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 1-12 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 1 recites the limitation "its underside" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the end coupling regions" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the underside of the connector strip" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the prop head of the further formwork prop" in lines 4 and 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "its two corner sections adjacent to the connector strip" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the prop head of a respective formwork prop assigned to the connector strip" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Further, it is unclear what comprises the assigned respective formwork prop. The examiner will examine as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "this prop head" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Further, it is unclear what comprises this prop head. The examiner will examine as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the height" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "its top" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Further, it is unclear what precise component comprises its top. The examiner will examine as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the top of the at least one slab formwork panel" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the width" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the longitudinal direction" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 recites the limitation " the side facing the at least one slab formwork panel" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the rest of the prop head" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the two corner sections" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 rejected under 35 USC 112 as being dependent on a rejected claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the underside" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 rejected under 35 USC 112 as being dependent on a rejected claim.
Regarding claim 10, it is unclear what is meant by the phrase “each of at least one or all,” as the terms seem to represent the same quantity. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 11-12 rejected under 35 USC as being dependent on a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rock, U.S. Patent 6,176,463.
Regarding claim 1, Rock discloses a formwork system comprising: at least one formwork prop (1) for a slab formwork; and a connector strip (6) coupled to a prop head of the at least one formwork prop, wherein the connector strip rests with its underside on the prop head (see Fig. 6) and one of the end coupling regions of the connector strip engages with a counter-coupling region of the prop head (as shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 2, Rock discloses a formwork assembly wherein the at least one formwork prop comprises two formwork props (components 1 of Fig. 2) and the connector strip is coupled with the two formwork props, and that at least one further formwork prop (2) can be provided between the two formwork props (see Fig. 2), with the underside of the connector strip resting on the prop head of the further formwork prop and with an intermediate coupling region of the connector strip engaging with a counter-coupling region of the prop head of the further formwork prop (as shown in Fig. 6).
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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) 3-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rock, U.S. Patent 6,176,463 in view of Becker, WO2020/150539, U.S. Patent 10,907,364.
Regarding claim 3, Rock discloses a formwork assembly further comprising: at least one slab formwork panel (4), but does not specifically disclose it rests, on each of its two corner sections adjacent to the connector strip, on the prop head of a respective formwork prop assigned to the connector strip and which engages with this prop head. Becker teaches formwork panels that rest on two corner sections on a prop head of a respective formwork prop assigned to the connector strip and which engages with this prop head (as depicted in Fig. 2B). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the panels be supported at the corners in order that the supports may provide support to more than one panel.
Regarding claim 4, the prior art, as modified, discloses a formwork assembly wherein the height of the connector strip is such that its top and the top of the at least one slab formwork panel are essentially in one plane (see Becker Fig. 2B).
Regarding claim 5, Becker discloses a formwork assembly but does not specifically disclose wherein the connector strip essentially covers only half of the width of the prop head of the at least one formwork prop, which is measured transversely to the longitudinal direction of the connector strip. Becker teaches formwork panels that rest on two corner sections on a prop head of a respective formwork prop assigned to the connector strip and which engages with this prop head (as depicted in Fig. 2B). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the panels be supported at the corners in order that the supports may provide support to more than one panel. The connector strip would then cover approximately half of a prop head (see Fig. 2B).
Regarding claim 6, the prior art, as modified, discloses a formwork assembly wherein the prop heads of the formwork props assigned to the connector strip have a lowering region on the side facing the at least one slab formwork panel (side surface of a prop head facing a panel), which can be lowered relative to the rest of the prop head to lower the two corner sections of the at least one slab formwork panel adjacent to the connector strip, as best understood in light of the specification. The phrase “can be lowered relative to the rest of the prop head to lower the two corner sections of the at least one slab formwork panel adjacent to the connector strip” is a statement of intended use of the claimed invention and must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Regarding claim 7, the prior art, as modified, discloses a formwork assembly wherein a top of the connector strip and a top of the at least one slab formwork panel lie in a common plane and, directly adjacent to one another, together form a portion of a shaping surface for concrete (see Becker Fig. 2B).
Regarding claim 8, Rock discloses a formwork system comprising: a connector strip (6) for a slab formwork, the connector strip having a plurality of spaced-apart coupling regions (63) along a length of the connector strip, the connector strip having an end coupling region in each of two longitudinal end regions of the connector strip (outermost coupling regions, see Fig. 2), and the connector strip having at least one intermediate coupling region (center 63, see Fig. 2) between the two end coupling regions; two formwork props (1) for the slab formwork, wherein each of the two formwork props comprises a prop head (12), and wherein the connector strip is coupled to the prop heads of the two formwork props in such a way that the connector strip rests with the underside on the prop heads of the two formwork props (as shown in Fig. 2), and each one of the end coupling regions of the connector strip is engaged with a counter-coupling region of the prop head of a respective one of the two formwork props (see Fig. 2); at least one further formwork prop (2) for the slab formwork, wherein the at least one further formwork prop is between the two formwork props (see Fig. 2), wherein each of the at least one further formwork prop comprises a prop head (12), and wherein the connector strip rests with the underside on the prop head of the at least one further formwork prop (as shown in Fig. 2), and each of the at least one intermediate coupling region of the connector strip is engaged with a counter-coupling region of the prop head of a respective one of the at least one further formwork prop (see Fig. 2); and at least one slab formwork panel (4) having two corner sections adjacent to the connector strip (as shown in Fig. 2), but does not disclose wherein, at each of the two corner sections adjacent to the connector strip, the at least one formwork panel rests on and engages with the prop head of either one of the two formwork props or one of the at least one further formwork prop. Becker teaches formwork panels that rest on two corner sections on a prop head of a respective formwork prop assigned to the connector strip and which engages with this prop head (as depicted in Fig. 2B). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the panels be supported at the corners in order that the supports may provide support to more than one panel.
Regarding claim 9, Rock discloses a formwork assembly wherein either one or each of both of the end coupling regions has a receiving region for engagement with an insertion region on the prop head of the respective one of the two formwork props (the surfaces of each region that contact one another).
Regarding claim 10, Rock discloses a formwork assembly wherein each of at least one or all of the at least one intermediate coupling region has a receiving region for engagement with an insertion region on the prop head of the respective one of the at least one further formwork prop (as shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 11, Rock discloses a formwork assembly wherein the prop head of each of the two formwork props and each of the at least one intermediate formwork prop has a lowering region on a side facing the at least one slab formwork panel and a rest of the prop head (side facing the panel and uppermost surface, respectively), wherein the lowering region can be lowered relative to the rest of the prop head to lower the two corner sections of the at least one slab formwork panel adjacent to the connector strip. The phrase “can be lowered relative to the rest of the prop head to lower the two corner sections of the at least one slab formwork panel adjacent to the connector strip” is a statement of intended use of the claimed invention and must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Regarding claim 12, the prior art, as modified, discloses a formwork system wherein a top of the connector strip and a top of the at least one slab formwork panel lie in a common plane and, directly adjacent to one another, together form a portion of a shaping surface for concrete (see Becker Fig. 2B).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GISELE D FORD whose telephone number is (571)270-7326. The examiner can normally be reached M-T,Th-F 7:30am-4:30pm.
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 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.
GISELE D. FORD
Examiner
Art Unit 3633
/GISELE D FORD/Examiner, Art Unit 3633