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 .
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 5, 6 and 19 are 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 5 recites “wherein at least two shapes”, lacking antecedent basis.
Claim 6 recites “one or more crack at angle that not is 90”. Clarification is required.
Claim 19 recites “the concrete body” lacking antecedent basis and the limitation “and/or” is indefinite.
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, 8, and 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 8,683,773 to Emmons et al.
Regarding claim 1, Emmons discloses a method comprising the steps of supporting a tool over a surface (of concrete, abstract, fig. 3: step 310), the step of machining (310) inherently requires a machining tool held over a surface, directing the tool against the surface (machining) creating a plurality of channels (fig. 5 and 12: plurality of channels cut about the crack (fig. 12) having a plurality of channels), the channels shown in fig. 12 have opposite ends and a length which is non linear and is therefore longer that a measured straight line distance the opposite ends (end points).
Regarding claim 3, the channel is nonlinear.
Regarding claim 4, a preexisting crack (abstract) and channel inherently have borders of a shape.
Regarding 5, the shapes share a border (fig. 5: see crack border as part of cut border, sharing its shape.
Regarding claim 6, the channel extends at an angle not 90 degrees from the crack (fig. 5: see angle between 220 and 210).
Regarding claim 8, the channels may inherently be a control joint (see joint of channels in fig. 12).
Regarding claim 19, the concrete (abstract) surface is inherently walkable, as concrete is a walkable surface.
Regarding claim 20, a material is applied and fills the crack (fig. 9: 830, 102, 820).
Regarding claim 21, the body is concrete (abstract).
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 2and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. U.S. Patent No. 8,683,773 to Emmons et al.
Regarding claim 2, Emmons discloses the basic claim structure of the instant application but does not disclose specific dimensions of length. Applicant fails to show criticality for specifically claimed dimensions, therefore it would have been an obvious design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Emmons to use the dimensions such as specified in these claims. It should also be noted that it appears Emmons is at least 5% longer than the straight line distance (in fig. 12) but not explicitly disclosed as such. Such a longer length would have been obvious since cracks tend to grow in nonlinear directions.
Regarding claim 7, Emmons does not disclose the channels being an inch or less. However, Emmons discloses the basic claim structure of the instant application but does not disclose specific cut/channel dimensions. Applicant fails to show criticality for specifically claimed dimensions, therefore it would have been an obvious design choice to use the dimensions such as specified in these claims. The use of shallow cuts would require less filler, saving time and money.
Claims 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 8,683,773 to Emmons et al. in view of U.S. Patent No. 3,655,244 to Swisher.
Regarding claims 9 and 10, Emmons does not disclose repeatedly directing a tool up and down and moving horizontally although horizontally is inherent as the channels cannot be made otherwise since they are horizontal and does not disclose an impact drill as a tool for cutting. Swisher discloses an impact drill for such a use (column 1, lines 7-10, impact drills impact up and down). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Emmons by using such a tool since they are well known for cutting stone.
Claim 11-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 8,683,773 to Emmons et al. in view of U.S. Patent Application No. US 2003/0069668 to Zurn.
Regarding claims 11-18, Emmons does not disclose computer projected guides for cutting the surface. Zurn discloses motorized (robotic) machinery for cutting stone or concrete by projecting a target and machine cutting a surface along lines by computer control [0031]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Emmons by using such a machine since it is capable of use with concrete, which is like stone. This would speed production. Also, the applicant should note that Emmons is concerned with slabs such as concrete (abstract).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Basil Katcheves whose telephone number is (571)272-6846. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 8:00 am to 6:30pm EST.
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 Glessner can be reached on (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.
/BASIL S KATCHEVES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633