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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, Species c and i in the reply filed on 12/29/25 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no search burden. This is not found persuasive because (1) the search required for the elected invention and species would not include a search for the unelected invention and species since the structural difference between the inventions and species would necessitate additional search (for example, searching different classes/subclasses as noted in the restriction, or electronic resources, or employing different search queries where search terms for one species would not be the same as for another), and (2) examination is not limited simply to search. In addition to the search, much of the examination is devoted to determining patentability of claims. Said determination requires the formulation of rejections and responding to applicant' s arguments with regard to same. The additional search and the determination of patentability for multiple, patentability distinct species would place serious burden on the examiner.
The different search terms as noted above to be used when examining the various inventions and embodiments disclosed and claimed include “testing”, “cylinder compression strength test”, “three point modulus of rupture test”, “actuator” and “actuation” for the elected species, other species would include terms such as “elastic support”, “permanent building structural member”, “roof rafter”, “form ties”, “wire ties”; different subclasses within a class and even different classes, as noted in the restriction requirement, must be searched for the various embodiments disclosed and claimed; and thus would necessitate different formulation of any rejections directed to those claims encompassing the various embodiments disclosed and claimed
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 4-8,15,18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected inventions or species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 12/29/25.
Claim Objections
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim recites in line 3 “on the local ground upon to maintain” which is grammatically confusing with the term “upon”. Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1,2,11,12,13,14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Scarlett Lee “Build a doghouse with earth_Part3: ramming course and the completion of fabric formed rammed earth” (as seen in the attached NPL document).
Claim 1. Scarlett Lee discloses a method of fabricating an earthen construction formation, the method comprising:
preparing a site-derived earthen material mixture, wherein the site-derived earthen material mixture lacks cement stabilizer additives (page 2), the site-derived earthen material mixture constituting a pourable site-derived unstabilized earthen material mixture (page 2, “the mixture was somehow fluid”);
filling a geotextile fabric formwork (as noted in the captions of figures 7 and 8, where the fabric as noted throughout the document is a geotextile) with the pourable site-derived unstabilized earthen material mixture, the geotextile fabric formwork exhibiting flexibility and permeability (as noted in the captions of figures 7-8);
maintaining the geotextile fabric formwork with the pourable site-derived unstabilized earthen material mixture in an upright position (with the use of the timber formwork support as noted throughout the disclosure and seen in the figures); and
allowing the pourable site-derived unstabilized earthen material mixture filled in the geotextile fabric formwork to dry while maintained in the upright position (as noted at page 8).
Claim 2. The method as set forth in claim 1, wherein preparing the site-derived earthen material mixture comprises adding water to the site-derived earthen material mixture (as noted at page 2).
Claim 11. The method as set forth in claim 1, further comprising, once fully dried, removing the earthen construction formation from the geotextile fabric formwork and reusing the geotextile fabric formwork (as noted at pages 6 and 8).
Claim 12. Scarlet Lee discloses an earthen construction formation made by the method of claim 1 (as seen in the figures 12-14).
Claim 13. Scarlet Lee discloses a method of fabricating an earthen construction formation, the method comprising:
preparing a site-derived earthen material mixture (as noted at page 2), the site-derived earthen material mixture constituting a pourable site-derived earthen material mixture (as noted at page 2);
filling a geotextile fabric formwork with the pourable site-derived earthen material mixture (as noted throughout the disclosure and figures);
maintaining the geotextile fabric formwork (as noted in the captions of figures 7 and 8, where the fabric as noted throughout the document is a geotextile) with the pourable site-derived earthen material mixture in an upright position and on a local ground (via the timber formwork support boards as noted throughout the disclosure and seen in the figures); and
allowing the pourable site-derived earthen material mixture filled in the geotextile fabric formwork to dry while maintained in the upright position and while on the local ground (as noted at least at page 6).
Claim 14. The method as set forth in claim 13, wherein the site-derived earthen material mixture is free of cement stabilizer additives (as noted at page 2 where it doesn’t include cement stabilizers).
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(s) 3,9-10,16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scarlett Lee “Build a doghouse with earth_Part3: ramming course and the completion of fabric formed rammed earth” (as seen in the attached NPL document) in view of Fearn (6343894).
Claim 3. Scarlett Lee discloses the method as set forth in claim 1, but does not expressly disclose wherein maintaining the geotextile fabric formwork in the upright position comprises hanging the geotextile fabric formwork adjacent a local ground. Instead Scarlett Lee discloses maintaining the geotextile fabric formwork in the upright position and adjacent a local ground with timber formwork boards.
Fearn discloses a method of fabricating an construction formation comprising maintaining a geotextile fabric formwork in the upright position comprises hanging the geotextile fabric formwork adjacent a local ground (as seen in figures 13-14 and the related disclosure).
At the time the invention was filed it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to pursue known design options and modify the method of Scarlett Lee to maintain the geotextile fabric formwork in the upright positing hanging the geotextile from formwork supports as taught by Fearn to achieve the predictable result of accurately and more precisely controlling the amount and size of bulging that occurs (where Lee disclose at page 6 that vertical scaffolding would reduce bulging) to make removing the fabric formwork easier due to decreased bulging.
Claim 9. Scarlett Lee disclose the method as set forth in claim 1, wherein maintaining the geotextile fabric formwork in the upright position comprises supporting the geotextile fabric formwork on a local ground (via the timber formwork support boards as noted in the disclosure and figures), but does not expressly disclose systematically lowering the geotextile fabric formwork on the local ground to maintain support of the geotextile fabric formwork on the local ground as the earthen material mixture dries and as the earthen material mixture decreases in size in the geotextile fabric formwork. It is noted that the geotextile fabric formwork of Scarlett Lee is continuously supported on the local ground throughout the process. Additionally it is noted that earthen material mixture necessarily decreases in size as it dries, and further Scarlett Lee discloses adding a of lot water, which would necessarily result in size decrease during drying.
Fearn discloses a method of fabricating a construction formation comprising filling a geotextile fabric formwork with a pourable material mixture, where the geotextile fabric formwork is supported on a local ground and maintained supported on a local ground via a vertically adjustable telescoping form support to permit very accurate and easy vertical adjustment of the position of the support and fabric formwork (as seen in figures 13-14 and noted at least at cols 23-24).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to pursue known design options and modify the method Scarlett Lee to maintain the geotextile fabric formwork in the upright position on the local ground with the vertically adjustable formwork support as taught by Fearn and systematically lowering the geotextile fabric formwork on the local ground, via the vertically adjustable formwork support to maintain support of the geotextile fabric formwork on the local ground as the earthen material mixture dries and decreases in size, to achieve the predictable result of very accurate and precise positioning of the geotextile fabric formwork to reduce bulging.
Claim 10. Scarlett Lee in view of Fearn disclose the method as set forth in claim 9, wherein systematically lowering the geotextile fabric formwork on the local ground comprises actuation of at least one actuator (threaded shaft 252) in connection with the geotextile fabric formwork based on at least one sensed parameter (the sensed parameter being decreased size and/or a change in the contact with the local ground; where it is capable of the claimed intended use of being lowered based on a sensed parameter).
Claim 16. Scarlett Lee discloses the method as set forth in claim 13, but does not expressly disclose wherein maintaining the geotextile fabric formwork in the upright position and on the local ground comprises lowering the geotextile fabric formwork on the local ground upon to maintain support of the geotextile fabric formwork on the local ground as the earthen material mixture dries and as the earthen material mixture decreases in size in the geotextile fabric formwork, the lowering effected via actuation of at least one actuator. It is noted that the geotextile fabric formwork of Scarlett Lee is continuously supported on the local ground throughout the process. Additionally it is noted that earthen material mixture necessarily decreases in size as it dries, and further Scarlett Lee discloses adding a lot of water, which would necessarily result in size decrease during drying.
Fearn discloses a method of fabricating a construction formation comprising filling a geotextile fabric formwork with a pourable material mixture, where the geotextile fabric formwork is supported on a local ground and maintained supported on a local ground via a vertically adjustable telescoping form support with at least one actuator (252-cols 23-24) to permit very accurate and easy vertical adjustment of the position of the formwork support and fabric formwork (as seen in figures 13-14 and noted at least at cols 23-24).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to pursue known design options and modify the method of Scarlett Lee to maintain the geotextile fabric formwork in the upright position on the local ground with the vertically adjustable formwork support as taught by Fearn and lowering the geotextile fabric formwork on the local ground, via the vertically adjustable formwork support, by actuation of the at least one actuator, to maintain support of the geotextile fabric formwork on the local ground as the earthen material mixture dries and decreases in size, to achieve the predictable result of very accurate and precise positioning of the geotextile fabric formwork to reduce bulging.
Claim 17. The method as set forth in claim 16, wherein actuation of the at least one actuator is based on a sensed parameter indicating a drying state of the earthen material mixture (the sensed parameter being decreased size and/or a change in the contact with the local ground; where it is capable of the claimed intended use of being lowered based on a sensed parameter).
Conclusion
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