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 1/15/26. Accordingly the application has been amended.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3,6-15,17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Potts (7241094).
Claim 1. Potts discloses a decking anchor comprising:
a first anchor portion (11);
a second anchor portion (30 or 30’) operatively coupled to the first anchor portion, wherein the second anchor portion comprises one or more upper flange anchor surfaces (the upper surface at the end of 36and/or 38), and wherein the first anchor portion and the second anchor portion are configured to move with respect to each other (where the first anchor portion can move up or down with respect to the second anchor portion);
a fastener (50) operatively coupled to the first anchor portion or the second anchor portion; and
a stop (56) operatively coupled to the fastener, wherein the stop impedes movement of the first anchor with respect to the second anchor when the stop is in an engaged position;
wherein the decking anchor is configured to be operatively coupled to a flute of dovetail decking, wherein the dovetail decking has a plurality of flutes, wherein the plurality of flutes comprise an upper flange, a portion of a first lower flange and a portion of second lower flange, and webs operatively coupling the upper flange to the first lower flange and the second lower flange (where it is capable of the claimed intended use); and
wherein in an installed position the first anchor portion is configured to contact webs of the flute in the dovetail decking (where it is capable of the claimed intended use); and
wherein in the installed position the one or more upper flange anchor surfaces of the second anchor portion are configured to contact the upper flange of the flute of the dovetail decking (where it is capable of the claimed intended use).
Claim 2. The decking anchor of claim 1, wherein the first anchor portion is a web anchor and the second anchor portion is a flange anchor (as seen in the figures).
Claim 3. The decking anchor of claim 2, wherein the web anchor comprises opposing contact surfaces (16,18) and opposing free surfaces (20,22), and wherein the opposing contact surfaces meet the webs of the dovetail decking in the installed position (where it is capable of the claimed intended use).
Claim 6. The decking anchor of claim 2, wherein the flange anchor comprises:
a base (34);
a first support (one of 36,38 or 36b,38b) having a first upper flange anchor surface of the one or more upper flange anchor surfaces (as seen in the figures and noted in claim 1 above); and
a second support (the other one of 36,38 or 36b,38b) having a second upper flange anchor surface of the one or more upper flange anchor surfaces (the other as noted above);
wherein the first support and the second support are operatively coupled to the base and form a flange anchor aperture (as seen in the figures), and wherein the first support or the second support are configured to contact the upper flange of the flute of the dovetail decking (where they are capable of the claimed intended use and function).
Claim 7. The decking anchor of claim 6, wherein the first upper flange anchor surface of the first support and the second upper flange anchor surface of the second support are operatively coupled to form a bridge (where 34 operatively connects the first upper flange anchor surface to the second upper flange anchor surface thus forming a bridge).
Claim 8. The decking anchor of claim 6, wherein the web anchor is located within the flange anchor aperture of the flange anchor (as seen in the figures), and
wherein a first contact surface (one of 20,22) of the web anchor contacts the first support and a second contact surface (one of 20,22) of the web anchor contacts the second support in an assembly position as the decking anchor is being installed.
Claim 9. The decking anchor of claim 6, wherein the flange anchor comprises a flange fastener aperture (40) and wherein the flange fastener aperture is configured to receive the fastener therethrough.
Claim 10. The decking anchor of claim 6, wherein the web anchor comprises a web anchor fastener aperture (14), and wherein the web fastener anchor aperture is configured to receive the fastener therethrough or wherein the web anchor is integral with the fastener.
Claim 11. The decking anchor of claim 2, wherein in an assembly position the first anchor portion and the second anchor portion are configured to pass through an opening in the flute of the dovetail decking (where they are capable of the claimed intended use).
Claim 12. The decking anchor of claim 2, wherein the web anchor is configured to rotate with respect to flange anchor (as noted in the figures and disclosure at col. 5, lines 9-35, where the web anchor can be inserted in the x direction by rotating, with the fastener, with respect to the flange anchor).
Claim 13. Potts discloses a decking system comprising:
dovetail decking (60) having a plurality of flutes, wherein the plurality of flutes comprise an upper flange (66), a portion of a first lower flange (72 or 70) and a portion of second lower flange (the other of 72 or 70), and webs (62,64) operatively coupling the upper flange to the first lower flange and the second lower flange; and
one or more decking anchors, wherein each of the one or more decking anchors comprise:
a first anchor portion (11);
a second anchor portion (30 or 30’) operatively coupled to the first anchor portion, wherein the second anchor portion comprises one or more upper flange anchor surfaces (the upper surface of 36 and/or 38 or 36a,b and/or 38a,b) and wherein the first anchor portion and the second anchor portion are configured to move with respect to each other (where the first anchor portion can move up and down with respect to the second anchor portion);
a fastener (50) operatively coupled to the first anchor portion or the second anchor portion; and
a stop (56) operatively coupled to the fastener, wherein the stop impedes movement of the first anchor with respect to the second anchor when the stop is in an engaged position;
wherein the decking anchor is configured to be operatively coupled to a flute of the dovetail decking (where it is capable of the claimed intended use);
wherein in an installed position the first anchor portion is configured to contact webs of the flute in the dovetail decking (where it is capable of the claimed intended use); and
wherein in the installed position the one or more upper flange anchor surfaces of the second anchor portion are configured to contact the upper flange of the flute of the dovetail decking (where it is capable of the claimed intended use, where the upper horizontal surfaces of 36,38 and 36b,38b are capable of contacting an upper flange of the flute of decking in part because they are parallel to the flange).
The height and depth of the flutes of the decking are capable of being modified to be deeper or less deep depending on the specific design and structural requirements of the decking to be formed. The anchor of Potts is capable of being used in a decking having flutes of variable depth/height, where the upper flange is closer to the first and second lower flange or where it is at a height more distant to the first and second lower flange. Accordingly the anchor of Potts is capable of and therefore configured to contact the upper flange of the flute of the decking when the height is reduced.
Claim 14. The decking system of claim 13, wherein the first anchor portion is a web anchor and the second anchor portion is a flange anchor (as seen in the figures).
Claim 15. The decking system of claim 14, wherein the web anchor comprises opposing contact surfaces (16,18) and opposing free surfaces (20,22), and wherein the opposing contact surfaces meet the webs of the dovetail decking in the installed position (where it is capable of the claimed intended use).
Claim 17. The decking system of claim 14, wherein the flange anchor comprises:
a base (34);
a first support (one of 36,38 or 36b,38b) having a first upper flange anchor surface of the one or more upper flange anchor surfaces (one of the surfaces as noted in the claims above); and
a second support (the other one of 36,38 or 36b,38b) having a second upper flange anchor surface of the one or more upper flange anchor surfaces (the other one of the surfaces as noted in the claims above);
wherein the first support and the second support are operatively coupled to the base and form a flange anchor aperture, and wherein the first support or the second support are configured to contact the upper flange of the flute of the dovetail decking (where it is capable of the claimed intended use).
Claim 18. The decking system of claim 14, wherein in an assembly position the first anchor portion and the second anchor portion are configured to pass through an opening in the flute of the dovetail decking (where it is capable of the claimed intended use).
Claim 19. The decking system of claim 14, wherein the web anchor is configured to rotate with respect to the flange anchor (as noted in the figures and disclosure at col. 5, lines 9-35, where the web anchor can be inserted in the x direction by rotating, with the fastener, with respect to the flange anchor).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 4-5,16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Potts (7241094) in view of Reiland (3005292).
Claims 4-5,16. Potts discloses the decking anchor of claims 2,14 as noted above, but does not disclose the anchor further comprising a biasing member operatively coupled to the web anchor or the flange anchor, wherein the biasing member aids in biasing the web anchor within the flange anchor in the assembly position or within the flute in the installed position and wherein the biasing member is a spring.
However it is known in the art to have a decking anchor further comprising a biasing member that is a spring to aid in biasing a web anchor within a decking. For example Reiland discloses a decking anchor including a biasing member that is a spring (21), wherein the biasing member aids in biasing the anchor (20) with in the flute. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing of the invention to pursue known design options and modify the decking anchor of Potts to include a spring biasing member as taught by Reiland to achieve the predictable result of a decking anchor that is securely installed and resists separation/disassembly.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/15/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants arguments are not persuasive. It is noted that the claims do not require that the upper flange anchor surfaces contact the upper flange of the flute, rather that they are capable of contacting. For claim 1, the claim is drawn to the anchor only and does not require decking. Clearly the anchor of Potts is capable of the claimed intended use in a decking have a height between the upper flange and the first and second lower flanges that matches the height of the arms 36,38, whereupon the upper flange anchor surfaces would contact the upper flange. Thus they are considered to be configured to contact a flange of a decking. Regarding claim 13, the decking is claimed, however the claim does not require actual contact. The upper flange anchor surfaces of configured to contact an upper surface of the decking as noted above and in the rejection. Applicants argument that the arms 36,38 and wings 46,48 are fixed relative to each other does not preclude the upper flange anchor surfaces from contacting an upper flange of decking as they surfaces are parallel to and disposed at a free end. The variability of the height/depth of the decking flute cavity and the distance from the decking upper flange to the decking first and second lower flanges effects the ability of the surfaces to contact the upper flange, not the relative position of the arms with respect to the wings. Further fastener 50 is capable of being adjusted to a position that does not interfere with the upper flange anchor surfaces contacting an upper flange because the fastener 50 can be lowered to a position so that it does not extend beyond the arms 36,38. This the anchor is configured for the intended use.
Applicant’s arguments that the arms 36,38 are thin and would bend and do not provide structural support in the longitudinal direction of the flute is not persuasive as these are not presently claimed features.
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