DETAILED ACTION
Receipt is acknowledged of Applicant’s Response, dated 4 December 2025, which papers have been made of record.
Claims 1-20 are currently presented for examination, of which claims 11-20 have been withdrawn from consideration.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-10, in the reply filed on 4 December 2025 is acknowledged.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the Abstract as filed is fewer than 50 words. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2 and 4 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites “further comprising advancing the sub-component along the sub-component assembly surface between fastening cripple members to the first member and the second member’ at lines 1-3. There are no previously recited “cripple members” though claim 1 recites “a first cripple stud” at line 6 and “a second cripple stud” at line 11. It is unclear whether the phrase “between fastening cripple members” refers to the previously recited cripple studs.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the two or more cripple studs" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The examiner notes claim 3 recites “three or more cripple studs” however claim 4 does not depend from claim 3.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-6 and 9-10
Claims 1-3, 5-6, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by United States Patent Application Publication 2013/0283618 to Williams (hereinafter “Williams”).
Regarding claim 1, Williams discloses a method of extruding a sub-component (wall panel sub-assembly shown in Figure 16) to be incorporated into a sub-element (wall panel 20; intended use), the method comprising: loading a first member ((unnumbered board parallel to board 703; see Fig. 16; see Fig. 16) onto a sub-component assembly surface (110, including stationary frame 120 in Fig. 17); loading a second member (703; see Fig. 16) onto the sub-component assembly surface parallel to and spaced from the first member (see Figs. 16, 17); loading a first cripple stud (701) with a first end (see Fig. 16, end abutting board 703) of the first cripple stud abutting the first member (unnumbered board; see Annotated Figure below) and a second end (end of 701 abutting unnumbered board) of the first cripple stud abutting the second member, wherein the first cripple stud is perpendicular to the first member and the second member (see Fig. 16); fastening (boards may be nailed in position; see paragraph [0102]), by a robot (300 may have nailers 200; or via nailers 600), the first cripple stud to the first member (boards nailed together; see paragraph [0102]; 701 and unnumbered board understood to be fastened together to provide desired fixturing; see paragraphs [0088]-[0089]); fastening (boards may be nailed in position; see paragraph [0102]), by the a robot (300 may have nailers 200; or via nailers 600]), the first cripple stud to the second member (701 and board 703 understood to be fastened together to provide desired fixturing; see paragraphs [0088]-[0089]); loading a second cripple stud (second cripple stud 701; see Fig. 16) with a first end of the second cripple stud abutting the first member (unnumbered board) and a second end (end of cripple stud 701 abutting unnumbered member) of the second cripple stud abutting the second member (703), wherein the second cripple stud (701) is perpendicular to the first member (unnumbered board) and the second member (703) and laterally offset from the first cripple stud (701 and 701 shown laterally offset from one another); fastening (boards may be nailed in position; see paragraph [0102]), by a robot (see paragraph [0088]), the second cripple stud to the first member (unnumbered board); and fastening (boards may be nailed in position; see paragraph [0102]), by the a robot (see paragraph [0088]), the second cripple stud to the second member (701 and unnumbered board understood to be fastened together to provide desired fixturing; see paragraphs [0088]-[0089]).
PNG
media_image1.png
506
789
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Williams discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further Williams discloses advancing the sub-component (assembled frame) along the sub-component assembly surface (120; after boards are placed, moveable table sections and clamps may be actuated, such as movable carriage 170; see paragraph [0087) between fastening cripple members to the first member (unnumbered board) and the second member (703; nailing sequence performed per paragraph [0088]). Williams further teaches that where it is difficult to apply nails using the robot (300; see paragraph [0105]), the entire wall assembly may be moved away from the robot, then fastened (see paragraph [0105]).
Regarding claim 3, Williams discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further Williams discloses that three or more cripple studs are fastened to the first member and fastened to the second member (Fig. 16 shows two cripple studs 701, and further paragraph [0102] recites “two or more top ‘cripples 701’ result in at least three cripple studs being provided).
Regarding claim 5, Williams discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further Williams discloses that a length of the first member (unnumbered board; see Fig. 16, shown extending beyond cripple studs 701) is longer than a length of the second member (703; a length can be defined limited between opposed sides of cripple studs 701).
Regarding claim 6, Williams discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further Williams discloses that the robot (end of arm nail device; see paragraph [0088]) comprises at least one robot arm (articulating arm 300) and at least one fastening appliance (nailing assembly 200; see paragraph [0070]).
Regarding claim 9, Williams discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further Williams discloses loading a first jack stud (see Annotated Figured below; unnumbered board parallel to board 800) with a first portion (uppermost portion of board shown contacting horizontally extending first member, see also Fig. 16) of the first jack stud abutting the first member (unnumbered board) and a second portion of the first jack stud (see Annotated Figure, portion abutting board 703) abutting the second member (703), wherein the first jack stud is perpendicular to the first member (see Figs. 16 and 18) and the first member (unnumbered horizontally extending board); fastening, by a robot, the first jack stud to the first member (board 800 and other king studs may be secured with nails and nailers 200; see paragraph [0105]); fastening, by a robot, the first jack stud to the second member (board 800 and other king studs may be secured with nails and nailers 200; see paragraph [0105]); loading a second jack stud (board 800) with a first portion of the second jack stud abutting the first member and a second portion of the second jack stud abutting the second member, wherein the second jack stud is perpendicular to the first member and the second member and laterally offset from the first jack stud (see Fig. 18A); fastening, by a robot, the second jack stud to the first member; fastening, by a robot, the second jack stud to the second member; and wherein the first cripple stud (701) and the second cripple stud (701) are disposed between the first jack stud and the second jack stud (see Fig. 18A). The boards 800 and unnumbered board are understood to be secured in the same manner.
PNG
media_image2.png
508
752
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Williams discloses the limitations of claim 9, and further Williams discloses that the length of the first jack stud (unnumbered board; see Annotated Figure above) and the length of the second jack stud (800) exceed the distance between the first member and the second member (see Annotated Figure; each of the side boards is illustrated as substantially longer than the distance between member 703 and uppermost board).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 4 and 7-8
Claims 4 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 4, Williams discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further Williams discloses that the two or more cripple studs (701) are fastened (via nailer 200 or 600) with a second nail to the second member (703).
Williams does not explicitly disclose that the first member is nailed to the cripple studs (701), however Williams does teach that the second member (703) is nailed to the cripple studs (paragraph [0102]). Williams teaches that the cripple studs (701) may provide a rigid locating reference for the second member such that one having ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect that the cripple studs may be secured or otherwise located rigidly relative to the assembly surface. Further, Williams illustrates (see Figs. 16 and 17) a nailer assembly (600; see paragraph [0064]) mounted to the sub-component assembly surface abutting the first board (unnumbered board) and the cripple studs (701) at the first end. Williams teaches that the nailer assemblies (600) may insert nails through boards into appropriate studs (see paragraph [0101]), including nailing studs to both “top and bottom planks.” One having ordinary skill in the art would at least reasonably expect that at least the nailer assemblies 600 mounted to the sub-component assembly surface would apply a nail to secure the first board to the cripple studs, providing the recited rigidity for fixturing the wall assembly as described, and would thus reasonably expect that the nailers would apply a nail into the cripple studs through “top” plank (unnumbered board in Fig. 16) without modification of the principles of operation of Williams.
Thus, Williams is understood to teach the limitations of claim 4.
Regarding claim 7, Williams discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further Williams discloses loading a third cripple stud (also 701; see paragraph [0102] recites “two or more top ‘cripples 701’ is understood to teach at least three cripple studs being provided). Williams does not explicitly disclose that the third cripple stud abuts the first member and the second member, the third cripple stud being perpendicular to the first member and the second member and laterally offset from the first cripple stud.
However, the MPEP instructs that “a person of ordinary skill in the art is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton.” (See MPEP 2141.03(I)). “Office personnel may also take into account the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ” (Id.). in the absence of clear description regarding the positioning and attachment of additional cripple studs, one having ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect that a third or four or additional cripple studs would be disposed in the same manner taught by the illustrated cripple studs 701 and 701 in Figure 1. Because those two studs are shown aligned with the terminal sides of the second member (703), one having ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect that a third cripple stud would be positioned between the illustrated cripple studs.
As a result, one having ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect that a first end of the third cripple stud would be positioned to abut the first member (unnumbered board in Fig. 16, in the same manner as the illustrated crippled studs (701) and a second end of the third cripple stud would be positioned to abut the second member (703). In the same manner as the first cripple stud and the second cripple stud, the third cripple stud would be positioned perpendicular to the first member and the second member and laterally offset from the first cripple stud (any board positioned in the same manner as cripple studs 701 would be laterally offset from each other, even if abutting one another). Further, one would reasonably expect that the third cripple stud would be fastened, by a robot (nailer 300 or 600), the third cripple stud to the first member and to the second member (see paragraph [0088]).
Thus, Williams is understood to teach the limitations of claim 7.
Regarding claim 8, Williams discloses the limitations of claim 7, and further Williams teaches that the third cripple stud is disposed between the first cripple stud and the second cripple stud (because cripple studs 701 are positioned at terminal ends of board 703, one having ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect that further cripple studs would be positioned between the two terminal boards, otherwise the third cripple stud could not provide structural support to the second member 703).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
United States Patent 10,145,111 to Weber teaches a wall frame assembly (see Fig. 14) including jack studs (121, 128).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARRELL C. FORD whose telephone number is (313)446-6515. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM to 5:15 PM, Monday to Friday.
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, Sunil K Singh can be reached at (571) 272-3460. 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.
/DARRELL C FORD/Examiner, Art Unit 3726
Prosecution Insights