4, 2023 identifies the same error identified in the reissue declaration filed in parent reissue Application No. 17/091,656 on November 6, 2020.
Where a continuation reissue application is filed, and the parent reissue application is not abandoned, a copy of the reissue oath/declaration filed in the parent reissue application (or an essentially duplicate oath/declaration citing the same error) is improper under 35 U.S.C. 251 unless it is accompanied by a statement explaining compliance with 37 CFR 1.175(f)(2). If the same error corrected in the parent reissue application is also being corrected in the continuation reissue application, but the error is being corrected in a different way, a statement is needed to explain compliance with 37 CFR 1.175(f)(2). See MPEP 1414, subsection II(D). In this case, applicant has failed to explain why the filing of a reissue declaration citing the same error as the reissue declaration in the parent reissue application is sufficient to ensure that an error is correctly identified by the continuation reissue application. See MPEP 1451, subsection II(B).
Claim Construction
During examination, the pending claims are normally interpreted according to the broadest reasonable interpretation standard (hereinafter, the “BRI standard”). That is, claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification, and limitations in the specification are not read into the claims. See MPEP 2111 et seq.
An exception to the BRI standard occurs when the applicant acts as their own lexicographer. For this exception to apply, the applicant must clearly set forth a special definition of a claim term in the specification that differs from the plain and ordinary meaning it would otherwise possess. See MPEP 2111.01, subsection IV.
Another exception or special case occurs when a claim recites a means-plus-function limitation that must be interpreted in accordance with 35 USC 112 ¶ 6, or 35 USC 112(f). See MPEP 2181. According to the guidance provided by Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC, 792 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (en banc), 35 USC 112 ¶ 6 applies when the claim term fails to recite (i) sufficiently definite structure, and/or (ii) sufficient structure for performing the claimed function.
The following claim terms/limitations are construed by the examiner to aid in reexamination:
Claim Term:
Coupling element (claims 17, 24, 27, 30, 37, 40, 43, 50, 53, 56, 63 and 66)
Examiner’s Construction:
Any and all possible elements that (i) are integrated into a screed plate, (ii) have a curving or angular configuration that is appropriately matching and paired with a front side of a structural/conductor plate, and (iii) enable a pressure-connective, secure attachment or coupling of themselves to the front side of the structural/conductor plate
Examiner’s Explanation:
This term invokes 35 USC 112(f) because “element” is a generic placeholder for structure, and the claims do not recite sufficient structure for performing the claimed function. Thus, “coupling element” is synonymous with “means for coupling”.
According to the patent specification, (i) a coupling element is incorporated into the screed plate front side, (ii) the conductor front side securely and freely receives the appropriately matching and paired coupling element, and (iii) the coupling element may be any number of elements having a curving or angular configuration integrated into the screed plate enabling a pressure-connective, secure attachment or coupling of the coupling element to the conductor front side. See col. 2, ll. 28-29, 47-49 and 58-60; col. 5, ll. 40-41; col. 6, ll. 16-21 and 45-49.
While the specification states that the coupling element can be any number of elements having a curving or angular configuration integrated into the screed plate enabling a pressure-connective, secure attachment or coupling of the coupling element to the conductor front side, the specification fails to identify any specific element suited for this purpose. Further, while Figs. 2A-2B, 4B, 5 and 7 of the drawings show a coupling element in the form of a curved edge/lip extending upward from or at the front side of the screed plate, the drawings do not show the front side of the structural/conductor plate as being “appropriately matching and paired” with this curved edge/lip. Rather, Fig. 6 appears to show the front side of the structural/ conductor plate as having a tapered, inclined, angular and/or pointed construction, which does not appear to constitute a structure that is “appropriately matching and paired” with the curved edge/lip defining the coupling element.1 In addition, the specification does not explain how the curved edge/lip (i.e., coupling element) and the tapered, inclined, angular and/or pointed front side (i) are “appropriately matching and paired”, and (ii) form a pressure-connective, secure attachment or coupling. Still further, the specification does not describe and the drawings do not show any coupling element having an angular configuration and being capable of forming a pressure-connective, secure attachment or coupling.
Claim Term:
Attaching means (claims 18, 19, 24, 31, 32, 37, 44, 45, 50, 57, 58 and 63)
Examiner’s Construction:
Any and all possible structures that are (i) located on a top side of a screed plate, (ii) appropriately matched and paired with retaining means located on a bottom side of a structural/conductor plate, and (iii) capable of being received by the retaining means so as to attach the screed plate to the structural/conductor plate
Examiner’s Explanation:
This term invokes 35 USC 112(f) because “means” is a generic placeholder for structure, and the claims do not recite sufficient structure for performing the claimed function. Thus, “attaching means” is synonymous with “means for attaching”.
According to the patent specification, (i) the screed plate has at least two screed plate attaching means located on the screed top side, (ii) the structural/conductor plate comprises at least two screed plate retaining means located on the conductor bottom side, and (iii) the at least two retaining means securely receive the appropriately matching and paired at least two attaching means. See col. 2, ll. 29-30, 43-45 and 56-58; col. 5, ll. 41-43; col. 6, ll. 7-9 and 41-45.
The specification fails to identify any specific element or structure suited to serve as the “attaching means”. Further, Fig. 4B of the drawings provides only a generally schematic illustration of the “attaching means”. No cross hatching appears in Fig. 4B, indicating that the “attaching means” is not shown in cross section. It is impossible to ascertain with any certainty what the interior lines of the element 109 represent. Further, it is impossible to ascertain what the three-dimensional structure of the element 109 is since Fig. 4B provides only a two-dimensional representation. No additional views are provided in the drawings, and no explanation of the structure of element 109 is found in the specification.
Claim Term:
Retaining means (claims 19, 32, 45 and 58)
Examiner’s Construction:
Any and all possible structures that are (i) located on a bottom side of a structural/conductor plate, (ii) appropriately matched and paired with attaching means located on a top side of a screed plate, and (iii) capable of receiving the attaching means so as to attach the screed plate to the structural/conductor plate
Examiner’s Explanation:
This term invokes 35 USC 112(f) because “means” is a generic placeholder for structure, and the claims do not recite sufficient structure for performing the claimed function. Thus, “retaining means” is synonymous with “means for retaining”.
According to the patent specification, (i) the screed plate has at least two screed plate attaching means located on the screed top side, (ii) the structural/conductor plate comprises at least two screed plate retaining means located on the conductor bottom side, and (iii) the at least two retaining means securely receive the appropriately matching and paired at least two attaching means. See col. 2, ll. 29-30, 43-45 and 56-58; col. 5, ll. 41-43; col. 6, ll. 7-9 and 41-45.
The specification fails to identify any specific element or structure suited to serve as the “retaining means”. Further, Fig. 6 of the drawings provides only a schematic illustration of the “retaining means” using a generic black box. It is impossible to ascertain what the structure of element 126 is since Fig. 6 shows only a generic black box. No additional views are provided in the drawings, and no explanation of the structure of element 126 is found in the specification.
Listing of Prior Art
The following is a listing of the prior art cited in this Office action together with the shorthand reference used for each document (listed alphabetically):
“Baker”
US Publication No. 2002/0106244 A1
“Barton”
US Patent No. 3,775,018
“Birtchet”
US Patent No. 5,417,516
“Frampton et al.”
US Patent No. 5,397,199
“Jackson ‘595”
US Patent No. 2,643,595
“Jackson ‘766”
US Patent No. 2,261,766
“Lutz”
US Patent No. 4,865,487
“Mosel”
US Patent No. 2,185,645
“Mullen”
US Patent No. 1,733,198
“Pilla”
US Patent No. 3,140,500
“Rahn et al.”
US Publication No. 2002/0061227 A1
“Schaffer ‘060”
US Publication No. 2018/0266060 A1
“Schaffer ‘705”
US Design Patent No. D727,705 S
“Sovik”
US Patent No. 6,884,000 B2
“Swearingen”
US Patent No. 6,318,928 B1
“Weller et al.”
US Patent No. 1,591,593
“Wisniewski”
US Patent No. 2,685,236
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 251
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 251:
(a) IN GENERAL.—Whenever any patent is, through error, deemed wholly or partly inoperative or invalid, by reason of a defective specification or drawing, or by reason of the patentee claiming more or less than he had a right to claim in the patent, the Director shall, on the surrender of such patent and the payment of the fee required by law, reissue the patent for the invention disclosed in the original patent, and in accordance with a new and amended application, for the unexpired part of the term of the original patent. No new matter shall be introduced into the application for reissue.
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(b) MULTIPLE REISSUED PATENTS.—The Director may issue several reissued patents for distinct and separate parts of the thing patented, upon demand of the applicant, and upon payment of the required fee for a reissue for each of such reissued patents.
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(c) APPLICABILITY OF THIS TITLE.—The provisions of this title relating to applications for patent shall be applicable to applications for reissue of a patent, except that application for reissue may be made and sworn to by the assignee of the entire interest if the application does not seek to enlarge the scope of the claims of the original patent or the application for the original patent was filed by the assignee of the entire interest.
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(d) REISSUE PATENT ENLARGING SCOPE OF CLAIMS. No reissued patent shall be granted enlarging the scope of the claims of the original patent unless applied for within two years from the grant of the original patent.
GROUND 1: Claims 17-20, 22, 24, 25, 27, 28, 30-33, 35, 37, 38, 40, 41, 43-46, 48, 50, 51, 53, 54, 56-59, 61, 63, 64, 66 and 67 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 251 as being based upon a defective reissue oath/declaration. See 37 CFR 1.175. The nature of the defect(s) in the reissue oath/declaration is explained above.
GROUND 2: Claims 17-20, 22, 24, 25, 27, 28, 30-33, 35, 37, 38, 40, 41, 43-46, 48, 50, 51, 53, 54, 56-59, 61, 63, 64, 66 and 67 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 251 as being based upon new matter added to the patent for which reissue is sought. The added material which is not supported by the prior patent is explained above. Dependent claims are included in this rejection at least because of their dependencies.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
GROUND 3: Claims 17-20, 22, 24, 25, 27, 28, 30-33, 35, 37, 38, 40, 41, 43-46, 48, 50, 51, 53, 54, 56-59, 61, 63, 64, 66 and 67 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement because these claims recite new matter. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is explained above. Dependent claims are included in this rejection at least because of their dependencies.
GROUND 4: Claims 17-20, 22, 24, 25, 27, 28, 30-33, 35, 37, 38, 40, 41, 43-46, 48, 50, 51, 53, 54, 56-59, 61, 63, 64, 66 and 67 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. These claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
The Federal Circuit has repeatedly held that “the specification must teach those skilled in the art how to make and use the full scope of the claimed invention without ‘undue experimentation’.” Nevertheless, not everything necessary to practice the invention need be disclosed; all that is necessary is that one skilled in the art be able to practice the claimed invention, given the level of knowledge and skill in the art. With respect to the breadth of a claim, the relevant concern is whether the scope of enablement provided to one skilled in the art by the disclosure is commensurate with the scope of protection sought by the claims. In other words, the scope of the claims must be less than or equal to the scope of the enablement provided by the specification. See MPEP 2164.08.
Claims 17, 24, 43, 50, 56 and 63 recite “a coupling element positioned at the screed front side and constructed to coupleably engage the screed plate to a structural-conductor plate” (claim 17, ll. 9-10; claim 24, ll. 9-10; claim 43, ll. 14-15; claim 50, ll. 14-15; claim 56, ll. 13-14; claim 63, ll. 14-15). Claims 30 and 37 recite “a coupling element positioned at the screed front side and constructed to coupleably engage the screed plate to the structural-conductor plate” (claim 30, ll. 19-20; claim 37, ll. 21-22). Claims 17, 27, 30, 40, 43, 53, 56 and 66 recite “wherein the coupling element comprises a curving configuration and provides a pressure-connective, a secure attachment or a coupling of the coupling element with a front side of a structural-conductor plate” (claim 17, ll. 11-13; claim 30, ll. 21-23; claim 43, ll. 16-18; claim 56, ll. 15-17).
Claims 18, 31, 44 and 57 recite “further comprising two screed plate attaching means positioned at the screed backside.” Claims 24, 37, 50 and 63 recite “at least two screed plate attaching means” (claim 24, l. 11; claim 37, l. 23; claim 50, l. 16; claim 63, l. 16).
Claims 19, 32, 45 and 58 recite “wherein the two screed plate attaching means are configured to securely receive the at least two screed plate retaining means located on the road paver.”
Concerning the “coupling element” of claims 17, 24, 27, 30, 37, 40, 43, 50, 53, 56, 63 and 66:
The patent specification allows for this to be any and all possible elements that (i) are integrated into a screed plate, (ii) have a curving or angular configuration that is appropriately matching and paired with a front side of a structural/conductor plate, and (iii) enable a pressure-connective, secure attachment or coupling of themselves to the front side of the structural/ conductor plate. See the explanation in the Claim Construction section above.
The specification fails to identify any specific element suited to serve as the “coupling element”. Further, while Figs. 2A-2B, 4B, 5 and 7 of the drawings show a coupling element in the form of a curved edge/lip extending upward from or at the front side of the screed plate, the drawings do not show the front side of the structural/conductor plate as being “appropriately matching and paired” with this curved edge/lip. Rather, Fig. 6 appears to show the front side of the structural/conductor plate as having a tapered, inclined, angular and/or pointed construction, which does not appear to constitute a structure that is “appropriately matching and paired” with the curved edge/lip defining the coupling element.2 In addition, the specification does not explain how the curved edge/lip (i.e., coupling element) and the tapered, inclined, angular and/or pointed front side (i) are “appropriately matching and paired”, and (ii) form a pressure-connective, secure attachment or coupling. Still further, the specification does not describe and the drawings do not show any coupling element having an angular configuration and being capable of forming a pressure-connective, secure attachment or coupling.
Thus, the scope of the claims (encompassing any and all possible structures integrated into a screed plate and having a curving or angular configuration that is appropriately matching and paired with a front side of a structural/conductor plate to enable a pressure-connective, secure attachment or coupling) is far greater than the scope of enablement provided by the specification (describing no specific embodiment, or, at best, only one embodiment in which the coupling element is in the form of a curved edge/lip extending upward from or at the front side of the screed plate).
Concerning the “attaching means” of claims 18, 19, 24, 31, 32, 37, 44, 45, 50, 57, 58 and 63:
The patent specification allows for this to be any and all possible structures that are (i) located on a top side of a screed plate, (ii) appropriately matched and paired with retaining means located on a bottom side of a structural/conductor plate, and (iii) capable of being received by the retaining means so as to attach the screed plate to the structural/conductor plate. See the explanation in the Claim Construction section above.
The specification fails to identify any specific element or structure suited to serve as the “attaching means”. Further, Fig. 4B of the drawings provides only a generally schematic illustration of the “attaching means”. No cross hatching appears in Fig. 4B, indicating that the “attaching means” is not shown in cross section. It is impossible to ascertain with any certainty what the interior lines of the element 109 represent. Further, it is impossible to ascertain what the three-dimensional structure of the element 109 is since Fig. 4B provides only a two-dimensional representation. No additional views are provided in the drawings, and no explanation of the structure of element 109 is found in the specification.
Thus, the scope of the claims (encompassing any and all possible structures located on a top side of a screed plate and appropriately matched and paired with retaining means located on a bottom side of a structural/conductor plate so as to be capable of being received by the retaining means) is far greater than the scope of enablement provided by the specification (describing no specific embodiment).
Concerning the “retaining means” of claims 19, 32, 45 and 58:
The patent specification allows for this to be any and all possible structures that are (i) located on a bottom side of a structural/conductor plate, (ii) appropriately matched and paired with attaching means located on a top side of a screed plate, and (iii) capable of receiving the attaching means so as to attach the screed plate to the structural/conductor plate. See the explanation in the Claim Construction section above.
The specification fails to identify any specific element or structure suited to serve as the “retaining means”. Further, Fig. 6 of the drawings provides only a schematic illustration of the “retaining means” using a generic black box. It is impossible to ascertain what the structure of element 126 is since Fig. 6 shows only a generic black box. No additional views are provided in the drawings, and no explanation of the structure of element 126 is found in the specification.
Thus, the scope of the claims (encompassing any and all possible structures located on a bottom side of a structural/conductor plate and appropriately matched and paired with attaching means located on a top side of a screed plate so as to be capable of receiving the attaching means) is far greater than the scope of enablement provided by the specification (describing no specific embodiment).
Concerning the Wands factors (see MPEP 2164.01(a)):
The scope of claims 17, 24, 27, 30, 37, 40, 43, 50, 53, 56, 63 and 66 is very broad because they cover any and all possible structures integrated into a screed plate and having a curving or angular configuration that is appropriately matching and paired with a front side of a structural/conductor plate to enable a pressure-connective, secure attachment or coupling. The scope of claims 18, 19, 24, 31, 32, 37, 44, 45, 50, 57, 58 and 63 is very broad because they cover any and all possible structures located on a top side of a screed plate and appropriately matched and paired with retaining means located on a bottom side of a structural/conductor plate so as to be capable of being received by the retaining means. The scope of claims 19, 32, 45 and 58 is very broad because they cover any and all possible structures located on a bottom side of a structural/conductor plate and appropriately matched and paired with attaching means located on a top side of a screed plate so as to be capable of receiving the attaching means.
(B) The nature of the invention has to do with (i) structures used to couple/attach a screed plate to a portion of a road paver, and (ii) surface textures/patterns incorporated into the working surface of a screed plate.
(C) The prior art considered by the examiner establishes that it was known in the art to:
Couple/attach a screed plate to a mounting frame on a road paver via coupling elements at a curved front end of the screed plate that mate with and couple to complementary coupling elements on the mounting frame. See Baker.
Couple/attach a screed plate to a mounting frame on a road paver via coupling elements at the front of the screed plate having threaded openings that receive threaded fasteners extending through openings in the mounting frame. See Birtchet.
Provide a screed plate with an upwardly projecting front end that is curved or straight and that mates with or engages a portion of a mounting frame. See Frampton et al., Lutz, Mosel, Rahn et al., Sovik and Swearingen.
Couple/attach a screed plate to a mounting frame on a road paver via threaded fasteners extending from a top side of the screed plate and received in openings in the mounting frame. See Baker, Birtchet, Frampton et al., Lutz, Mosel and Rahn et al.
Couple/attach a screed plate to both a mounting frame on a road paver and a conductive plate (located between the screed plate and the mounting frame) via threaded fasteners extending from a top side of the screed plate and received in openings in both the mounting frame and the conductive plate. See Swearingen.
Incorporate surface textures/patterns into the working surface of a screed plate, with the surface textures/patterns being in the form of:
Mounds, hummocks or topographical highs arranged in a staggered or offset pattern. See Wisniewski.
Wavy teeth with points and beveled edges. See Mosel.
Corrugations forming alternating channels and ribs, with some sets of the corrugations angled relative to and intersecting other sets of the corrugations. See Weller et al.
Alternating parallel ribs/enlargements and recesses/pockets. See Barton and Jackson ‘766.
Alternating peaks and valleys. See Jackson ‘595.
Incorporate surface textures/patterns into the working surface of a compacting roller or plate, with the surface textures/patterns being in the form of mounds, hummocks or topographical highs arranged in a crisscross rhombic pattern. See Mullen.
Incorporate surface textures/patterns into the working surface of a spreading float, with the surface textures/patterns being in the form of mounds, hummocks or topographical highs arranged in a crisscross rhombic pattern. See Pilla, Schaffer ‘060 and Schaffer ‘705.
(D) The skilled artisan is familiar with prior art structures used to couple/attach a screed plate to a portion of a road paver, including those summarized above. Further, the skilled artisan is familiar with prior art surface textures/patterns incorporated into the working surface of a screed plate or similar implement, including those summarized above.
(E) On the one hand, the level of predictability in the art is considered to be relatively high given (i) the longstanding use of screed plates in implements and paving machines for the purpose of leveling, compacting and smoothing materials such as concrete and asphalt as such materials are applied to form a finished surface, (ii) the widespread use of threaded fasteners for attaching screed plates to a mounting frame on a road paver, and (iii) the well-known practice of incorporating surface textures/patterns into the working surface of a screed plate or similar implement. However, on the other hand, the level of predictability in the art is considered to be relatively low given the following facts:
Baker (i) is the only cited prior art document that teaches coupling elements at a curved front end of the screed plate that mate with and couple to complementary coupling elements on the mounting frame, and (ii) teaches only one example/type of coupling element that is suitable for this purpose.
While threaded fasteners are widely used for attaching screed plates to a mounting frame, the prior art fails to teach a wide range of other types of attaching means on a top side of a screed plate that are appropriately matched and paired (so as to form complementary structures) with retaining means located on a bottom side of a conductor plate.
(F) The amount of direction provided by the inventor is very limited in comparison to the scope of the claims. Concerning the claimed “coupling element”, the original disclosure provides a limited disclosure of one embodiment (i.e., the curved edge/lip extending upward from or at the front side of the screed plate, as shown in the drawings), but the drawings do not show the front side of the structural/conductor plate as being “appropriately matching and paired” with this curved edge/lip. Further, the specification does not explain how the curved edge/lip and the tapered, inclined, angular and/or pointed front side (i) are “appropriately matching and paired”, and (ii) form a pressure-connective, secure attachment or coupling. In contrast, the claims broadly cover any and all possible structures integrated into a screed plate and having a curving or angular configuration that is appropriately matching and paired with a front side of a structural/conductor plate to enable a pressure-connective, secure attachment or coupling. Concerning the claimed “attaching means”, the original disclosure does not describe any preferred embodiment. No example of such a structure is disclosed. In contrast, the claims cover any and all possible structures located on a top side of a screed plate and appropriately matched and paired with retaining means located on a bottom side of a structural/conductor plate so as to be capable of being received by the retaining means. Concerning the claimed “retaining means”, the original disclosure does not describe any preferred embodiment. No example of such a structure is disclosed. In contrast, the claims cover any and all possible structures located on a bottom side of a structural/conductor plate and appropriately matched and paired with attaching means located on a top side of a screed plate so as to be capable of receiving the attaching means. Thus, the scope of enablement provided to one skilled in the art by the disclosure is not commensurate with the scope of protection sought by the claims. Rather, the specification leaves the skilled artisan to develop his/her own solutions for achieving the any and all possible structures covered by the claims.
(G) As explained above, applicant’s specification fails to describe a complete working example of the claimed “coupling element”. Further, as explained above, applicant’s specification fails to describe any working example of either the claimed “attaching means” or the claimed “retaining means”. Thus, the specification does not provide evidence of the existence of working examples that are representative of the any and all possible structures covered by the claims.
(H) Due to the insufficiency of applicant’s disclosure, an undue amount of experimentation would be needed to make or use the full scope of the invention encompassed by the claims. For example, the skilled artisan would have to engage in extensive and complex experimentation to determine:
What curved or angled coupling elements, paired with what complementary conductor plate structures, would be capable of and suitable for use as the claimed coupling element enabling a pressure-connective, secure attachment or coupling.
What attaching structures would be capable of and suitable for use as the claimed attaching means.
What retaining structures would be capable of and suitable for use as the claimed retaining means.
Thus, for claims 17-19, 24, 27, 30-32, 37, 40, 43-45, 50, 53, 56-58, 63 and 66, the specification does not reasonably provide enablement for the entire scope of the claimed invention.
Dependent claims are included in this rejection at least because of their dependencies.
GROUND 5: Claims 17-20, 22, 24, 25, 27, 28, 30-33, 35, 37, 38, 40, 41, 43-46, 48, 50, 51, 53, 54, 56-59, 61, 63, 64, 66 and 67 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The written description requirement serves both to satisfy applicant’s obligation to disclose the technologic knowledge upon which the patent is based, and to demonstrate that the inventor(s) was in possession of the invention that is claimed. It is not enough that a skilled artisan could theoretically construct his/her own version of the claimed invention. Rather, applicant bears the burden of setting forth sufficient information to show that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention. Thus, the written description requirement requires applicant to go beyond a discussion of mere concepts and suggestions. It is not sufficient to merely outline desired results that the claimed invention is expected to achieve. Rather, the specification must explain how the invention is structured and how it functions in order to achieve the desired results. While subject matter that is conventional or well known in the art need not be described in detail, the specification must provide a complete description of each of the essential features recited in the claims which enable the claimed invention to achieve the desired results.
Concerning the “coupling element” of claims 17, 24, 27, 30, 37, 40, 43, 50, 53, 56, 63 and 66, the original disclosure provides a limited disclosure of one embodiment (i.e., the curved edge/lip extending upward from or at the front side of the screed plate, as shown in the drawings), but the drawings do not show the front side of the structural/conductor plate as being “appropriately matching and paired” with this curved edge/lip. Further, the specification does not explain how the curved edge/lip and the tapered, inclined, angular and/or pointed front side (i) are “appropriately matching and paired”, and (ii) form a pressure-connective, secure attachment or coupling. Thus, applicant’s specification fails to describe a complete working example of the claimed “coupling element”. In contrast, the claims broadly cover any and all possible structures integrated into a screed plate and having a curving or angular configuration that is appropriately matching and paired with a front side of a structural/conductor plate to enable a pressure-connective, secure attachment or coupling. The specification fails to explain how this claimed subject matter is structured and how it functions in order to achieve the desired results. Therefore, the written description requirement is not satisfied.
Concerning the “attaching means” of claims 18, 19, 24, 31, 32, 37, 44, 45, 50, 57, 58 and 63, the original disclosure does not describe any preferred embodiment. No example of such a structure is disclosed. In contrast, the claims cover any and all possible structures located on a top side of a screed plate and appropriately matched and paired with retaining means located on a bottom side of a structural/conductor plate so as to be capable of being received by the retaining means. The specification fails to explain how this claimed subject matter is structured and how it functions in order to achieve the desired results. Therefore, the written description requirement is not satisfied.
Concerning the “retaining means” of claims 19, 32, 45 and 58, the original disclosure does not describe any preferred embodiment. No example of such a structure is disclosed. In contrast, the claims cover any and all possible structures located on a bottom side of a structural/conductor plate and appropriately matched and paired with attaching means located on a top side of a screed plate so as to be capable of receiving the attaching means. The specification fails to explain how this claimed subject matter is structured and how it functions in order to achieve the desired results. Therefore, the written description requirement is not satisfied.
Dependent claims are included in this rejection at least because of their dependencies.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
GROUND 6: Claims 17-20, 22, 24, 25, 27, 28, 30-33, 35, 37, 38, 40, 41, 43-46, 48, 50, 51, 53, 54, 56-59, 61, 63, 64, 66 and 67 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Concerning the “coupling element” of claims 17, 24, 27, 30, 37, 40, 43, 50, 53, 56, 63 and 66, the scope of the claims (encompassing any and all possible structures integrated into a screed plate and having a curving or angular configuration that is appropriately matching and paired with a front side of a structural/conductor plate to enable a pressure-connective, secure attachment or coupling) is far greater than the scope of the specification (describing no specific embodiment, or, at best, only one embodiment in which the coupling element is in the form of a curved edge/lip extending upward from or at the front side of the screed plate). See the further explanation above. As a result, it is impossible to determine with a reasonable degree of certainty what structures are encompassed by the claim and what structures are excluded therefrom.
Claims 17, 27, 30, 40, 43, 53, 56 and 66 each recite “wherein the coupling element comprises a curving configuration and provides a pressure-connective, a secure attachment or a coupling of the coupling element…” (claim 17, ll. 11-13; claim 30, ll. 21-23; claim 43, ll. 16-18; claim 56, ll. 15-17). According to the patent specification, the coupling element may be any number of elements having a curving or angular configuration integrated into the screed plate enabling a pressure-connective, secure attachment or coupling of the coupling element to the conductor front side. However, the new claim limitation differs from this disclosure by more broadly reciting “a pressure connective, a secure attachment or a coupling”. For example, this new claim limitation defines (or at least implies) a distinction between “a pressure connective” and “a secure attachment”, but such a distinction contradicts the original disclosure. Further, this new claim limitation defines (or at least implies) a distinction between “a pressure connective” and “a coupling”, but such a distinction contradicts the original disclosure. Such inconsistency with the disclosure renders the claim indefinite. Further, the claim language is confusing.
Claim 17 introduces “a structural-conductor plate” at line 10 and goes on to introduce “a structural-conductor plate” at lines 12-13. This inaccurately suggests that the plate introduced at line 10 is a different plate than the plate introduced at lines 12-13. That is, it inaccurately defines the screed plate as being constructed to couple to more than one structural-conductor plate. At the very least, the claim is indefinite because it is unclear how the plate introduced at line 10 relates to the plate introduced at lines 12-13.
Claims 17 and 24 recite “wherein the screed plate is configured to receive indirect heat from a heating element” (claim 17, l. 16; claim 24, l. 14). However, the original disclosure fails to describe the screed plate as being “configured to receive” (i.e., as being structured in some particular fashion so as to be equipped to receive) indirect heat from a heating element. Neither the specification nor the claims establish how the claimed screed plate is structured in some particular fashion such that it is distinguished from (i) a screed plate that is not configured to receive indirect heat, or (ii) a screed plate that is configured to receive direct heat. Since no distinctive structural characteristics are disclosed or claimed, it is impossible to ascertain with any reasonable degree of certainty what subject matter is encompassed by the “configured to receive indirect heat” limitation and what subject matter is excluded therefrom.
Concerning the “attaching means” of claims 18, 19, 24, 31, 32, 37, 44, 45, 50, 57, 58 and 63, the scope of the claims (encompassing any and all possible structures located on a top side of a screed plate and appropriately matched and paired with retaining means located on a bottom side of a structural/conductor plate so as to be capable of being received by the retaining means) is far greater than the scope of the specification (describing no specific embodiment). See the further explanation above. As a result, it is impossible to determine with a reasonable degree of certainty what structures are encompassed by the claim and what structures are excluded therefrom.
Concerning the “retaining means” of claims 19, 32, 45 and 58, the scope of the claims (encompassing any and all possible structures located on a bottom side of a structural/conductor plate and appropriately matched and paired with attaching means located on a top side of a screed plate so as to be capable of receiving the attaching means) is far greater than the scope of the specification (describing no specific embodiment). See the further explanation above. As a result, it is impossible to determine with a reasonable degree of certainty what structures are encompassed by the claim and what structures are excluded therefrom.
Claim 17 introduces “a structural-conductor plate” at line 10 and goes on to introduce “a structural-conductor plate” at lines 12-13. Then claim 27 goes on to introduce “a structural-conductor plate” (l. 3). The introduction of three seemingly different plates renders the claim indefinite. See the explanation above with respect to claim 17.
The preamble of each of claims 30 and 37 states that the claim is directed to “A road paver”. However, the body of each of claims 30 and 37 only recites three components: a heating element, a structural-conductor plate, and a screed plate. These three elements are components of a screed plate apparatus. They do not constitute (i.e., do not cooperate to define) a complete road paver. Absent the recitation of the necessary components of a complete road paver (e.g., a structure or system for receiving a paving material, a structure or system for delivering the paving material to a road surface, a structure or system for propelling the road paver, a structure of system for powering the paver components, etc.), the claims are incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. Further, if a road paver is required, it is unclear what road paver structure is encompassed by the claims and what road paver structure is excluded therefrom.
Claims 30, 37, 43, 50, 56 and 63 recite “a heating element configured to provide indirect heat to a screed plate” (l. 2). However, the original disclosure fails to describe the heating element as being “configured to provide” (i.e., as being structured in some particular fashion so as to be equipped to provide) indirect heat to a screed plate. Neither the specification nor the claims establish how the claimed heating element is structured in some particular fashion such that it is distinguished from (i) a heating element that is not configured to provide indirect heat, or (ii) a heating element that is configured to provide direct heat. Since no distinctive structural characteristics are disclosed or claimed, it is impossible to ascertain with any reasonable degree of certainty what subject matter is encompassed by the “configured to provide indirect heat” limitation and what subject matter is excluded therefrom.
Claim 30 introduces “a structural-conductor plate” at line 3, goes on to refer to “the structural-conductor plate” at line 8, but then goes on to introduce “a structural-conductor plate” at lines 22-23. This inaccurately suggests that the plate introduced at lines 22-23 is a different plate than the plate introduced at line 3. That is, it inaccurately defines the screed plate as being constructed to couple to more than one structural-conductor plate. At the very least, the claim is indefinite because it is unclear how the plate introduced at line 3 relates to the plate introduced at lines 22-23.
In claims 33 and 35, the term “the direction of travel of the road paver” (l. 3) lacks proper antecedent basis. Further, it is unclear how this direction of travel relates to the direction of travel of the screed plate previously introduced in claim 30.
In claim 41, the term “direction of travel of the road paver” (l. 3) is incomplete. If this was intended to read “the direction of travel of the road paver”, then it lacks proper antecedent basis. Further, it is unclear how this direction of travel relates to the direction of travel of the screed plate previously introduced in claim 37.
Claim 37 introduces “a structural-conductor plate” at line 3 and goes on to refer to “the structural-conductor plate” at line 10. Then claim 40 goes on to introduce “a structural-conductor plate” (l. 3). The introduction of two seemingly different plates renders the claim indefinite. See the explanation above with respect to claim 17.
In claim 41, the term “the direction of travel of the road paver” (l. 3) lacks proper antecedent basis. Further, it is unclear how this direction of travel relates to the direction of travel of the screed plate previously introduced in claim 37.
The preamble of each of claims 43 and 50 states that the claim is directed to “A road paver”. However, the body of each of claims 43 and 50 only positively recites two components: a heating element, and a screed plate. These two elements are components of a screed plate apparatus. They do not constitute (i.e., do not cooperate to define) a complete road paver. Absent the recitation of the necessary components of a complete road paver (e.g., a structure or system for receiving a paving material, a structure or system for delivering the paving material to a road surface, a structure or system for propelling the road paver, a structure of system for powering the paver components, etc.), the claims are incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. Further, if a road paver is required, it is unclear what road paver structure is encompassed by the claims and what road paver structure is excluded therefrom.
Claim 43 introduces “[a] structural-conductor plate” at line 15 and goes on to introduce “a structural-conductor plate” at lines 17-18. The introduction of two seemingly different plates renders the claim indefinite. See the explanation above with respect to claim 17.
In claims 46 and 48, the term “the direction of travel of the road paver” (claim 46, ll. 3-4; claim 48, l. 3) lacks proper antecedent basis. Further, it is unclear how this direction of travel relates to the direction of travel of the screed plate previously introduced in claim 43.
In claims 51 and 54, the term “the direction of travel of the road paver” (l. 3) lacks proper antecedent basis. Further, it is unclear how this direction of travel relates to the direction of travel of the screed plate previously introduced in claim 50.
Claim 50 introduces “a structural-conductor plate” at line 15. Then claim 53 goes on to introduce “a structural-conductor plate” at line 3. The introduction of two seemingly different plates renders the claim indefinite. See the explanation above with respect to claim 17.
The preamble of each of claims 56 and 63 states that the claim is directed to “A screed assembly”. However, the body of each of claims 56 and 63 only recites two components: a heating element, and a screed plate. While these two elements are components of a screed plate apparatus, the claim fails to define how these two elements are interrelated and interconnected so as to form an “assembly”. Further, the heating element and the screed plate do not constitute or define a complete screed assembly. Absent the recitation of the necessary components of a complete screed assembly, the claims are incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements.
Claim 56 introduces “a structural-conductor plate” at line 14 and then goes on to introduce “a structural-conductor plate” at lines 16-17. The introduction of two seemingly different plates renders the claim indefinite. See the explanation above with respect to claim 17.
Claim 58 recites “at least two screed plate retaining means located on the screed plate”. There is no support in the original disclosure for the retaining means being “located on the screed plate”. Instead, the attaching means are disclosed as being located on the screed plate, and the retaining means are disclosed as being located on the bottom side of the structural/conductor plate. Thus, claim 58 is indefinite for failing to conform to the description of the invention in the original disclosure.
Claim 63 recites “wherein the screed plate is releasably attachable to the screed assembly” (l. 7). The scope of the claim encompasses any and all possible structures for releasably attaching the screed plate to the screed assembly. Since the scope of the claim is far greater than the scope of the specification, it is impossible to determine with a reasonable degree of certainty what structures are encompassed by the claim and what structures are excluded therefrom. Further, since claim 63 goes on to recite the “coupling element” and “attaching means”, it is unclear how the broad “releasably attachable” limitation relates to the narrower limitations related to the “coupling element” and “attaching means”. Such a recitation of a broad limitation followed by a narrower limitation(s), within the same claim, renders the scope of the claim unclear.
Claim 63 introduces “a structural-conductor plate” at line 15. Then claim 66 goes on to introduce “a structural-conductor plate” at line 3. The introduction of two seemingly different plates renders the claim indefinite. See the explanation above with respect to claim 17.
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.
GROUND 7: Claims 17-20, 22, 24, 25, 27, 28, 30-33, 35, 37, 38, 40, 41, 43-46, 48, 50, 51, 53, 54, 56-59, 61, 63, 64, 66 and 67 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baker in view of Wisniewski, Mullen and Pilla (as further evidenced by Mosel, Jackson ‘766, Jackson ‘595, Weller et al. and Sovik) and further in view of Swearingen.
With respect to claims 17-19, 24, 43-45, 50, 56-58 and 63, Baker discloses a road paver 10 comprising a screed assembly 12. See Fig. 1; ¶ 0022. The screed assembly 12 includes a screed plate 16 connected to a screed frame 14 on the road paver 10. See Figs. 2-3; ¶¶ 0022-0023. The screed plate 16 comprises: a base plate 32 having a bottom paving surface side (see annotated Fig. 2 below); a front side (see annotated Fig. 2 below) extending between the bottom side and a top side (see annotated Fig. 2 below) opposite the bottom side; a back side (see annotated Fig. 2 below) opposing the front side and extending between the bottom side and the top side; and two screed plate attaching means (i.e., threaded studs) 36C, 36D positioned near the screed back side; wherein the two screed plate attaching means 36C, 36D are configured to securely receive at least two screed plate retaining means (i.e., apertured portions of the frame 14, and/or washers and nuts) located on the road paver 10 so as to coupleably engage the screed plate 16 to the road paver 10. See Figs. 2-3; ¶¶ 0024-0025.
With respect to claims 17, 24, 27, 43, 50, 53, 56, 63 and 66, Baker further discloses a coupling element 30, 34 positioned proximal to the screed front side and constructed to coupleably engage the screed plate to a frame 14 on the road paver 10; wherein the coupling element 30, 34 comprises a curving configuration (i.e., curved portion 34) and further comprises notches 42 that receive tabs 40 on the frame 14 so as to provide a pressure connective, secure attachment of the coupling element 30, 34 with the frame 14. See Figs. 2-3 and 7-9; ¶¶ 0024, 0026-0028, 0032-0035. In a further embodiment, the notches 42 are in the form of recesses that mate with the tabs 40, and fasteners 44 extend through holes 46, 48 in the tabs 40 and notches 42 so as to provide a more secure attachment of the coupling element 30, 34 with the frame 14. See Fig. 10; ¶ 0036.
Annotated Fig. 2 of Baker:
PNG
media_image2.png
438
562
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to claims 17, 24, 43, 50, 56 and 63, Baker fails to teach a plurality of mounds, hummocks or topographical highs that (i) extend from the paving surface side, (ii) are arranged in a crisscross rhombic pattern, and (iii) are acutely oriented in a direction of travel of the screed plate (and road paver).
Wisniewski teaches a screed plate 11 comprising a bottom paving surface side provided with a plurality of mounds, hummocks or topographical highs 15, 16 extending therefrom, wherein the plurality of mounds, hummocks or topographical highs 15, 16 are arranged in a crisscross pattern and are oriented in a direction of travel of the screed plate 11. See Figs. 1-4; col. 1, ll. 39-47; col. 2, ll. 3-33. Wisniewski explains that the mounds, hummocks or topographical highs 15, 16 function to:
Manipulate or work a soft mix of paving material in order to consolidate it, rearrange its granular components, produce a denser structure, and leave a smoother finished surface. See col. 1, ll. 7-12.
Exert pressure on closely spaced areas of the soft mix, displacing some of the mix which is allowed to rise between the compressed areas and is then compressed in turn. See col. 1, ll. 13-20; col. 2, l. 34 to col. 3, l. 16.
While Wisniewski teaches that the mounds, hummocks or topographical highs 15, 16 are preferably of bi-tapered, hemi-spindle shape, Wisniewski does not teach that they must have this particular shape. See col. 2, ll. 5-32; claims 1-5. Rather, Wisniewski teaches that the particular configuration of the mounds, hummocks or topographical highs 15, 16 depends upon the quality and state of the mass to be worked, and the intensity and type of desired action for which the device is designed. See col. 2, ll. 24-29. Thus, Wisniewski defines the claimed invention as producing regions of displacement (of the soft mix) that are tapered forwardly and rearwardly with respect to the direction of travel. See claim 5. The skilled artisan would appreciate that a rhombic or diamond shape fits within the confines of the “tapered forwardly and rearwardly” requirement of Wisniewski. Mullen and Pilla teach that such a rhombic or diamond shape was known in the art.
Mullen teaches a paving compactor A’ comprising a paving surface side provided with a plurality of topographical highs (see Fig. 2) extending therefrom, wherein the plurality of topographical highs are arranged in a crisscross rhombic pattern and are oriented in a direction of travel of the compactor A’. See Fig. 2; p. 2, ll. 117-119. Mullen uses the compactor in combination with a tamping/vibrating mechanism B. See Figs. 1 and 3; p. 1, ll. 85-98; p. 2, ll. 70-105. Mullen explains that the device is used to compact a paving material, such as asphalt, while the material is sufficiently plastic in order to produce greater uniformity of density, compaction and stability. See p. 1, ll. 1-47; p. 2, ll. 16-31; p. 2, l. 128 to p. 3, l. 9.
While Mullen’s drawings show embodiments in which the paving compactor is in the form of a roller, Mullen teaches that it can be in the form of a plate bearing a pattern (like that shown in Fig. 2). See p. 2, left column, ll. 16-48. The skilled artisan would appreciate that Mullen’s plate configuration is synonymous with the screed plates of Baker and Wisniewski.
Pilla teaches a float (or screed) 1 comprising a bottom paving surface side provided with a plurality of topographical highs 11 extending therefrom, wherein the topographical highs 11 are arranged in a crisscross diamond (i.e., rhombic) pattern defined by intersecting depressions/ grooves/channels 9, and wherein the topographical highs 11 are oriented in a direction of travel of the float. See Figs. 1-3; col. 2, l. 58 to col. 3, l. 30.
Pilla explains that:
Other shapes of topographical highs are possible depending on the shapes of the depressions/grooves/channels 9 and how the depressions/grooves/channels 9 are related to each other. See col. 3, ll. 18-21.
The float functions to effectively spread concrete or a similar material, and provides a relatively rough or course surface prior to imparting a smooth finish to the surface. See col. 1, ll. 58-63; col. 2, ll. 24-34.
The topographical highs and intersecting depressions/grooves/channels enable the float to be highly effective in spreading the material uniformly over the surface to which it is applied because (i) the sharp edges of the topographical highs act somewhat like a spatula in spreading the material evenly, and (ii) the angled edges of the topographical highs extend in different directions so that they cut the material at various angles as the float is moved thereover. See col. 2, ll. 19-29; col. 3, ll. 23-30.
If the edges of the topographical highs become dull after a period of use, they can be resharpened easily by regrooving the depressions/grooves/channels. See col. 4, ll. 13-15.
From the combined teachings of Wisniewski, Mullen and Pilla, the skilled artisan would appreciate that:
Wisniewski teaches that it is beneficial to provide a screed plate with a plurality of mounds, hummocks or topographical highs arranged in a crisscross pattern and are oriented in a direction of travel of the screed plate in order to manipulate or work a soft/plastic mix of paving material in order to consolidate it, rearrange its granular components, produce a denser structure, and leave a smoother finished surface.
Wisniewski and Pilla teach that the shape and configuration of the mounds, hummocks or topographical highs can be varied/changed depending upon the type of paving material to be worked and the desired action of the screed plate on the paving material. Thus, the skilled artisan is capable of selecting a particular shape and configuration to suit a particular application.
Mullen and Pilla establish that it was known in the art of screed plates and floats to use topographical highs having a rhombic or diamond shape in order to provide the forwardly and rearwardly tapered structure taught by Wisniewski for consolidating, rearranging, compacting and smoothing the paving material.
Pilla teaches that topographical highs having a rhombic or diamond shape are advantageous (in comparison to such structures having other shapes) because (i) the sharp edges of the topographical highs act somewhat like a spatula in spreading the material evenly, and (ii) the angled edges of the topographical highs extend in different directions so that they cut the material at various angles as the float is moved thereover.
Based on these teachings of Wisniewski, Mullen and Pilla, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Baker by providing a plurality of mounds, hummocks or topographical highs that (i) extend from the paving surface side of the screed plate, (ii) are arranged in a crisscross rhombic pattern, and (iii) are oriented in a direction of travel of the road paver. Further, given the orientation of the mounds, hummocks or topographical highs taught by Wisniewski (i.e., oriented with narrowed ends pointing in the travel direction and the opposite direction), and given the teaching of acutely angled diamond or rhombic shapes by Pilla, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to arrange the mounds, hummocks or topographical highs on the screed plate of Baker such that they are acutely oriented in the travel direction in order to achieve (i) the forwardly and rearwardly tapered structure taught by Wisniewski, and (ii) the benefit of cutting the paving material at angles for more even spreading taught by Pilla.
Reliance on the teachings of Mosel, Jackson ‘766, Jackson ‘595, Weller et al. and Sovik is not considered to be necessary to reject the claims. However, Mosel, Jackson ‘766, Jackson ‘595, Weller et al. and Sovik serve as evidence supporting the conclusion of obviousness3 because:
Mosel teaches a screed member 17 having a paving surface side provided with a plurality of topographical highs 24 extending therefrom, with the topographical highs 24 having a forwardly tapered structure (i.e., wavy teeth having pointed ends 25 and beveled edges 26) oriented in a direction of travel of the screed member 17 for shearing off (i.e., cutting) a paving material and providing better compaction thereof. See Figs. 3-5; p. 2, right column, ll. 24-74.
Jackson ‘766 teaches a screed plate 26 having a paving surface side provided with a plurality of topographical highs 32 extending therefrom, with the topographical highs 32 oriented in a direction of travel of the screed plate 26 and functioning to transmit vibrations from a vibrating mechanism 34 to a paving material. See Figs. 1-4; p. 1, right column, ll. 25-54.
Jackson ‘595 teaches a screed plate structure having a paving surface side provided with a corrugated surface pattern defined by alternating topographical highs 5 and channels 9, with the topographical highs 5 having a forwardly tapered structure (i.e., having converging forward ends 7) oriented in a direction of travel of the screed plate structure, and with the topographical highs 5 transmitting vibrations from a vibrating mechanism 15-17 to a paving material for rearranging and compacting the paving material. See Figs. 1-5; col. 2, l. 4 to col. 3, l. 4; col. 3, ll. 34-46.
Weller et al. teaches a screed assembly including a series of screed plates 39, 40. See Fig. 4; p. 2, ll. 25-42. Each screed plate has a paving surface side provided with a corrugated surface pattern defined by angled and intersecting channels 43 defining topographical highs (see Figs. 13-14) therebetween, with the angled and intersecting channels 43 and the topographical highs being acutely oriented in a direction of travel of the screed plate structure, and with the channels 43 and topographical highs functioning to compact, grind (i.e., cut) and smooth the paving material. See Figs. 13-14; p. 1, ll. 1-14; p. 2, ll. 54-62.
Sovik teaches a screed plate 110 having a front coupling element 114, 118 including a curved portion 118, attaching means 202 near a back side, and topographical highs 170 extending from a paving surface side 116. See Figs. 3-6 and 9; col. 3, ll. 40-57; col. 4, ll. 15-31; col. 5, ll. 49-54. The topographical highs 170 function to realign the paving material for better compaction and smoothing. See col. 3, l. 57 to col. 4, l. 16; col. 4, l. 32 to col. 5, l. 48; col. 6, ll. 4-26. In an alternative embodiment, an additional topographical high 204 is arranged behind the topographical highs 170, and a vibrating mechanism 300 is positioned above the screed plate 110 for compacting the paving material. See Fig. 9; col. 5, l. 55 to col. 6, l. 3.
These teachings of Mosel, Jackson ‘766, Jackson ‘595, Weller et al. and Sovik provide evidence supporting the finding that it would have been obvious to modify Baker to include topographical highs, and to select among the different configurations and shapes for such topographical highs known in the art. Further, Weller et al. supports the finding that it would have been obvious to arrange the topographical highs so as to be acutely oriented in the travel direction.
With respect to claims 17, 24, 30, 37, 43, 50, 56 and 63, the Baker, Wisniewski, Mullen and Pilla combination fails to teach:
A conductor plate having a top side and an opposite bottom side, and a front side and an opposite backside, with the screed plate engageable with the conductor plate proximal to the bottom side of the conductor plate.
A heating element (providing heat to the conductor plate to thereby) provide indirect heat to the screed plate.
Swearingen teaches a road paver 20 comprising a screed assembly 30 having a screed plate 46. See Fig. 1; col. 4, ll. 48-52; col. 5, ll. 10-14. The screed plate 46 has a front coupling element (see Figs. 2, 5 and 7) including a curved portion, and attaching means (i.e., threaded studs) 64 near a back side. See Figs. 2, 5 and 7; col. 5, ll. 35-40 and 48-53. While not shown in detail, Swearingen teaches that the screed plate 46 is a vibratory screed plate, i.e., a vibrating/oscillating mechanism forcibly operates on the screed plate to apply force vectors to the paving material. See col. 5, ll. 10-14.
Swearingen further teaches:
A conductor plate 62 having a top side and an opposite bottom side (see Figs. 5 and 7), and a front side and an opposite backside (see Figs. 5 and 7), with the threaded studs 64 used to selectively engage the screed plate 46 with the conductor plate 62 proximal to the bottom side of the conductor plate. See Figs. 2, 5 and 7; col. 5, ll. 35-61.
A heating element 60 located immediately against a top side of the conductor plate 62 so as to provide direct heat to the plate 62, with the plate 62 heat-conductively attached at its bottom side to a top side of the screed plate 46 to provide indirect heat to the screed plate 46. See Figs. 2-8; col. 5, l. 35 to col. 6, l. 8. This construction provides for uniform heating of the screed plate while allowing for easy replacement of the heating element. See col. 1, ll. 8-14. The heating system involves no moving parts, runs clean, emits no noxious fumes, and is capable of uniformly heating the screed plate. See col. 2, ll. 1-4.
From the teachings of Swearingen, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify Baker by providing: (i) a conductor plate having a top side and an opposite bottom side, and a front side and an opposite backside, with the screed plate selectively engageable with the conductor plate proximal to the bottom side of the conductor plate; and (ii) a heating element providing heat to the conductor plate to thereby provide indirect heat to the screed plate. The use of such a conductor plate and heating element is well known in the art of road pavers for maintaining the paving material in a plastic state for better workability and preventing the paving material from adhering to the screed plate. Further, Swearingen’s heating system involves no moving parts, runs clean, emits no noxious fumes, heats the screed plate uniformly, and allows for easy replacement of the heating element.
With respect to claims 20, 22, 25, 28, 33, 35, 38, 41, 46, 48, 51, 54, 59, 61, 65 and 67, the mounds, hummocks or topographical highs taught by Wisniewski, Mullen and Pilla are specifically designed and shaped to apply force to the paving material in different directions when the screed plate or float is moved in the travel direction across the paving material. Wisniewski explains how the application of such force serves to move and rearrange the paving material. Further, Mullen teaches the addition of a tamping/vibrating mechanism, which produces better compaction through the application of additional force to the paving material.
Double Patenting – Nonstatutory
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
GROUND 8: Claims 24, 25, 28, 37, 38, 41, 50, 51, 54, 63, 64 and 67 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 4 of US Reissued Patent No. RE49,588 E.
Claims 24, 25, 28, 37, 38, 41, 50, 51, 54, 63, 64 and 67 of the instant application are broader versions of claim 4 of US Reissued Patent No. RE49,588 E because claims 24, 25, 28, 37, 38, 41, 50, 51, 54, 63, 64 and 67 of the instant application recite many of the same limitations found in claim 4 of US Reissued Patent No. RE49,588 E, but claims 24, 25, 28, 37, 38, 41, 50, 51, 54, 63, 64 and 67 of the instant application omit some of the limitations recited in claim 4 of US Reissued Patent No. RE49,588 E. The omission of one or more limitations (i.e., the additional limitations required by claim 4 of US Reissued Patent No. RE49,588 E) with the consequent loss of their function is recognized to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Further, claims 24, 25, 28, 37, 38, 41, 50, 51, 54, 63, 64 and 67 of the instant application rearrange some of the limitations found in claim 4 of US Reissued Patent No. RE49,588 E. However, a modification involving a mere rearrangement of limitations is recognized to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Accordingly, claims 24, 25, 28, 37, 38, 41, 50, 51, 54, 63, 64 and 67 of the instant application are not patentably distinct from claim 4 of US Reissued Patent No. RE49,588.
GROUND 9: Claims 17-20, 22, 27, 30-33, 35, 40, 43-46, 48, 53, 56-59, 61 and 66 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 4 of US Reissued Patent No. RE49,588 E in view of Baker.
Claims 17-20, 22, 27, 30-33, 35, 40, 43-46, 48, 53, 56-59, 61 and 66 of the instant application are broader versions of claim 4 of US Reissued Patent No. RE49,588 E (in at least some respects) because claims 17-20, 22, 27, 30-33, 35, 40, 43-46, 48, 53, 56-59, 61 and 66 of the instant application recite many of the same limitations found in claim 4 of US Reissued Patent No. RE49,588 E, but claims 17-20, 22, 27, 30-33, 35, 40, 43-46, 48, 53, 56-59, 61 and 66 of the instant application omit some of the limitations recited in claim 4 of US Reissued Patent No. RE49,588 E. The omission of one or more limitations (i.e., the additional limitations required by claim 4 of US Reissued Patent No. RE49,588 E) with the consequent loss of their function is recognized to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Further, claims 17-20, 22, 27, 30-33, 35, 40, 43-46, 48, 53, 56-59, 61 and 66 of the instant application rearrange some of the limitations found in claim 4 of US Reissued Patent No. RE49,588 E. However, a modification involving a mere rearrangement of limitations is recognized to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
In addition, claims 17-20, 22, 27, 30-33, 35, 40, 43-46, 48, 53, 56-59, 61 and 66 differ from claim 4 of US Reissued Patent No. RE49,588 E by requiring that the coupling element has a curving configuration and provides a pressure-connective, secure attachment. This subject matter, which is not found in claim 4 of US Reissued Patent No. RE49,588 E, is taught by Baker. See the detailed discussion of Baker in GROUND 7. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify claim 4 of US Reissued Patent No. RE49,588 E to include this subject matter taught by Baker in order to provide a more secure attachment of the screed plate.
Accordingly, claims 17-20, 22, 27, 30-33, 35, 40, 43-46, 48, 53, 56-59, 61 and 66 of the instant application are not patentably distinct from claim 4 of US Reissued Patent No. RE49,588 in view of Baker.
Specification
The specification is objected to because of many instances of unclear language that (i) does not conform to proper grammar and ordinary usage, and/or (ii) fails to accurately characterize the invention. For example:
In the abstract, at ll. 9-11, “The screed plate bottom side has differing forms of textured surface impacting the paving material, by differing corrugations of differing patterns, into a more homogeneous consistency.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, the sentence inaccurately suggests that “differing forms, “differing corrugations” and “differing patterns” are used together on the same screed plate bottom side. According to col. 3, ll. 4-5, and col. 6, ll. 63-65, the different forms of textured surface constitute alternative embodiments. Further, the phrase “differing corrugations of differing patterns” appears to require dissimilar corrugations that belong to dissimilar patterns, which does not accurately characterize the invention. According to col. 6, ll. 63-65, the differing forms of textured surface are defined by differing patterns “or” differing corrugations (not by differing corrugations “of” differing patterns).
In the abstract, at ll. 12-14, “The corrugated pattern may be oriented parallel or perpendicular to the paver travel direction, and/or progressively flattening or set in a crisscross rhombic pattern.” In addition to the inconsistent use of conjunctions and the run-on nature, the phrase “may be…progressively flattening” does not conform to proper grammar and ordinary usage. Further, it is unclear what structure is defined by “progressively flattening”.
In the abstract, at ll. 16-17, “a homogeneously sorting on the paving material”. The paving material can be sorted, i.e., sorting can occur within the paving material. However, sorting “on” the paving material is unclear.
In col. 1, at l. 15, “Screed plate assemblies and method for paving” improperly combines the plural “assemblies” and the singular “method”.
In col. 1, at l. 17, “payment of highways” is inaccurate. It appears this should read “pavement of highways”.
In col. 1, at ll. 17-19, “such as payment of highways, airports, streets and other sites requiring paving of constructional site beds and pads, requiring a paving mat”. The run-on nature and repeated use of “requiring” renders the sentence unclear.
In col. 1, at ll. 25-28, “A critical feature of a road paver is the self-leveling, or free floating, screed plate which will determine the profile of the material being paved or placed on the road bed, the mat and its correct smoothness and thickness.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, the inclusion of “, the mat” is confusing since it interrupts the flow of the phrase “which will determine the profile of the material being paved…and its correct smoothness and thickness”.
In col. 1, at ll. 32-33, “There has been a recognized in the road paving industry need for providing…” is unclear since the word “need” is misplaced.
In col. 1, at ll. 43-44, “force vector applied on the material to the mat applied to the road surface.” The repeated use of “applied” and “to” renders the sentence unclear.
In col. 1, at ll. 61-63, “a screed provided with a means for generating, vibration, vibratory plates disposed on the front of the screed”. The combination of the verb form “generating” with the noun forms “vibration” and “vibratory plates” is confusing and improper grammar.
In col. 2, at ll. 22-24, “The present invention is a screed plate apparatus and method for homogeneously applying paving material to a road surface includes a road paver/finisher…” is unclear due to the combination of the verb “is” and the verb “includes”.
In col. 2, at ll. 28-30, “and a coupling element incorporated into the screed plate front side, as well as, at least two screed plate attaching means, located on the screed top side” is unclear due to the unconventional combination of “and” and “as well as”, and the unconventional use of commas.
In col. 2, at l. 33, the term “a structural/conductor plate” is indefinite. It is unclear whether this requires (i) a structural plate or a conductor plate, (ii) a structural and conductor plate, (iii) a structural and/or conductor plate. Multiple interpretations are possible, but the correct interpretation is unknown. Thus, the scope of the disclosure cannot be ascertained with a reasonable degree of certainty.
In col. 2, at ll. 34-39, “The material matting apparatus is an integrated component in the road paver/finisher, and contains paving material loaded into the material matting apparatus to pave surfaces and distributes that material from the road paver/finisher during paving operation, as the road paver/finisher paves or traverses in a paver travel direction.” In addition to the run-on nature, the meaning is unclear due to the repeated use of “and”, and the unconventional use of commas.
In col. 2, at ll. 60-64, “whereby the structural/conductor plate heat-conductively attaches at the opposing conductor bottom side to the screed plate at the screed plate top side provides indirect heat to the screed plate” is unclear due to (i) the run-on nature, (ii) the combination of the verb “attaches” and the verb “provides” without a conjunction, and (iii) the repetition of “at”.
In col. 3, at ll. 4-6, “Differing forms of textured surface are provided in alternative embodiments, by the differing patterns or corrugations, allows the screed plate apparatus to manipulate…” is unclear due to (i) the run-on nature, and (ii) the combination of the verb form “are provided” and the verb “allows” without a conjunction.
In col. 3, at ll. 8-17, “In alternative embodiments to the screed plate apparatus the textured surface comprises a corrugated pattern orienting parallel to the paver travel direction, or orienting perpendicularly to the paver travel direction, and/or progressively flattening in a dampening corrugated pattern from the screed plate first side toward the opposing screed plate second side, or in a crisscross rhombic pattern, orienting acutely to the paver travel direction.” In addition to the inconsistent use of conjunctions and the run-on nature, the phrase “comprises… progressively flattening in a dampening corrugated pattern” does not conform to proper grammar and ordinary usage. Further, it is unclear what structure is defined by “progressively flattening” or by “in a dampening corrugated pattern”. The use of “dampening” does not comport with the ordinary meaning of this term.
In col. 3, at ll. 17-21, “In any of the embodiments, the plurality of corrugations comprise various forms, those being at least one of a repetitive wave form, a repetitive v-shaped pattern, a repetitive block shaped pattern, or a variably shaped wave pattern.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, it is inaccurate to characterize “any of the embodiments” as comprising “various forms”. According to col. 3, ll. 4-5, and col. 6, ll. 63-65, the different forms of textured surface constitute alternative embodiments. Various forms are not comprised by any of the embodiments.
In col. 3, at ll. 25-26, “a homogeneously sorting on the paving material”. See the explanation above.
In col. 3, at l. 30, “In advantage of the present invention” does not conform to ordinary usage.
In col. 3, at ll. 38-39, “The screed plate apparatus allows, therefore, the paving material to be compartmentalized under the screed plate by the addition of variable force vectors employed on the paving material at varying angles, producing a more homogeneous paving mat.” The definition of “compartmentalized” is in direct contradiction to the definition of “more homogenous”.
In the 3rd line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 3, ll. 46-63, “The flexibility [in sue] therefore will improve” is unclear because there is no previous discussion of “flexibility”. Saying “therefore” (or “because of that flexibility”) is confusing since it is unclear what “flexibility” is being referred to.
In the 5th line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 3, ll. 46-63, “material where needed easier to achieve” does not conform to ordinary usage.
In the 5th to 8th lines of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 3, ll. 46-63, “The present invention may be used in any paving application where paving material is being laid into the paving mat, from particulate materials, as well, for road surface, including for highways, airpost runways, roads and parking lot pavings.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, the inclusion of “, from particulate materials, as well, for road surface” is confusing since it interrupts the flow of the phrase “in any paving application where paving material is being laid into the paving mat…including for highways…”. Further, the singular “road surface” is inconsistent with the plural “highways”, “runways”, etc. In addition, “airpost” is inaccurate; it appears this should read “airport”.
In the 8th to 11th lines of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 3, ll. 46-63, “The advantage of the present invention is that these variable force vectors will organize and apply added force to the paving material, improving paving mat texture and density, as desired, allowing an increased over-all density to the paving mat, and increased density in road surface, combating ruts and irregularities, providing a more stable road surface.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, “these variable force vectors” is unclear since the paragraph does not previously discuss variable force vectors.
In col. 4, at l. 11, “FIG. 1 illustrates an elevated side view”. The view may be an elevation, but it’s not elevated.
In col. 4, at ll. 15-16, “depicting repetitive wave forms in a plurality of corrugations”. The waveforms may be defined by corrugations, but they are not “in” corrugations.
In col. 4, at ll. 18-19, “depicting repetitive wave forms of the plurality of corrugations”. The waveforms may be defined by the corrugations, but they are not “of” the corrugations.
In col. 4, at ll. 22-23, “depicting repetitive wave forms of the plurality of corrugations”. The waveforms may be defined by the corrugations, but they are not “of” the corrugations.
In col. 4, at l. 25, “FIG. 3A C illustrate three elevated front side views”. The views may be elevations, but they’re not elevated. Further, “FIG. 3A C” should read “FIGS. 3A-3C”.
In col. 4, at ll. 28-29, “depicting repetitive wave forms as a corrugated pattern in a plurality of corrugations”. The waveforms may define a corrugated pattern, but they are not “as” a corrugated pattern. Further, the corrugated pattern may be defined by corrugations, but it is not “of” corrugations.
In col. 4, at ll. 31-32, “depicting a repetitive v-shaped pattern as a corrugated pattern in a plurality of corrugations”. The phrase “repetitive v-shaped pattern as a corrugated pattern” is unclear because “corrugated pattern” is broader than “repetitive v-shaped pattern”. Also, how can one pattern be “as” another pattern? Further, the corrugated pattern may be defined by corrugations, but it is not “in” corrugations.
In col. 4, at ll. 34-35, “depicting a repetitive block pattern as a corrugated pattern in a plurality of corrugations”. The phrase “repetitive block pattern as a corrugated pattern” is unclear because “corrugated pattern” is broader than “repetitive block pattern”. Also, how can one pattern be “as” another pattern? Further, the corrugated pattern may be defined by corrugations, but it is not “in” corrugations.
In col. 4, at l. 36, “FIGS. 4A-B illustrate two elevated views an embodiment”. The views may be elevations, but they’re not elevated. Further, “views an embodiment” is not correct grammar. Also, “FIGS. 4A-B” should read “FIGS. 4A-4B”.
In col. 4, at ll. 37-39, “depicting repetitive wave forms producing a dampened corrugated pattern from a plurality of corrugations”. The use of “dampened” does not comport with the ordinary meaning of this term. It is unclear what structure is defined by “dampened corrugated pattern”. The corrugations may define waveforms, but the waveforms do not produce a corrugated pattern from the corrugations.
In col. 4, at ll. 37-39, “depicting a dampened corrugated pattern from a plurality of corrugations”. See the explanation above.
In col. 4, at l. 40, “FIG. 4A illustrates an elevated front side view”. The view may be an elevation, but it’s not elevated.
In col. 4, at ll. 41-42, “depicting a dampened corrugated pattern from a plurality of corrugations”. See the explanation above.
In col. 4, at l. 43, “FIG. 4B illustrates an elevated side view”. The view may be an elevation, but it’s not elevated.
In col. 4, at ll. 44-45, “depicting a dampened corrugated pattern from a plurality of corrugations”. See the explanation above.
In col. 4, at ll. 48-49, “depicting repetitive wave forms producing a dampened corrugated pattern from a plurality of corrugations”. See the explanation above.
In col. 4, at ll. 51-52, “depicting a top conductor side of the structural/conductor plate of FIG. 3” is inaccurate because Figs. 3A-3C do not show the structural/ conductor plate.
In col. 4, at l. 52, “structural/conductor plate” is indefinite. See the explanation above.
In col. 4, at ll. 53-56, “The heating element is depicted in FIGS. 1 and 3 should be understood herein as receiving electricity or other form of heat from the power source, by a jagged line from the power source.” The sentence is unclear due to the combination of the verb forms “is depicted” and “should be understood” without a conjunction. It is not possible to receive electricity “by a jagged line”.
In col. 4, at ll. 59-65, “In its two dimensional, planar view, the mogul pattern resembles repeating diamond shapes as quadrilaterals, 2-dimensional flat figures that have four closed, generally straight sides, each categorized as a rounded rhombus, because of four equal sides and opposite equal angles, two acute and two obtuse, with the rhombus orienting acutely or obtusely.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, Fig. 7 does not show a “rounded rhombus”. Rather, Fig. 7 shows rhombus shapes with sharp corners.
In col. 5, at l. 7, “FIG. 8 illustrates a blown up partial, elevated side view”. The view may be an elevation, but it’s not elevated. Further, “blown up partial, elevated” is a confusing string of adjectives with inconsistent punctuation.
In col. 5, at l. 9, “structural/conductor plate” is indefinite. See the explanation above.
In col. 5, at ll. 30-33, “Turning now in detail to the drawings in accordance with the present invention, one embodiment of the present invention, the screed plate apparatus 100, is depicted in FIG. 1, includes an elevated side view of a road paver/finisher 120.” In addition to the run-on nature, the sentence is unclear due to the repetition of “the present invention”, and the combination of the verb forms “is depicted” and “includes”. Further, the sentence is inaccurate because the screed plate apparatus 100 does not include the road paver/finisher 120. Also, “elevated” is inaccurate for the reason given above.
In col. 5, at ll. 34-43, “The screed plate apparatus 100 further comprises, as more particularly depicted in FIGS. 2A-B and 4B, a screed plate 101 having a screed plate front side 102 and an opposing screed plate back side 103, a screed plate top side 104 and an opposing screed plate bottom side 105, a screed plate first side 106 and an opposing screed plate second side 107, and a coupling element 108 incorporated into the screed plate front side 102, as well as, at least two screed plate attaching means 109, as depicted in FIG. 4B, located on the screed top side 104. In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, the terms “first side” and “second side” are unclear since additional sides are previously recited. How can these sides be “first” and “second” sides, if the screed plate is previously defined as possessing additional sides?
In the 1st to 3rd lines of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 5, l. 52 to col. 6, l. 2, “The road paver/finisher 120, shown in FIGS. 1 and 6 comprises a material matting apparatus 122 having a plate bottom 125 and paving material 110, a power source 150, a heating element 151, and a structural/conductor plate 121.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, the punctuation is incomplete and inconsistent.
In the 2nd to 3rd lines of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 5, l. 52 to col. 6, l. 2, the singular term “a heating element 151” is inaccurate since plural heating elements 151 are shown in Fig. 6
In the 3rd line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 5, l. 52 to col. 6, l. 2, “structural/conductor plate” is indefinite. See the explanation above.
In the 1st line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 6, ll. 3-21, “structural/conductor plate” is indefinite. See the explanation above.
In col. 6, at ll. 23-24, 25, 25-26, 32, 35 and 36, the singular term “the heating element 151” is inaccurate since plural heating elements 151 are shown in Fig. 6. See “heating elements 151” at col. 6, l. 28.
In col. 6, at l. 36, “The heating element 151, as depicted in FIG. 1” is inaccurate since the heating elements 151 are not shown in Fig. 1.
In col. 6, at ll. 36-37, “freely and securely” is unclear since the ordinary meaning of “freely” contradicts the ordinary meaning of “securely”.
In col. 6, at ll. 41-45, “The at least two screed plate retaining means 126, shown in FIG. 6, to the structural/conductor plate 121 securely and respectively receive the appropriately matching, and paired with, the at least two screed plate attaching means 109, shown in FIG. 4B, from the screed plate top side 104.” As a result of the grammatical errors and run-on nature, the sentence is very confusing.
At col. 6, l. 42, “structural/conductor plate” is indefinite. See the explanation above.
In col. 6, at ll. 45-49, “The conductor front side 141, in FIG. 6, securely and freely receives the appropriately matching and paired coupling element 108 of the screed plate 101, show in FIGS. 4B and 6.” In addition to the grammatical errors, “securely and freely” is unclear since the ordinary meaning of “freely” contradicts the ordinary meaning of “securely”. Further, “the appropriately matching and paired coupling element 108 of the screed plate 101, show in FIGS. 4B and 6” is inaccurate because coupling element 108 is not shown in Fig. 6.
At col. 6, ll. 58-62, “The opposing screed plate bottom side 105 further comprises a textured surface 130, the textured surface 130 impacting the paving material 110 on the road surface 123, as the screed plate 100 compacts the paving material 110 to the road surface 123.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, “the textured surface 130 impacting the paving material 110 on the road surface 123” is inaccurate. While the textured surface 130 impacts the paving material 110, it does not do so “on the road surface 123”.
At col. 7, ll. 3-7, “In other embodiments of the present invention to the screed plate apparatus 100 the textured surface 130 comprises a corrugated pattern 131 comprising a plurality of corrugations 132, as shown in FIGS. 2A-B, 3A-C, 4A-B and 7.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, the phrase “In other embodiments” is inaccurate because no alternative “embodiment” is previously described.
At col. 7, ll. 7-10, “In one embodiment, shown in FIGS. 2 and 3A, the corrugated pattern 131 has the plurality of corrugations 132 orienting parallel to the paver travel direction 128 shown in FIG. 1.” In addition to the grammatical errors, “In one embodiment, shown in FIGS. 2 and 3A” is inaccurate because Figs. 2A and 2B show different embodiments (not one embodiment).
At col. 7, ll. 13-17, “In another embodiment, the plurality of corrugations 132 progressively flattening in a dampening corrugated pattern 139 from the screed plate first side 106 toward the opposing screed plate second side 107, as shown in FIGS. 4A-B, and 5.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, the phrase “progressively flattening in a dampening corrugated pattern” is confusing and inaccurate. See the explanation above.
At col. 7, ll. 17-22, “In any of the embodiments, the plurality of corrugations 132 comprise various forms, those being at least one of a repetitive wave form 135, a repetitive v-shaped pattern 136, a repetitive block shaped pattern 137, as shown in FIG. 3A-C, or a variably shaped wave pattern with any of the referenced patterns or other patterns.” The sentence is very confusing due to the grammatical errors and run-on nature.
At col. 7, ll. 30-38, “In this FIG. 7, it is understood that, when viewed from this perspective, the diagonal sets of lines represent shading to depict troughs, indentations or topographical lows of the crisscross pattern 133 in the plurality of corrugations 133, and the diamond shaped open spaces represent mounds, moguls, hummocks or topographical highs of the crisscross pattern 133 in the plurality of corrugations 131, which are acutely oriented in the direction of travel of the road paver/finisher depicted in FIG. 1.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, “crisscross pattern 133 in the plurality of corrugations 133” is inaccurate because the pattern may be defined by the corrugations, but it is not “in” the corrugations. Further, “corrugations 133” and “corrugations 131” are inaccurate because reference number 132 is used to identify the corrugations, and reference number 132 is not shown in Fig. 7.
At col. 7, ll. 46-47, “homogeneously sorting, horizontal and vertical driving function” does not conform to ordinary usage. The paving material can be sorted, i.e., sorting can occur within the paving material. However, sorting “on” the paving material is unclear. Further, it is unclear what is defined by “horizontal and vertical driving function”.
In the 1st to 3rd lines of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 7, l. 60 to col. 8, l. 6, “In another embodiment of the present invention, the power source 150, depicted in [FIGS. 2A, 4B and] FIG. 8, generates and provides at least one of electric, gas or hydraulic heat to the heating element 151 causing the heating element 151 to heat the screed plate 101.” In addition to the run-on nature, “In another embodiment of the present invention” is inaccurate because the same embodiment was previously described with respect to Fig. 6. Further, this embodiment is not shown in Fig. 8; rather, Fig. 8 shows the embodiment without a conductor plate. See col. 5, ll. 7-10.
In the 2nd to 3rd, 3rd, 3rd to 4th and 8th lines of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 7, l. 60 to col. 8, l. 6, the singular term “the heating element 151” is inaccurate since plural heating elements 151 are shown in Fig. 6. See “heating elements 151” at col. 6, l. 28.
In the 4th to 6th lines of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 7, l. 60 to col. 8, l. 6, “The heating element 151 is freely and securely located between the plate bottom 127 and the screed plate top side 104 and, immediately against the screed plate top side 104 providing direct heat to the screed plate 101.” The sentence contains grammatical errors and improper punctuation. Further, “freely and securely” is unclear since the ordinary meaning of “freely” contradicts the ordinary meaning of “securely”.
In the 6th to 8th lines of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 7, l. 60 to col. 8, l. 6, “The at least two screed plate retaining means 126 securely receiving the respective at least two screed plate attaching means 109, and the plate bottom 127 securely and freely receiving the coupling element 108, as they are depicted in FIG. 4B.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, this is not a complete sentence. Further, “securely and freely” is unclear since the ordinary meaning of “freely” contradicts the ordinary meaning of “securely”. In addition, “as they are depicted in FIG. 4B” is inaccurate because the retaining means 126 and the plate bottom 127 are not depicted in Fig. 4B.
In the 8th to 9th lines of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 7, l. 60 to col. 8, l. 6, “The heating element 151 providing direct heat to the screed plate 101.” This is not a complete sentence.
At col. 8, ll. 7-10, “Another embodiment of the present invention is a method for homogeneously applying paving material 110 to a road surface 123, as shown in FIG. 1, the method providing for a screed plate 101 having…” This is inaccurate and confusing because a “method for…applying paving material” is not defined by a “method providing for a screed plate” having a list of structural elements. No method for applying paving material is defined in the paragraph.
At col. 8, ll. 12-14, “a screed plate first side 106 and an opposing screed plate second side 107”. The terms “first side” and “second side” are unclear since additional sides are previously recited. How can these sides be “first” and “second” sides, if the screed plate is previously defined as possessing additional sides?
At col. 8, ll. 16-17, “The method incorporated a coupling element 108 into the screed plate front side 102, as depicted in FIGS. 2A-B.” This is not a complete sentence. Further, it is unclear whether this refers to the method of applying the paving material, or the method of providing a screed plate (see discussion above).
In the 1st to 3rd lines of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 8, ll. 18-33, “This method, alternative embodiment of the present invention, also provides for a road paver/finisher 120, shown in FIG. 1, comprising a material matting apparatus 122 having paving material 110, a plate bottom 127 and a structural/conductor plate 121.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, “This method, alternative embodiment” is inaccurate because a “method” is not an “embodiment”. Further, a method for applying paving material (see discussion above) is not defined by an embodiment that “provides for a road paver/finisher”. Also, “structural/conductor plate” is indefinite. See the explanation above.
In the 7th to 10th lines of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 8, ll. 18-33, “This method provides the structural/conductor plate 121 securely attached directly to the plate bottom 127, in FIG. 1, by the plurality of conductor plate fastening means at the conductor top side 124, in FIG. 6, directly to the plate bottom 127 of the material matting apparatus 122”. In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, “This method provides the structural/conductor plate” is inaccurate because a method of applying paving material (see discussion above) is not defined by a method/step that “provides” a structural element.
At col. 8, ll. 34-43, “The method provides for applying paving material 110 which is homogeneous to a road surface 123 in a paver travel direction 128 as traversed by the road paver/finisher 120 using the material matting apparatus 122, as depicted in FIG. 1, and providing heat to the structural/conductor plate 121 by the road paver/finisher 120, by providing a power source to the road paver/finisher 120 attaching to a heating element 151 and generating and providing electricity by a power source 150 to the heating element 151 causing the heating element to heat.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, “The method provides for applying paving material…” contradicts the earlier definition of providing a list of structural elements (see discussion above).
At col. 8, ll. 40-41, the singular term “a heating element 151” is inaccurate since plural heating elements 151 are shown in Fig. 6. See “heating elements 151” at col. 6, l. 28.
At col. 8, ll. 42, 42-43, and 43, the singular term “the heating element 151” is inaccurate.
At col. 8, ll. 48-58, “The method also provides, in FIGS. 1, 4B and 6, for securely and receiving or joining the respective at least two screed plate attaching means 109 to or with the at least two screed plate retaining means 126, and freely and securely receiving the coupling element 108 against the conductor front side 141 while securely and heat-conductively contacting and attaching the opposing conductor bottom side 125 of the structural/conductor plate 121 to the screed plate 101 at the screed plate top side 104 for providing indirect heat to the screed plate 101 by and through the structural/conductor plate 121.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, “The method also provides, in FIGS. 1, 4B and 6” because Figs. 1, 4B and 6 do not show or provide a method. Further, “for securely and receiving or joining” does not conform to ordinary usage. Also, “freely and securely” is unclear since the ordinary meaning of “freely” contradicts the ordinary meaning of “securely”.
At col. 8, ll. 59-61, “The method alternative embodiment to the present invention provides a textured surface 130 on the opposing screed bottom side 105, as depicted in FIG. 1.” The phrase “The method alternative embodiment” is does not conform to ordinary usage. Further, a “method” is not an “embodiment”. Further, “as depicted in FIG. 1” is inaccurate because Fig. 1 does not show a method, and also does not show the textured surface 130 on the screed bottom side 105.
At col. 9, ll. 3-9, “The differing forms of the textured surface 130, by differing patterns or corrugations, allows the screed plate apparatus 100 to impact or manipulate the particular paving material 110 as it is applied on the road surface 123 to cause the paving material 110 to be applied to the road surface in a more homogeneous manner or other desired manner, creating a more homogeneous paving material 110.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, “differing forms of the textured surface 130, by differing patterns or corrugations” is unclear and inaccurate for the reasons given above.
At col. 9, ll. 14-18, “A third alternative method provides the corrugated pattern 131 orienting a crisscross rhombus pattern 138 of the plurality of corrugations 132 acutely to the paver travel direction 128, as further described above.” In addition to the grammatical errors, “the corrugated pattern 131 orienting a crisscross rhombus pattern 138” is inaccurate because one pattern does not orient another pattern. Further, the disclosed embodiments do not possess two patterns, i.e., both a corrugated pattern and a rhombus pattern.
At col. 9, ll. 18-22, “A fourth alternative method provides the corrugated pattern 131 progressively flattening the plurality of corrugations 132 in a dampening corrugated pattern 139 from the screed plate first side 106 toward the screed plate second side 107.” The phrase “progressively flattening the plurality of corrugations 132 in a dampening corrugated pattern 139” is unclear and inaccurate for the reasons given above. Further, the phrase “from the screed plate first side 106 toward the screed plate second side 107” is inaccurate because, as shown in Fig. 4B, the pattern 139 flattens in a direction toward the back side 103 (not from the first side 106 toward the second side 107).
At col. 9, ll. 22-26, “The plurality of corrugations 131 in various embodiments of the present invention may have at least one of a repetitive wave form 135, such as a repetitive v-shaped pattern 136, a repetitive block shaped pattern 137, or a variably shaped wave pattern, shown FIG. 3A-C.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, this sentence is unclear and inaccurate for the reasons given above.
At col. 9, ll. 42-43, “The heating element 151, depicted generally in FIG. 1” is inaccurate since the invention comprises plural heating elements 151 shown in Fig. 6 (not a singular heating element). See “heating elements 151” at col. 6, l. 28. Further, the heating elements are not shown in Fig. 1.
At col. 9, ll. 57-66, “The problem of having only once force vector, or one direction of force applied by the material matting apparatus 122 in FIG. 1, applied on the paving material 110 as it is paved, causing a heterogeneous material paving mat 153 paved on the road surface 123 is solved by the variable wave design or variable surface pattern 134 of the of the present invention, shown in FIGS. 3A-C, which variable surface pattern 134 encapsulates the paving material 110 and allows the material matting apparatus 122 to apply additional vectors of force to the paving material 110.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, “only once force vector” does not conform to ordinary usage. In addition, the phrases “the variable wave design or variable surface pattern 134” and “which variable surface pattern 134” are inaccurate because the invention does not have a “variable” wave design, surface pattern or corrugation. While the disclosure describes alternative wave designs or surface patterns, none of these designs or patterns are capable of varying or changing (i.e., “variable”). Instead, the user can choose a screed plate having the particular static design or pattern deemed most useful to the user.
At col. 9, l. 66 to col. 10, l. 2, “The purpose of the variable wave corrugation or variable wave pattern 134 is to add varying force vectors to help organize and compact the paving material 110 being paved into a paving mat 153.” The phrase “the variable wave corrugation or variable wave pattern 134” is inaccurate for the reasons given above. Further, the phrase “add varying force vectors” is inaccurate because the particular static design or pattern chosen by the user is not capable of (i) adding to an existing quantity of force vectors, or (ii) varying or changing the force vectors.
At col. 10, ll. 3-8, “The screed plate apparatus 100 of the present invention allows, therefore, the paving material 110 to be compartmentalize under the screed plate 101 by the addition of variable force vectors employed on the paving material 110 at varying angles, producing a more homogeneous paving mat 153.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, the term “compartmentalize” contradicts the term “more homogenous”. See the explanation above. Further, the phrase “variable force vectors employed…at varying angles” is inaccurate for the reasons given above.
At col. 10, ll. 9-15, “The screed plate apparatus 100 of the present invention is driven in one alterative by the vibrating or oscillating mechanism 129 contained in the material matting apparatus 122, integral parts of the road paver/finisher 120, commonly used and recognized in the industry, and depicted in FIG. 1, which provides the varying force vectors to the paving material 110.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, the use of “integral parts” is confusing and appear to be inaccurate since the material matting apparatus 122 is not an integral part with the entire road paver/finisher 120. Further, “the varying force vectors” is inaccurate for the reasons given above.
At col. 10, ll. 15-24, “The variable surface pattern 134 applied to a screed plate 101, depicted in FIGS. 2A-5 and 7, in the embodiments of the screed plate apparatus 100 is most effective when coupled with the addition of a vibration component, the vibrating and oscillating mechanism 129 applied to the screed plate 101 by the road paver/finisher 120 to move or drive the screed plate 101 paving material 110 at ‘off angles’ with respect to the corrugations or wave of the particular screed plate 101, and/or with respect to the paver travel direction 128 of the road paver/finisher 120.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, the phrase “The variable surface pattern 134” is inaccurate for the reasons given above. Further, the phrase “drive the screed plate 101 paving material 110” is incomplete and inaccurate.
At col. 10, ll. 25-34, “The screed plate apparatus 100 of the present invention allows for a variable corrugated or wave screed plate 101 opposing screed plate bottom side 105 with variable shapes or corrugations, corrugated pattern 131, and wave amplitudes and frequency, as shown in FIGS. 3A-C and 4A-B and 7, depending upon the required application of the paving material 110 to be paved into the paving mat 153 on the road surface 123, and the nature of the paving material 110, such as the aggregate size or constituent nature of the paving material 110.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, the phrases “a variable corrugated or wave screed plate” and “variable shapes or corrugations…” are inaccurate for the reasons given above.
At col. 10, ll. 34-36, “The plurality of corrugations 132 may run from parallel, FIG. 2A, or perpendicular, FIG. 2B, to the paver travel direction 128 of the road paver/finisher 120” contains grammatical errors and does not conform to ordinary usage.
At col. 10, ll. 36-38, “As well, the corrugations may crisscross, FIG. 7 each other in certain other desired applications” contains grammatical errors and does not conform to ordinary usage.
At col. 10, ll. 39-41, “FIGS. 4A-B and 5 show the corrugated opposing screed plate bottom side 105 flattening or dampening toward the opposing screed plate back side 103.” The phrase “flattening or damping toward” is unclear and inaccurate for the reasons given above.
At col. 10, ll. 41-46, “Essentially, the amplitude of the plurality of corrugations 132 of the corrugated waves is dampening, or goes to zero, toward the back of the screed plate 101, in the direction opposite of the paver travel direction 128 as the paving material 110 is being applied to the road surface 123.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, the phrase “the amplitude of the plurality of corrugations 132 of the corrugated waves is dampening, or goes to zero” is unclear and inaccurate for the reasons given above. Further, as shown in Fig. 3A, the “amplitude” of the corrugations is defined in a direction from the first side 106 toward the second side 107, not “toward the back of the screed plate”.
In the 1st line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 10, ll. 47-59, the phrase “The variable corrugated or wave” is inaccurate for the reasons given above.
In the 3rd to 4th lines of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 10, ll. 47-59, the phrase “The flexibility [in sue] therefore will improve” is unclear because there is no previous discussion of “flexibility” in the immediate context. Saying “therefore” (or “because of that flexibility”) is confusing since it is unclear what “flexibility” is being referred to.
In the 6th to 8th lines of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 10, ll. 47-59, “The present invention may be used in any paving application where paving material 110 is being laid into the paving mat 153, from particulate materials, as well, for road surface 123, including for highways, airpost runways, roads and parking lot pavings.” In addition to the grammatical errors and run-on nature, the inclusion of “, from particulate materials, as well, for road surface” is confusing since it interrupts the flow of the phrase “in any paving application where paving material 110 is being laid into the paving mat…including for highways…”. Further, the singular “road surface” is inconsistent with the plural “highways”, “runways”, etc. In addition, “airpost” is inaccurate; it appears this should read “airport”.
The specification is also objected to because:
At col. 1, l. 46, a period has been omitted after “surface”.
At col. 6, l. 51, “conductor bottom side 105” should read “conductor bottom side 125”.
At col. 7, l. 52, “mechanism 129 to the” should read “mechanism 129 of the”.
In the 5th to 6th lines of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 8, ll. 18-33, “a conductor front side and an opposing conductor backside, a plurality of conductor plate fastening means, and at least two screed plate retaining means located” should read “a conductor front side 141 and an opposing conductor back side 142, a plurality of conductor plate fastening means 143, and at least two screed plate retaining means 126 located”.
In the 8th to 9th lines of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 8, ll. 18-33, “conductor plate fastening means” should read “conductor plate fastening means 143”.
At col. 9, l. 16, “rhombus pattern 138” should read “rhombus pattern 133”.
At col. 9, l. 31, “FIG. 1” should read “FIG. 8”.
At col. 10, l. 13, “FIG. 1” should read “FIG. 8”.
Any corrections to the specification must comply with 37 CFR 1.173(b), (d) and (g).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) for failing to show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. The following features are not shown:
A screed plate comprising a paving surface side with a plurality of mounds, hummocks or topographical highs extending therefrom, the plurality of mounds, hummocks or topographical highs arranged in a crisscross rhombic pattern (claim 43, ll. 3-7; claim 50, ll. 3-7).
A screed plate comprising a paving surface side with a plurality of mounds, hummocks or topographical highs extending therefrom, wherein the plurality of mounds, hummocks or topographical highs form a crisscross rhombic pattern (claim 56, ll. 3-7; claim 63, ll. 3-7).
Fig. 7 shows a two-dimensional pattern 131/133 represented by crisscross lines having rhombic-shaped spaces/areas therebetween. However, Fig. 7 does not show a three-dimensional structure in the form of mounds, hummocks or topographical highs extending from a paving surface side of the screed plate.
These features must be shown in the drawing or canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are also objected to because:
In Figs. 1 and 8, the lead line for reference number 100 does not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(q) since it does not originate in the immediate proximity of the reference character and extend to the feature indicated. The examiner suggests providing the lead line with an arrow pointing to the feature indicated.
In Fig. 1 and 8, reference number 129 does not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(q) because:
Its lead line does not originate in the immediate proximity of the reference character and extend to the feature indicated.
The corresponding feature (i.e., a vibrating and oscillating mechanism) is not actually shown in the figure. Rather, the lead line for reference number 129 extends to the same feature (i.e., the material matting apparatus) designated by reference number 122 in Fig. 1.
In Fig. 1, reference number 150 does not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(q) because:
It lacks a lead line originating in the immediate proximity of the reference character and extending to the feature indicated.
The corresponding feature (i.e., a power source) is not actually shown in the figure. Rather, reference number 150 is placed on a side of the material matting apparatus 122.
In Figs. 2A-5 and 7, the lead line for reference number 101 does not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(q) since it does not originate in the immediate proximity of the reference character and extend to the feature indicated. The examiner suggests providing the lead line with an arrow pointing to the feature indicated.
In Figs. 2A and 2B, reference characters 130, 131, 134 and 135 do not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) since these different reference characters are not used to label distinct features of the invention. Rather, they are all used to designate the same part (i.e., the repetitive waveform, corrugated pattern defining the textured surface on the bottom side of the screed plate).
In Figs. 2A and 2B, the lead line for reference number 101 does not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(q) since it does not originate in the immediate proximity of the reference character and extend to the feature indicated. The examiner suggests providing the lead line with an arrow pointing to the feature indicated.
In Figs. 3A-4A, the lead line for reference number 104 does not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(q) since it does not originate in the immediate proximity of the reference character and extend to the feature indicated. Instead of being directed to the top side of the screed plate (see reference number 104 in Figs. 2A-2B), the lead line for reference number 104 extends to the top of the coupling element 108 in Figs. 3A-3C.
In Fig. 3A, reference characters 130, 131 and 135 do not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) since these different reference characters are not used to label distinct features of the invention. Rather, they are all used to designate the same part (i.e., the repetitive waveform, corrugated pattern defining the textured surface on the bottom side of the screed plate).
In Fig. 3B, reference characters 130, 131 and 136 do not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) since these different reference characters are not used to label distinct features of the invention. Rather, they are all used to designate the same part (i.e., the repetitive v-shaped, corrugated pattern defining the textured surface on the bottom side of the screed plate).
In Fig. 3A, reference characters 130, 131 and 137 do not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) since these different reference characters are not used to label distinct features of the invention. Rather, they are all used to designate the same part (i.e., the repetitive block-shaped, corrugated pattern defining the textured surface on the bottom side of the screed plate).
In Fig. 4A, reference characters 130 and 134 do not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) since these different reference characters are not used to label distinct features of the invention. Rather, they are both used to designate the same part (i.e., the repetitive waveform, corrugated pattern defining the textured surface on the bottom side of the screed plate).
In Fig. 4B, reference characters 130, 135 and 139 do not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) since these different reference characters are not used to label distinct features of the invention. Rather, they are all used to designate the same part (i.e., the repetitive waveform, corrugated, dampening pattern defining the textured surface on the bottom side of the screed plate).
In Fig. 5, reference characters 130, 131, 135 and 139 do not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) since these different reference characters are not used to label distinct features of the invention. Rather, they are all used to designate the same part (i.e., the repetitive waveform, corrugated, dampening pattern defining the textured surface on the bottom side of the screed plate).
In Fig. 6, the lead line for reference number 121 does not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(q) since it does not originate in the immediate proximity of the reference character and extend to the feature indicated. The examiner suggests providing the lead line with an arrow pointing to the feature indicated.
In Figs. 6 and 8, each occurrence of reference number 150 does not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(q) because:
It lacks a lead line originating in the immediate proximity of the reference character and extending to the feature indicated.
The corresponding feature (i.e., a power source) is not actually shown in the figure. Rather, each occurrence of reference number 150 is placed adjacent to a wavy or jagged line (apparently representing some form of power conductor).
In Fig. 7, reference characters 131 and 133 do not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) since these different reference characters are not used to label distinct features of the invention. Rather, they are both used to designate the same part (i.e., the crisscross rhombic, corrugated pattern defining the textured surface on the bottom side of the screed plate).
In Fig. 8, it appears that the occurrence of reference character 150 and the corresponding wavy or jagged line is inaccurate. According to col. 5, ll. 7-10, the embodiment shown in Fig. 8 does not include a structural/conductor plate. Thus, the Fig. 8 embodiment would not appear to include the power source for supplying power to the omitted structural/conductor plate.
Any corrections to the drawings must comply with 37 CFR 1.173(b) and (g).
Pertinent Prior Art
The following prior art is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Barton teaches a screed plate 150 having a paving surface side provided with a plurality of topographical highs 151 extending therefrom, with the topographical highs 151 oriented in a direction of travel of the screed plate. A vibrating/oscillating mechanism 157, 158 is positioned above the screed plate 150.
Birtchet teaches a screed plate 16 comprising: a coupling element 22, 24 positioned proximal to the screed front side and constructed to coupleably engage the screed plate to a mounting member 20 of a road paver, wherein the coupling element 22, 24 comprises a curving configuration (i.e., curved portion 22) and further comprises mounting blocks 62 having threaded apertures receiving threaded bolts 58 so as to provide a pressure connective, secure attachment of the coupling element 22, 24 with the mounting member 20; and screed plate attaching means (i.e., threaded bolts) 58 positioned near the screed back side, wherein the screed plate attaching means 58 are configured to securely receive screed plate retaining means (i.e., apertured portions of the mounting member 20) so as to coupleably engage the screed plate 16 to the road paver.
Frampton et al. teaches a screed plate 22 comprising: a coupling element (see Fig. 2) positioned proximal to the screed front side and constructed to coupleably engage the screed plate to a mounting member 20 of a road paver, wherein the coupling element (see Fig. 2) comprises a curving configuration; and screed plate attaching means (i.e., threaded bolts) 30 positioned near the screed back side, wherein the screed plate attaching means 30 are configured to securely receive screed plate retaining means (i.e., apertured portions of the mounting member 20, and/or nuts 28) so as to coupleably engage the screed plate 22 to the road paver.
Jackson ‘766 teaches a screed plate 26 having a paving surface side provided with a plurality of topographical highs 32 extending therefrom, with the topographical highs 32 oriented in a direction of travel of the screed plate 26 and functioning to transmit vibrations to a paving material (effective vibration producing greater compaction of the paving material). See Figs. 1-4; p. 1, right column, ll. 25-48. The vibrations are produced by a vibrating/oscillating mechanism 34-36 that forcibly operates on the screed plate 26 to apply force vectors to the paving material. See Figs. 1-2 and 4; p. 1, right column, ll. 49-54.
Lutz teaches a screed plate 40 comprising: a coupling element 41 positioned proximal to the screed front side and constructed to coupleably engage the screed plate to a mounting member 25 of a road paver, wherein the coupling element 41 comprises a curving configuration; and screed plate attaching means (i.e., threaded studs) 46 positioned near the screed back side, wherein the screed plate attaching means 46 are configured to securely receive screed plate retaining means (i.e., apertured portions of the mounting member 25, and/or nuts) so as to coupleably engage the screed plate 40 to the road paver.
Rahn et al. teaches a screed plate 12 comprising: a coupling element 18, 20a positioned proximal to the screed front side and constructed to coupleably engage the screed plate to a mounting member 3 of a road paver, wherein the coupling element 18, 20a comprises a curving configuration (i.e., curved portion 20a); and screed plate attaching means (i.e., threaded studs) 25 positioned near the screed back side, wherein the screed plate attaching means 25 are configured to securely receive screed plate retaining means (i.e., apertured portions of the mounting member 3, and/or nuts) so as to coupleably engage the screed plate 12 to the road paver.
Schaffer ‘060 teaches a float (or screed) 10 comprising a bottom paving surface side 14 provided with a plurality of topographical highs 16 extending therefrom, wherein the topographical highs 16 are arranged in a crisscross diamond (i.e., rhombic) pattern defined by intersecting grooves 15.
Like Schaffer ‘060, Schaffer ‘705 teaches a float (or screed) comprising a bottom paving surface side provided with a plurality of topographical highs extending therefrom, wherein the topographical highs are arranged in a crisscross diamond (i.e., rhombic) pattern defined by intersecting grooves.
Sovik teaches a screed plate 110 having a front coupling element 114, 118 including a curved portion 118, attaching means 202 near a back side, and topographical highs 170 extending from a paving surface side 116. See Figs. 3-6 and 9; col. 3, ll. 40-57; col. 4, ll. 15-31; col. 5, ll. 49-54. The topographical highs 170 function to realign the paving material for better compaction and smoothing. See col. 3, l. 57 to col. 4, l. 16; col. 4, l. 32 to col. 5, l. 48; col. 6, ll. 4-26. In a further embodiment providing for greater compaction of the paving material, an additional topographical high 204 is arranged behind the topographical highs 170, and a vibrating/oscillating mechanism 300 is positioned above the screed plate 110 for forcibly operating on the screed plate to apply force vectors to the paving material. See Fig. 9; col. 5, l. 55 to col. 6, l. 3.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on October 21, 2025 have been considered.
Applicant argues that the specification and claims have been amended to overcome the objections thereto. This argument fails because many objections have not been overcome. Further, applicant’s amendments necessitated new objections.
Applicant asserts that a corrected reissue declaration has been submitted. However, no declaration was received as part of the October 21, 2025 response.
With respect to the interpretation of claims under 35 USC 112(f), applicant fails to address any of the specific findings of the examiner. A general allegation as to the manner in which the claims should be interpreted fails to constitute a full and complete response.
Applicant argues that the claims have been amended to comply with 35 USC 112(a). This argument fails for the reasons explained in detail above.
Applicant argues that the claims have been amended to comply with 35 USC 112(b). This argument fails for the reasons explained in detail above.
Applicant argues that the claims have been amended to overcome the prior rejections under 35 USC 103. However, applicant’s amendments necessitated the new grounds of rejection above. With respect to the argument that the prior art fails to teach the combination of claimed features, including the claimed heating element providing indirect heat, this argument fails because Swearingen teaches such a heating element.
With respect to the double patenting rejections, applicant fails to address any of the specific findings of the examiner. A general allegation that the claims differ in scope from the prior reissued patent fails to constitute a full and complete response.
With respect to the objections to the specification, applicant argues that the objections are based on mere personal choice of wording. This argument fails because the specification is replete with confusing and/or inaccurate wording.
With respect to the objections to the drawings, applicant argues that furnishing a drawing is only required where necessary for the understanding of the claimed subject matter. This argument fails because 37 CFR 1.83(a) requires a showing of every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Showing these claimed features is, in fact, necessary for understanding the claimed subject matter.
With respect to the objections to the drawings, applicant defers filing drawing corrections. Such a deferral fails to constitute a full and complete response.
Final Action
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).
Response Period
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.
Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
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.
Amendments in Reissue Applications
Applicant is notified that any subsequent amendment to the specification, claims or drawings must comply with 37 CFR 1.173(b)-(g).
Failure to fully comply with 37 CFR 1.173(b)-(g) will generally result in a notification to applicant that an amendment before final rejection is not completely responsive. Such an amendment after final rejection will not be entered.
Disclosure Obligations
Applicant is reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.178(b), to timely apprise the Office of any prior or concurrent proceed-ing in which the patent for which reissue is sought is or was involved. These proceedings would include interferences, reissues, reexaminations, and litigation. Applicant is further reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.56, to timely apprise the Office of any information which is mate-rial to patentability of the claims under consideration in this reissue appli-cation. These obligations rest with each individual associated with the filing and prosecution of this application for reissue. See also MPEP 1404, 1442.01 and 1442.04.
Filing and Contact Information
All correspondence relating to this reissue application should be directed:
By Patent Center4: Registered users may submit via the Patent Center at: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/
By Mail5 to: Commissioner for Patents
United States Patent & Trademark Office
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
By FAX to: (571) 273-8300
By hand: Customer Service Window
Knox Building
501 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Peter English whose telephone number is (571)272-6671. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday (8:00 am - 6:00 pm EST). If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s the examiner’s supervisor, Eileen Lillis, can be reached at 571-272-6928.
/PETER C ENGLISH/Reexamination Specialist, Art Unit 3993
Conferees:/GLENN K DAWSON/ Reexamination Specialist, Art Unit 3993
/EILEEN D LILLIS/SPRS, Art Unit 3993
1 As the phrase “appropriately matching and paired” is used in applicant’s specification, the ordinary and customary meaning is counterparts to one another that are used together to form a complementary pair.
2 As the phrase “appropriately matching and paired” is used in applicant’s specification, the ordinary and customary meaning is counterparts to one another that are used together to form a complementary pair.
3 The ultimate determination of patentability is based on the entire record, by a preponderance of evidence, with due consideration to the persuasiveness of any evidence properly made of record. In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). With regard to rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103, the examiner must provide evidence which, as a whole, shows that the legal determination sought to be proved (i.e., a prima facie case of obviousness has been established) is more probable than not. The decision on patentability must be made based upon consideration of all the evidence, including the evidence submitted by the examiner and the evidence submitted by the applicant. In re Eli Lilly & Co., 902 F.2d 943, 14 USPQ2d 1741 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP 2142.
4 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).
5 Mail Stop REISSUE should only be used for the initial filing of reissue applications, and should not be used for any subsequently filed correspondence in reissue applications. See MPEP 1410.
Prosecution Insights