DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Acknowledgment is made of the amendment filed 2/20/26. Accordingly the application has been amended.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2,5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iannacone (20210381244) in view of Douglass (20210254345).
Claim 1. Iannacone discloses a stair nose molding comprising:
A first elongated part (the portion extending from 60b to 110b as seen in figure 3b) having a first point of curvature (as seen in figures 3a-c, 4A-C the first point being at 110A or B or one of the points 184) (at 110A or the second 184);
A second elongated part (the portion from 110a to 60a as seen in figure 3b) parallel to the first elongated part, the second elongated part having a second point of curvature; and
a curved part (the portion extending from 110b to 110a of figure 3b or 184 to 180 of figure 4b) being tangent to the first elongated part at the first point of curvature, being tangent to the second elongated part at the second point of curvature, and extends one hundred eight degrees (having two ninety degree curves or three 60 degree curves as noted in the disclosure, paragraph 0070) from the first point of curvature to the second point of curvature and being integrally formed with the first and second elongated parts (as seen in the figures and noted throughout the disclosure),
wherein said stair nose molding includes a core layer (52/58/56 or alternatively 58/56) and a padding layer (54 or alternatively 52 or alternatively 152 paragraph 0034), the core layer includes a first surface (the upper surface of the upper layer at 104) and a second surface (the lower surface of 52 or 56), a first edge (60b or 60a), and a second edge (the other of 60b or 60a), and the padding layer covers less than all of one of the surfaces for a first distance (from 60b to 110b figure 3a-c or 60b-180 as in figures 4A-C) extending from the first edge to the second edge (as seen in at least figure 3b and 4A-C), the first distance being less than the distance between the first and second edges (as seen in figures 3a-c, 4A-C).
Iannacone does not expressly disclose that the curved part includes a single curved that extends one hundred eighty degrees.
Douglass discloses a stair nose molding comprising a first and second parallel elongated part each having a point of curvature and a curved part being tanged to the first and second point of curvature and including a single curved that extend one hundred eight degrees from the first point of curvature to eh second point of curvature and being integrally formed with the first and second elongated parts.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to pursue known design options and modify the curved part of Iannacone to be a single curved that extends one hundred eight degrees from the first point of curvature to the second point of curvature to achieve the predictable result of a rounded stair nose to satisfy specific design aesthetics where a curved nosing is a known desired nosing shape.
Claim 2. The stair nose molding according to claim 1, the curved part having a radius (at either of 110A or B figures 3A-Cand/or at either of 184 in figure 4A-c) for fitting said stair nose molding over a stair nose (as seen in figures 3a-c, 4A-C).
Claim 5. The stair nose molding according to claim 1, wherein the first elongated part is a first length of said stair nose molding (as seen in the figures).
Claim 6. The stair nose molding according to claim 1, wherein the first distance is less than the length of the first elongated part (as seen in figures 3a-c and 4A-c and noted throughout the disclosure).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicants arguments are drawn to the newly amended claim limitations not previously considered. The rejection above relies upon Douglass for teaching the single curve that extends one hundred eighty degrees from the first point of curvature to the second point of curvature. Thus applicants arguments are not persuasive.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA LAUX whose telephone number is (571)272-8228. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-3:30.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brian Mattei can be reached at 571.270.3238. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
JESSICA L. LAUX
Examiner
Art Unit 3635
/JESSICA L LAUX/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635