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 § 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.
Claims 1-2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abidov et al., US 9,970,203 in view of Bunch et al., US 2014/0298736 and Castellanos, US 2021/0062522.
Regarding claim 1:
Abidov discloses a tile leveling structure comprising:
a support base (11); and
a pressing seat (30 and 40) mounted on the support base;
wherein:
the support base includes a bottom plate (13) and a handle (12) extending upward from the bottom plate;
the support base is provided with a through hole (14);
the handle is provided with a locking portion (17) arranged in a top of the through hole;
the pressing seat includes a pedestal (40), an abutting portion (30) extending upward from a first end of the pedestal, and a push portion extending upward from a second end of the pedestal;
the abutting portion is provided with multiple ratchet teeth (36); and
the push portion has a top end (42) abutting a bottom face (31 and 32) of the abutting portion.
Abidov does not expressly disclose wherein the bottom plate has a concave shape.
Bunch discloses a support base having a bottom plate (18) that has a concave shape.
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to provide a concave shape as suggested by Bunch to the bottom plate of Abidov in order to ensure that tiles of varying thicknesses may be leveled and aligned (para. 0019).
Abidov does not expressly disclose wherein the abutting portion is provided with a press section located above the ratchet teeth.
Castellanos discloses a press section (36) located above ratchet teeth (12).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to provide a press section as suggested by Castellanos on the abutting portion of Abidov in order to facilitate manipulation of the wedge (para. 0024 of Castellanos).
Regarding claim 2:
Abidov discloses wherein the pressing seat is made of an elastic material (rubber) but does not disclose wherein the pressing seat is plastic.
Castellanos discloses a pressing seat of plastic (para. 0026).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to construct the pressing seat of Abidov of plastic as suggested by Castellanos for convenience (para. 0026). Plastic is also an elastic material.
Regarding claim 5:
Abidov discloses wherein the pedestal is integrally formed with the push portion, and an acute angle is defined between the pedestal and the push portion.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4 and 6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The most relevant prior art of record to Abidov as set forth above could not be reasonably modified to include, respectively, wherein each of the pedestal, the abutting portion, and the push portion of the pressing seat is a sheet plate (claim 3), the pedestal is integrally formed with the abutting portion (claim 4), and a receiving space is defined between the pedestal, the abutting portion and the push portion (claim 6). Modifying the prior to include these claimed features would compromise functionality and teach away from the prior art device, and require improper hindsight reasoning and reconstruction.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRENT W HERRING whose telephone number is (571)270-3661. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30a-6:00p MT.
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.
/BRENT W HERRING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633