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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the
“d. the structural member interfacing with or in close association with the anchor plate of the connector and attached to the anchor plate of the connector with the anchor plate of the connector supporting the structural member, and the first vertical panel of the one or more vertical panels disposed between the cementitious member and the anchor plate, and the anchor plate disposed between the first vertical panel of the one or more vertical panels and the structural member” as recited in claim 1;
“each…anchoring legs are formed with …more openings” (only one opening in each leg shown) as recited in claims 10 and 11
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
par 0034 contains a typographical error in spelling “planer” instead of “planar”;
two different reference numbers 18 and 19 are used to refer to the strengthening flanges in par 0039;
the same reference numeral 18 is used to designate a rear end (par 0038) and a strengthening flange 18 (par 0039).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 2 of claim 1 contains a typographical error in reciting “diposed” instead of “disposed.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 2 of claim 14 contains a typographical error in reciting “horitzontally” instead of “horizontally.” 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.
Claims 1-16 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.
The terms “negligible” and “significant” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The terms “negligible” and “significant” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The specification does not provide a criterial for what would be considered as “negligible” and “significant” dowel bearing strength.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the one or more openings" in line 2 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The remainder of the claims are rejected as a result of their dependency from claim 1.
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, 10, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Publication No. 2016/0333570 to Gueli (“Gueli”). See also annotated Fig. 5 below.
Regarding claim 1, Gueli discloses a connection (Fig. 1) utilizing a connector 2 (see embodiment of Fig 5) to attach a structural member 38 to a generally vertical cementitious member 32 having one or more panels 30 disposed on one or more vertical faces of the cementitious member, the connection comprising: a. the one or more panels 30, each having a front face (face that is facing structural member 38), a back face (face facing concrete 32) opposite the front face, the one or more panels having negligible dowel bearing strength (due to being constructed of foam which has lower bearing strength compared to concrete, par 0027) compared to the generally vertical cementitious member 32; b. the generally vertical cementitious member 32 having significant dowel bearing strength compared to the one or more vertical panels; c. the connector 2, the connector 2 comprising: i. an anchor plate 4, 12 in parallel registration or in close association with the front face of a first vertical panel 30 of the one or more vertical panels; ii. a plurality of anchoring legs 201, 202 attached to the anchor plate and extending from the anchor plate and through the first vertical panel of the one or more vertical panels and into the cementitious member with the cementitious member supporting the embedded anchoring legs and the anchoring legs supporting the anchor plate (as shown in use in Fig. 1); d. the structural member 38 interfacing with or in close association with the anchor plate 4, 12 of the connector and attached to the anchor plate of the connector with the anchor plate of the connector supporting the structural member, and the first vertical panel 30 of the one or more vertical panels disposed between the cementitious member 32 and the anchor plate 4, 12, and the anchor plate 4, 12 disposed between the first vertical panel 30 of the one or more vertical panels and the structural member 38 (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 10, Gueli discloses that each of the plurality of anchoring legs are formed with one or more openings 18, 20.
Regarding claim 11, Gueli discloses at least one of one or more openings 18, 20 in each of the plurality of anchoring legs is formed near the rear end (end furthest from 4) of the anchoring leg of the plurality of anchoring legs in which it is formed.
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) 2-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gueli in view of U.S. Patent No. 10,036,160 to Judd (“Judd”).
Regarding claim 2, Gueli discloses that a. each of the plurality of anchoring legs 201, 202 of the connector has a top edge 203/204 and a bottom edge 205/206 and an end edge 207/208, with the top and bottom edges being opposed to each other and the end edge being opposed to where the anchoring leg attaches to the anchor plate of the connector; but does not disclose first and second strengthening flanges extend along portions of the top and bottom edges of each anchoring leg respectively, and the first and second strengthening flanges connected to each anchoring leg also extend away from the anchoring leg to which they are attached.
Gueli in Fig. 9 discloses that each leg 54, 56 can be formed separately and not connected to each other.
Judd in Fig. 13 discloses that a connector (Judd 46) with anchoring legs (leg where leader line of 46 is pointing to and a corresponding opposed leg) can include first and second strengthening flanges (short flange extending perpendicular from 46) extend along portions of the top and bottom edges of each anchoring leg respectively, and the first and second strengthening flanges connected to each anchoring leg also extend away from the anchoring leg to which they are attached.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the connector of Gueli to have first and second strengthening flanges extend along portions of the top and bottom edges of each anchoring leg respectively, and the first and second strengthening flanges connected to each anchoring leg also extend away from the anchoring leg to which they are attached as taught in Judd with a reasonable expectation of success because it would strengthen each anchoring leg.
Regarding claim 3, Gueli modified by Judd discloses that the first and second strengthening flanges connected to each anchoring leg of the plurality of anchoring legs extend in the same direction from each anchoring leg to which they are attached.
Regarding claim 4, Gueli modified by Judd discloses that a. the anchor plate of the connector has a center region; and b. the first and second strengthening flanges connected to each anchoring leg of the plurality of anchoring legs extend toward the center region (center portion of 4) of the connector.
Regarding claim 5, Gueli modified by Judd discloses that the first and second strengthening flanges connected to each anchoring leg of the plurality of anchoring legs extend orthogonally to the anchoring leg to which they are connected.
Claim(s) 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gueli in view of GB 2524965 to McAndrew (“McAndrew”).
Regarding claim 7, Gueli does not disclose that each of the plurality of anchoring legs are formed with one or more embossments.
McAndrew discloses a connector in Fig. 4 wherein the connector comprises a plurality of anchoring legs (McAndrews 5, 5’), each of the anchoring legs formed with one or more embossments (McAndrews 8) for reinforcing each leg.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the connector of Gueli to have the plurality of anchoring legs formed with one or more embossments as taught in McAndrews with a reasonable expectation of success because it would strengthen each leg by the reinforcing embossments.
Regarding claim 8, Gueli modified by McAndrew does not disclose that each of the plurality of anchoring legs is formed with four embossments. It has been held that a mere duplication of parts, such as the duplication of the embossments, has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. A duplication of parts is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 9, Gueli modified by McAndrew does not disclose that at least one of the one or more embossments in each of the plurality of anchoring legs extends substantially the entire length of the anchoring leg of the plurality of anchoring legs in which it is formed.
McAndrew discloses a connector in Fig. 2 wherein at least one of the one or more embossments (McAndrews 8, Fig. 2) in each of the plurality of anchoring legs of the connector extends substantially the entire length of the anchoring leg of the plurality of anchoring legs in which it is formed.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the connector of Gueli to have at least one of the one or more embossments in each of the plurality of anchoring legs extends substantially the entire length of the anchoring leg of the plurality of anchoring legs in which it is formed as taught in McAndrews with a reasonable expectation of success because it would strengthen a substantial length of the leg by the reinforcing embossments.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 12-16 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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: None of the prior art, alone or in obvious combination absent hindsight, discloses applicant’s invention of a connection as recited in claims 6, 12, and 15. In particular, claim 6 requires that the first anchoring leg is offset from the second anchoring leg such that one of the first and second anchoring legs is disposed closer to the top edge of the anchor plate and the other of the first and second anchoring legs is disposed closer to the bottom edge of the anchor plate. In each of the cited prior art, anchoring legs inserted through a form panel and embedded into concrete have top and lower edges that lie in the same plane. There is absent teaching and reasoning to modify the prior art to meet the claimed language. Claims 12 and 15 require a similar structure where the first and side edges of the anchor plate are parallel and offset from each other. Even assuming that such features are taught by the prior art, modifying Gueli to have offset side edges would form an irregular saddle 12 such that a bottom surface of structural member 38 would no longer be evenly supported.
Annotated Fig. 5 of Gueli
PNG
media_image1.png
584
566
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE T CAJILIG whose telephone number is (571)272-8143. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-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 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.
/CHRISTINE T CAJILIG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633