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 .
DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
This communication is a first Office Action on the Merits. Claims 1-4, 6-7, and 9-15, as amended 03 JUN. 2026, are pending and have been considered as follows:
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03 JUN. 26 has been entered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.83 or 1.84 because of the following informalities:
The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims, therefore the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s):
“diameter of said auxiliary column-shaped element… is larger than the other” has not been explicitly pointed out.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action.
The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 objected to because of the following informalities:
Cl. 3: “straight angle” has not been disclosed
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 1-4, 6-7, 9-11 and 15 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Cl. 1 ln. 16: the phrase “within perimetral edges” is vague, indefinite, and confusing as lacking proper antecedent basis within the claims or specification. It is unclear how “perimetral edges” are defined or how an element can be “within” such an undefined element.
Cl. 1 ln. 24: after “a diameter of said auxiliary column-shaped element, which is” the recitation(s) of “connected to said hole” is vague, indefinite, and confusing as having not been positively introduced. No “column shaped element” has been claimed as “connected”. For examination purposes, this will be interpreted as “which is --configured to be-- connected“.
Claims 2-4, 6-7, 9-11 and 15 though not particularly referenced in this section are nonetheless rejected as being dependent upon an indefinite claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 1-4, 6-7, 9-11 and 15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marshall et al. US 6370831 B1 (Marshall) in view of Daga US 4542612 A.
As per claim 1 Marshall teaches a system of modular elements for making reinforced concrete floors, comprising:
a plurality of base elements (base floor web tile assemblies 104, 1004 FIGs. 1, 11; this is recognized as teaching a base element comprises of a plurality of elements) intended to be laid at modular and pre-established distances on a surface to be floored,
said plurality of base elements (base floor web tile assemblies 104, 1004 FIGs. 1, 11; this is recognized as teaching a base element comprises of a plurality of elements) having projections (see at least two projections shown extending upward from element 104, proximate element 404, FIG. 7) extending therefrom;
a plurality of upper elements (floor panels 102, FIG. 1) intended to be positioned side by side to form a surface on which concrete can be cast; and
a plurality of column-shaped elements (floor panel supports 204, FIG. 2) configured to be positioned vertically on said plurality of base elements (base floor web tile assemblies 104, 1004 FIGs. 1, 11; this is recognized as teaching a base element comprises of a plurality of elements) to engage said projections (see at least two projections shown extending upward from element 104, proximate element 404, FIG. 7),
each column-shaped element (floor panel supports 204, FIG. 2) being configured to support at least one of said upper elements (floor panels 102, FIG. 1),
wherein, at or adjacently to a top end of each column-shaped element (floor panel supports 204, FIG. 2),
a corner (see right-most corner of 100, 102, FIG. 1) of each of said plurality of upper elements (floor panels 102, FIG. 1) is shaped to define at least one closing surface (see shape of above-identified corner, FIG. 1; this is recognized as “shaped to define” a closing surface as broadly claimed) or element that prevents an introduction of the concrete inside the column-shaped element (floor panel supports 204, FIG. 2), but fails to explicitly disclose:
further comprising one or more auxiliary upper elements,
each having a planar surface extending between adjacent upper elements and within perimetral edges,
each of said one or more auxiliary upper elements having a hole configured to be connected to an auxiliary column-shaped element that is tubular,
said hole having a diameter corresponding to an outer diameter of said auxiliary column-shaped element,
the perimetral edges of said one or more auxiliary upper elements being configured to be engaged to perimetral edges of one or more of the upper elements,
wherein said one or more auxiliary upper elements have said hole defined within the planar surface, and
wherein a diameter of said auxiliary column-shaped element, which is --configured to be-- connected to said hole, is larger than a diameter of the other column-shaped elements.
Daga teaches an auxiliary member capable of use with the flooring panels of Marshall, specifically:
further comprising one or more auxiliary upper elements (insert 106, FIG. 19),
each having a planar surface (see square shaped upward facing planar surface of insert 106, FIG. 19) extending between adjacent upper elements (plates 110, FIG. 19) and within perimetral edges (see edges of neighboring plates 110, FIG. 19),
each of said one or more auxiliary upper elements having a hole (see hole defined between four edges, FIG. 19) configured to be connected to an auxiliary column-shaped element that is tubular (see FIG. 19; an “auxiliary column-shaped element that is tubular” can be connected to the opening as above identified),
said hole (see hole defined between four edges, FIG. 19) having a diameter corresponding to an outer diameter of said auxiliary column-shaped element (see bottom of square shaped opening, FIG. 19),
the perimetral edges of said one or more auxiliary upper elements being configured to be engaged to perimetral edges of one or more of the upper elements (see “configured to be engaged”, FIG. 19),
wherein said one or more auxiliary upper elements have said hole (see hole defined between four edges, FIG. 19) defined within the planar surface, and
wherein a diameter of said auxiliary column-shaped element, which is --configured to be-- connected to said hole (see hole defined between four edges, FIG. 19; note that the space between neighboring pedestals 16 is larger than the space between the four edges), is larger than a diameter of the other column-shaped elements.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the assembly of Marshall by including the inserts as taught by Daga in order to allow for a closing member to be mounted amongst the floor panels because doing so would enable the passage of construction elements therethrough as is old and well-known in the art of formworks.
As per claim 2 Marshall in view of Daga teaches the limitations according to claim 1, and Marshall further discloses wherein at least one of said upper elements (floor panels 102, FIG. 1) comprises:
a planar or curved upper surface (see “generally planar floor panels defining the raised floor” Cl. 20) defining a formwork bottom surface of a slab to be cast; and lowered side edges (see “lowered” edge extending downward at recess 106, FIG. 1) extending between corners of said at least one of said upper elements and shaped to be joined to corresponding side edges of other adjacent upper elements (floor panels 102, FIG. 1), wherein said at least one closing surface or element is configured as an angular portion (see shape of above-right-most corner, FIG. 1; this is recognized as “an angular portion” as broadly claimed because the proximal edge and the upper-right facing hidden from view edge form a right angle) of said at least one of said upper elements.
said angular portion being positioned at each corner of said at least one of said upper elements and being configured to be rested (see FIG. 1; these are recognized as being “configured to be” —or capable of being– rested as claimed) on the top end of one of said column-shaped elements (floor panel supports 204, FIG. 2).
wherein said angular portion is configured to form, together with other identical angular portions of a same number of upper elements resting on the same column-shaped element (floor panel supports 204, FIG. 2), a closed surface which completely closes said top end of said column- shaped element (see FIG. 8; a closed surface is formed “together with… a same number of upper elements” as broadly claimed).
As per claim 3 Marshall in view of Daga teaches the limitations according to claim 2, and Marshall further discloses wherein said angular portion (see shape of above-identified right-most corner, FIG. 1; this is recognized as “an angular portion” as broadly claimed because the proximal edge and the upper-right facing hidden from view edge form a right angle) comprises a part shaped as a straight angle (see proximal edge of above-identified right-most corner, FIG. 1; this is recognized as a “straight angle” as broadly claimed).
As per claim 4 Marshall in view of Daga teaches the limitations according to claim 2, and Marshall further discloses said angular portion comprises means for removable connection (panel fastener 600, FIG. 7) with the angular portions of other upper elements resting on the same column shaped element (floor panel supports 204, FIG. 2).
As per claim 6 Marshall in view of Daga teaches the limitations according to claim 1, and Daga further discloses wherein said one or more auxiliary upper elements (insert 106, FIG. 19) comprises a plurality of seats (see at least four upper and four lower planar surfaces at 108, FIG. 19) defined on said planar surface and distributed on one or more circumferences which are concentric with said hole (see hole defined between four edges, FIG. 19), said plurality of seats (see at least four upper and four lower planar surfaces at 108, FIG. 19) being configured to receive an edge of the top end of said an auxiliary column-shaped element (see FIG. 19; the above identified upper and lower planar surfaces can receive —or are “configured to receive”— the pedestals 16). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the assembly of Marshall in view of Daga forming the insert to receive a lower placed tubular element as taught by Daga in order to allow rigid connection with a subjacent passageway.
Regarding the limitation of the seats being located in a “concentric” fashion, the Examiner submits square shaped areas having a common center point can be considered concentric, i.e. having a common center.
As per claim 7 Marshall in view of Daga teaches the limitations according to claim 6, and Daga further discloses wherein said plurality of seats (see at least four upper and four lower planar surfaces at 108, FIG. 19) are distributed on at least two of said circumferences (see upper and lower circumferences about elements 106, 107, and 108, FIG. 19) which are concentric with said hole (see hole defined between four edges, FIG. 19) and have different diameters (see FIG. 19; note the above identified upper and lower circumferences necessarily form different upper and lower diameters, as broadly claimed). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the assembly of Marshall in view of Daga forming the insert to have upper and lower planar edges as taught by Daga in order to form a lower profile member which would limit the tripping hazard when installed between flooring panels.
As per claim 9 Marshall in view of Daga teaches the limitations according to claim 1, and Marshall further discloses each of said base elements (base floor web tile assemblies 104, 1004 FIGs. 1, 11; this is recognized as teaching a base element comprises of a plurality of elements) comprises:
a planar lower surface (see “generally planar floor panels defining the raised floor” Cl. 20; this is recognized as teaching the lower surface is at least somewhat “planar”) configured to be rested on a surface (see FIG. 1; also “ affix the interconnected base floor web tile assemblies to the base floor” abstract ln. 10) on which a floor will be laid;
said projections (see at least two projections shown extending upward from element 104, proximate element 404, FIG. 7) extending upwards from said planar lower surface (see EXRFIG. 7, below; note the continuous surface extending “upwards” from the bottom surface through the projections),
each of said projections (see at least two projections shown extending upward from element 104, proximate element 404, FIG. 7) comprising at least one step (see inside face —hidden from view— of above identified projections, FIG. 7; compare to inward face, FIG. 11 and EXRFIG. 11, below; also “matrix into which floor panel supports 204 are secured” 7:58; this is recognized as teaching the above identified projections have an inside face, which teaches a “step”) defined on a portion of said projections (see at least two projections shown extending upward from element 104, proximate element 404, FIG. 7) facing towards a center of each base element,
said at least one step (see inside face —hidden from view— of above identified projections, FIG. 7, discussed above) being configured to engage a part of a bottom end of one of the column-shaped elements (floor panel supports 204, FIG. 2),
wherein said projections (see at least two projections shown extending upward from element 104, proximate element 404, FIG. 7) and said at least one step are configured to jointly define a circumference (X) on which said bottom end of the one of the column-shaped elements (floor panel supports 204, FIG. 2) can be rested, and
wherein said circumference (X) lies on an ideal plane which is parallel to said planar lower surface (see FIG. 7 and EXRFIG. 7, below; the “circumference” wherein element 404 is secured is recognized as parallel to the base floor web tile assemblies 104, 1004 FIGs. 1, 11).
EXRFIG. 7
PNG
media_image1.png
529
550
media_image1.png
Greyscale
EXRFIG.11
PNG
media_image2.png
488
486
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As per claim 10 Marshall in view of Daga teaches the limitations according to claim 9, and Marshall further discloses wherein said projections (see at least two projections shown extending upward from element 104, proximate element 404, FIG. 7) are connected to said planar lower surface with flexible arms (see “elongated arm” at arrow 202, FIG. 7; note “Base floor web tile 202 and floor panel support boss 206 are preferably made of plastic but other resilient and flexible materials may be used” 6:4; this is recognized as teaching the above identified “arm” is at least somewhat “flexible” as plastic is known to be flexible),
each of said flexible arm having an inner portion (see “INSIDE” EXRFIG. 7.1, below, of above identified “arm” extend from lower left to upper right which portion faces inward and extends as claimed) that extends parallel to the surface to be floored, and an outer portion (see “OUTER PORTION” EXRFIG. 7.2, below), extending transversely to the surface to be floored.
EXRFIG. 7.1
PNG
media_image3.png
637
674
media_image3.png
Greyscale
EXRFIG. 7.2
PNG
media_image4.png
244
721
media_image4.png
Greyscale
As per claim 11 Marshall in view of Daga teaches the limitations according to claim 9, and Marshall further discloses wherein each one of said projections (see at least two projections shown extending upward from element 104, proximate element 404, FIG. 7) comprises a body (see above identified projections, FIG. 11; these have at least a somewhat upwardly extending “body”; see also EXRFIG.11), with at least one wall (upward and inward extending walls between ring and top face, EXRFIG.11) facing towards a center of the base element and said at least one step, on which a part of the bottom end of a column-shaped element (floor panel supports 204, FIG. 2) can be rested, and
wherein said projections (see at least two projections shown extending upward from element 104, proximate element 404, FIG. 7) and said at least one step define a seat (bottom face extending downward opposite top face, EXRFIG. 11) configured to house said bottom end of one of the column-shaped elements (floor panel supports 204, FIG. 2),
said bottom end being held laterally by walls (upward and inward extending walls between ring and top face, EXRFIG.11) of said projections (see at least two projections shown extending upward from element 104, proximate element 404, FIG. 7) and at a bottom by said at least one step.
As per claim 15 Marshall in view of Daga teaches the limitations according to claim 1, and Marshall further discloses wherein each of said base elements (base floor web tile assemblies 104, 1004 FIGs. 1, 11; this is recognized as teaching a base element comprises of a plurality of elements) comprises elements (tabs 314, FIG. 3) for a removable, direct or indirect, connection with adjacent base elements (base floor web tile assemblies 104, 1004 FIGs. 1, 11; this is recognized as teaching a base element comprises of a plurality of elements), on which said plurality of column-shaped elements that can rest (see “can rest” FIG. 7).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 12-14 allowed.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03 JUN. 26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As per the argument (“Page 8 of 10”)
“neither Marshall nor Daga disclose that "a corner of each of said plurality of upper elements (300) is shaped to define at least one closing surface or element “
the Examiner submits the claims have not defined a “closing surface or element” and fact only require a portion of the upper element to be “shaped” to contribute to a surface. Marshall in FIG. 1 teaches such a surface, while the claims do not explicitly require and the specification does not define either of a closing surface or element. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
As per Applicant’s supposition that “neither Marshall nor Daga disclose "one or more auxiliary upper elements (400), each having a planar surface extending between adjacent upper elements and within perimetral edges" Examiner notes the four edges of the insert of Daga can be reasonably broadly interpreted to define a plane which further comprises a hole capable of being connected to a later defined column-shaped member as broadly claimed.
As per the argument (“Page 9 of 10”):
Daga also does not disclose that ""a diameter of said auxiliary column-shaped element, which is connected to said hole (410), is larger than a diameter of the other column-shaped elements (200)" because the column received into insert 106 has the same diameters as the other columns.
the Examiner submits applicant has not shown a relationship between the prior introduced “plurality of column-shaped elements” and a second —distinct— column shaped element, specifically a relationship wherein an “auxiliary column-shaped element” is “larger” than a previously introduced column-shaped element. Examiner notes the “neighboring pedestals 16” form an auxiliary column-shaped element connecting to the previously introduced hole which can form a larger diameter as broadly claimed.
As per the argument (“Page 9 of 10”):
Turning now to claim 2, neither Marshall nor Daga teach that the upper elements have "lowered side edges (320) extending between corners of said at least one of said upper elements (300)." Marshall, cited in the Office Action, teaches that only the corners of floor panels 102 have lowered side edges, that is, Marshall does not teach lower side edges that extend between the corners of the floor panel.
the Examiner submits the cited panel edges extend at least somewhat “between” corners of the panels as the panels clearly present an effective square shape with sides between corners.
As per the argument (“Page 9 of 10”):
Turning now to claim 6, neither Marshall nor Daga teach seats that are defined in the planar surface of the auxiliary upper elements. The edges of flange 108, which the Office Action has alleged to be "seats," are defined instead in the capital form inserts 106. Moreover, those edges are not "seats," because the bottom edges of flange 108 do not contact the auxiliary column-shaped element, nor are configured to "receive" the auxiliary column-shaped element.
the Examiner submits “seats” have not been so distinctly redefined by applicant to comprise a structural limitation beyond the common meaning of “accommodate” or “position”. The upper and lower straightened planar surfaces of Daga are clearly capable of positioning or accommodating the straightened plates. The broadly claimed “seats” have not been introduced to perform a function which the straightened areas in Daga do not inherently perform.
As per the argument (“Page 9 of 10”):
Turning now to claim 9, the alleged "steps" highlighted in EXRFIG. 11 of the Office Action are not "defined on a portion of said projections facing towards a center of each base element (100)" because those alleged steps are not on defined on floor panel supports 204 at all.
Further, the alleged "steps" cited in the Office Action are not configured to engage any of the floor panels supports 204 at all because they have no contact with floor panels supports 204. The Office Action has cited col. 7, line 58 of Marshall, which reads: "Base floor web tiles 202 provide a matrix into which floor panels supports 204 are secured." The portion of web floor tiles that secures floor panels support 204, however, does not include the alleged "steps," which have no contact with floor panel supports 204.
the Examiner submits the cited projections extending upward from web tile elements (104) are capable of being engaged by the later added supports. Claim 9 merely requires “projections extending upwards”. The functional recitation of “said at least one step being configured to engage” does not suggest a structural limitation which the projections of Marshall are not capable of providing —at least somewhat— because of their location. The cylinders would be restricted from passing through the projections at least by way of interference. FIGs. 4 and 4A-C make clear a lower portion of each vertical cylinder extends outward which portion would necessarily provide a location at which to interact with the projections.
Applicant’s supposition that “the alleged "steps" … have no contact with floor panels supports 204” is not persuasive as to the claim language of “configured to engage” because the limitations of “have no contact” is not present in the claims.
As per the argument (“Page 9 of 10” through “Page 10 of 10”):
Turning now to claim 10, neither Marshall nor Daga disclose "each of said flexible arm having an inner portion that extends parallel to the surface to be floored, and an outer portion extending transversely to the surface to be floored." Not only is the transversely-extending portion of the flexible arms not disclosed by any of the cited references, but Marshall (cited in regard to claim 10) teaches that the base floor web tile must not stretch during installation (col. 6, lines 23- 25). Opposite to that, Applicant has disclosed that the transverse portion of the flexible arms enables an outward widening of protrusions 110, therefore, Marshall directs a reader away from having flexible arms with transversely-extending outer portions.
the Examiner submits “enables an outward widening” and/or “must not stretch” are not a recited features of the rejected claim(s).(See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993)). The Examiner submits the structural limitations of an “inner portion that extends parallel” and “outer portion extending transversely” are clearly capable of being reasonably broadly met by the portions of Marshall which extend away from the body and are provided with hook shapes, as shown in FIG. 1-3 and 7-8.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Marchetti US 11378293 B1 teaches auxiliary upper elements which are configured to be connected to auxiliary column-shaped elements
PNG
media_image5.png
663
435
media_image5.png
Greyscale
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 extension fee 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 JOSEPH J SADLON whose telephone number is (571)270-5730. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 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 D MATTEI can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JJS/
/ANNA M MOMPER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights