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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 3/9/26 has been entered and fully considered.
The pending claims are 1, 17-23, 35-39, 42, 45, 47, 54-57.
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, 17, 56 and 57 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Overman US 2021/0095469 A1 (hereinafter ‘Overman’).
In regard to claim 1, Overman teaches an insulative panel (14) comprising:
a panel body (fig. 2) having opposed front and rear surfaces extending between first and second lateral edges and between first and second longitudinal edges (as seen in fig. 2), with a plurality of recessed drainage channels (36) formed in the rear surface and extending from the first longitudinal edge to the second longitudinal edge (see fig. 2 showing the channels extend throughout the entire rear surface hence, from and to the edges as claimed);
wherein the panel body comprises a base insulation board (20) and a rear facer element (24) secured to a rear surface of the base insulation board (see [0034]), wherein the plurality of recessed drainage channels is formed in the rear facer element (see [0035]).
In regard to claim 17, Overman teaches the claimed invention wherein one or more fastening elements (nails, screws) are provided on the rear facer element (see [0050]).
In regard to claim 56, Overman teaches the claimed invention wherein the rear facer element is secured to a rear surface of the base insulation board using one or more of adhesive and mechanical fasteners (see [0043] Note that rear facer is secured using an adhesive fattener created by the foam itself).
In regard to claim 57, Overman teaches the claimed invention further comprising a front facer element (22) secured to a front surface of the base insulation board (see [0028]), with at least one of a reinforcing material and an architectural coating (32) being adhered to the front facer element (see [0032]).
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.
Claims 18, 19 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D. A. Anderson US 3,401,494 (hereinafter ‘Anderson’).
In regard to claim 18, Anderson teaches an insulative panel (13) comprising:
a panel body having opposed front and rear surfaces extending between first and second lateral edges and between first and second longitudinal edges (Although not all the edges of the panel are shown for simplification purposes, one of ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize that the panel has lateral and longitudinal edges as suggested by fig. 1);
a plurality of elongated rigid struts (14, 15, 16) secured to the rear surface of the panel body, with apertured end portions extending beyond the first and second longitudinal edges of the panel (see fig. 1) for fastening to a building substrate (10, via fasteners 17). Although Anderson appears to suggest the struts extend beyond the edges as claimed, it is not explicitly disclosed, however, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have the struts extending beyond the edges so as to enable the connection of an adjacent panel. Per broadest reasonable interpretation, the struts are “apertured” as they have the shape of a channel, thus having an open side and therefore being considered to have “apertured” ends.
In regard to claim 19, Anderson teaches the claimed invention wherein the struts are at least partially embedded into the panel body (see fig. 1).
In regard to claim 22, Anderson teaches the claimed invention wherein a rear surface of each of the plurality of struts is substantially flush with the rear surface of the panel body (see fig. 3).
Claims 20, 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anderson in view of Amend US 2021/0040727 A1 (hereinafter ‘Amend’).
In regard to claims 20 and 21, Anderson does not explicitly teach the struts are at least partially received in mating channels.
Amend teaches an insulative panel (40) comprising a plurality of elongated struts (54) that are at least partially received in mating channels (52) in the rear surface of the panel body (see fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the instant application, to provide the struts at least partially received in mating channels of the panel body, as taught by Amend, so as to facilitate the location of the struts in an expedite manner during construction.
Note that the struts of Anderson include a rib portion (as seen in fig. 3) that is received in the corresponding groove of the combination.
Claim 45 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Overman in view of Palladino US 2021/0285228 A1 (hereinafter ‘Palladino’).
In regard to claim 45, Although Overman teaches the panels are butted against each other (see [0046]), it does not explicitly teach interlocking features configured to interlock with a second adjacent insulative panel.
Palladino teaches an insulative panel comprising at least one of the lateral or longitudinal edges includes one or more interlocking features (115) configured to interlock with corresponding interlocking features on a second panel as claimed (see [0096]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the instant application, to provide interlocking features in the panels of Overman, as taught by Palladino, so as to maintain the panels retained (see Palladino [0096]).
Claim 47 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Overman in view of Leen US 2017/0009449 A1 (hereinafter ‘Leen’).
In regard to claim 47, Overman does not explicitly teach the front surface of the panel body is outwardly tapered between a central portion and at least one of the first and second lateral edges and the first and second longitudinal edges.
Leen teaches an insulative panel (1) wherein the front surface of the panel (2) is outwardly tapered (at 13 “sloping surface”) between a central portion and at least one of the edges (see fig. 3). Note that the tapered portion extends from a central portion (the central area of the front 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the instant application, to provide the front surface of the panel to be outwardly tapered, as taught by Leen, so as to provide for a notch between the panels that will form a substantially fully watertight seal when adhesive is applied (see Leen [0101]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 23 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record does not teach or suggest a panel as recited in claim 18 having a plurality of elongated struts secured to the rear surface such that end portions of the struts extend beyond the longitudinal edges of the panel, that is, the struts are longer than the distance between the longitudinal edges, and the struts are attached being offset from the rear surface of the panel such that when the panel with the struts is attached to the building, a space if defined between the building and the panel.
Claims 35-39, 42, 54-55 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art of record does not teach or suggest a panel having a front surface that is a textured surface defining recessed and raised portions, a reinforcing material adhered to the raised portions via a base coat that is disposed over the reinforcing material and between it and the raised portions so as to encapsulate the reinforcing material.
It is noted that while insulative panels with mesh as a reinforcing material are notoriously well known in the art, the prior art lacks a panel in which the mesh is adhered to raised portions of a textured surface of a panel body and encapsulated by a basecoat.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments 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.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 35 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claim 35 and its dependents has been withdrawn.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAOLA AGUDELO whose telephone number is (571)270-7986. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM - 5PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brian E Glessner can be reached at 571-272-6754. 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.
/PAOLA AGUDELO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Prosecution Insights