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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1-14 have been examined.
The application is a continuation of US application 17/173,206, now US Patent No. 12,005,607.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of the apparatus claims in Group I in the reply filed on 1/05/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the basis for the restriction was improper and that there would be no added burden to search and examine between the method and apparatus claims. This is not found persuasive because the process includes manner of operation that would not be necessary for consideration in the examination of apparatus claims if the prior art structures are capable of the manner operation, further the material used while required in the process limitations are not a necessary requirement for the references to be considered teaching over the apparatus claims. Thereby, there remains different considerations and different criterias that would qualify for prior art in both search and examination requirements.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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, 4, 6, and 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DOWNING (US 5339574 A).
Re: 1, DOWNING teaches of a system configured to form a hollow architectural structure (see cylinder and for habitation, see Col. 1, lines 61-68; see also Fig. 1), the system comprising:
an inner support mold (see 20 having a first thickness and a first injector (see pressurized tank/air bottles 14), wherein the inner support mold is configured to be filled with a fluid support or structural material via the first injector (see inflation of the cavities via air bottles 14, see Col. 3, lines 22-24);
an outer support mold arranged around the inner support mold and having a second thickness and a second injector, wherein the outer support mold is configured to be filled with a fluid structural material via the second injector such that the fluid structural material fills the volume between the outer support mold and the inner support mold (see teaching of the middle cavity that is filled with the fluid mold material, and wherein, then hardened, see Col. 3, line 25 to Col. 4, line 13); and
one or more separator system components coupled to the inner support mold and the outer support mold, the one or more separator system components holding apart the inner support mold from the outer support mold a set distance at one or more locations along the inner support mold and outer support mold, wherein the system is configured to form a hollow architectural structure from the fluid structural material when the fluid structural material hardens within the system (see constraints 22, that are the supports for a set distance, see Fig. 2).
Re: 2 (upon 1), wherein the fluid structural material includes concrete. (This is an intended use, material worked upon, claim does not provide additional structural limitation to the apparatus, and further see DOWNING teaching of the fluid mold material that is then hardened and can be seen as capable of operating such material.)
Re: 4 (upon 1), wherein the hollow architectural structure is a room and the hardened fluid structural material forms one or more walls of the room. (This is an intended use of the apparatus, the hollow cylinder structure formed by DOWNING can be seen as a room with formed walls.)
Re: 6, DOWNING teaches an airforming constructive system (see also above of the teachings for claim 1 of the inflatable mold), comprising:
a flexible and inflatable support mold having an outer layer and an internal hollow region, wherein the support mold is configured to be filled with one or more fluids (see the cavities of the mold, see inner, middle, and outer cavities, Fig. 1);
one or more inlets formed through the outer layer, wherein the one or more inlets are configured to facilitate inflating the support mold with an inflation fluid and to fill substantially the inflated support mold with a fluid structural material such that the fluid structural material takes substantially the full shape of the inflated first support mold (see teaching of the injectors 14 to facilitate the gas to inflate the support mold, see Col. 3, lines 22-24); and
one or more fluid escape outlets formed through the outer layer, wherein the one or more fluid escape outlets are configured to facilitate the escape of most or all of the inflation fluid from the support mold while the support mold is substantially filled with the fluid structural material, and wherein the support mold is further configured to allow the fluid structural material to harden therein to become a hardened structural material that forms at least a portion of an architectural structure.
(See teaching of hose connections 28, 30, wherein, the gas can be evacuated from the cavities, see Col.3, line 55 to Col. 4, line 13) (see also teaching of the hardenable material that are provided into the middle cavity 40 which are then hardened, see Col. 3, lines 48-68)
Re: 8 (upon 6), wherein the inflation fluid is air. (See teaching by DOWNING of pressurized tanks/air bottles 14, Col. 3, lines 15-26.)
Re: 9 (upon 6), wherein the fluid structural material includes a fluid concrete composite material and the hardened structural material includes a hardened concrete composite material. (This is seen as an intended use of the apparatus, with the material worked upon that does not further limit the claimed structure and wherein the DOWNING reference is capable of using such material.)
Re: 10 (upon 9), wherein the fluid concrete composite material includes fibers mixed therein, the fibers having an aluminum alloy component, a thickness of less than about 2 mm, and a length of less than about 30 mm. (This is seen as an intended use of the apparatus, with the material worked upon that does not further limit the claimed structure and wherein the DOWNING reference is capable of using such material.)
Re: 11 (upon 6), wherein the architectural structure forms all or part of a building or a statue. (This is seen as intended use of the formed product and does not further limit the claimed apparatus structure, and wherein, the formed cylinder structure of DOWNING is seen as being capable of being a room or statue.)
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 3, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DOWNING as applied to claims 1 and 6 above.
Re: 3 (upon 1), wherein each of the one or more separator system components include a rigid separator pipe and contact boards at surfaces of the inner support mold and outer support mold.
Regarding the rigid separator pipes and boards, this concept is taught by the second embodiment, see DOWNING, see teaching of rigid constraints 62, see Fig. 3. Further DOWNING already teaches of hoses that connect to the different support molds, wherein, the concept of a pipe would be similar in concept, while the contact boards are noted but the second embodiment also includes rigid constraints, and wherein, such features can also be seen as boards.
This can be applicable to the first embodiment regarding known configurations in forming the separator system components between the molds. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the separator systems of DOWNING with the desired support elements as taught by the second embodiment in forming the desired structure and of the related reinforced supports for the desired shape and structure between the molds.
Re: 14 (upon 6), wherein the architectural structure includes at least a first structural component having a first curved and non-planar geometry and a second structural component having a second curved and non-planar geometry that is substantially different than the first curved and non-planar geometry, and wherein the first structural component and second structural component are formed using the airforming constructive system.
See teaching of the different embodiments in Figs. 1-2, and Fig. 3 of DOWNING of the formed structure. The formed structure having the claimed shaped features are noted, but are directed to how the shape of the molds would impart upon the formed architectural structure.
This is considered a change in shape of the support mold, and further, the DOWNING reference teaches of different shapings in forming the desired formed product. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have further modified DOWNING with a change in shape that would form the desired shaped structure, see MPEP 2144.04 (IV) (B).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DOWNING as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of MCNEIL (US 5490744 A).
Re: 5 (upon 1), wherein the outer support mold includes one or more pressure valves configured to release pressure when the outer support mold is filled with the fluid structural material.
The DOWNING references do not specifically state pressure valves for the release pressure, the background information teaches of vent to permit escape of gases, see Col. 1, lines 39-42, and also gases removed through the hose connections, see Col. 4, lines 1-9.
See in MCNEIL of inflating of a liner for use in shaping and forming manhole liner. Wherein, a relief valve 82 is taught as the concept allows for ensuring maintaining the liner at a selected pressure, see claim 1 of MCNEIL, and also Col. 2, lines 18-23.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have further modified DOWNING of the vent to be replaced with a relief valve as taught by MCNEIL to ensure the pressure is maintained at the desired levels.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DOWNING as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of TANGEMAN (US 5106440 A).
Re: 7 (upon 6), wherein the support mold includes a fiberglass resin balloon.
DOWNING does not specifically teach of a fiberglass resin balloon for the support mold.
Tangeman (US 5106440), in the abstract of inflatable bladder that is enveloped by a carrier of resin-impreganted fiberglass fabric. Known type of material informing the inflatable structure.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have further modified the DOWNING teaching with the inflatable balloon as taught by TANGEMAN as a known manner of forming the inflatable structure.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DOWNING as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of MORELAND (US 4304084 A).
Re: 13 (upon 6), wherein the support mold includes a base region and one or more support regions coupled to and extending from the base region.
The teaching of DOWNING does not specifically state a base region.
However, in a related teaching of forming a structure with inflated mold supports, see MORELAND, Fig. 2. Wherein, there is a base region taught as it is formed upon the ground.
Here, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified DOWNING with a base region as taught by MORELAND as a manner in forming the structure secured to the ground, under KSR, see MPEP 2143, regarding combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DOWNING as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of LYMAN (US 3021569 A).
Re: 12 (upon 6), wherein the support mold includes a customized texture at its inner surfaces, and wherein the customized texture results in a corresponding customized surface texture of the architectural structure.
DOWNING does not specifically teach of the customized texture upon the inner surface to form a texture result upon the formed structure.
However, this concept is known in the molding arts. Here, the LYMAN reference teaches of molds with patterns that can be produced, such as a texture of leather can be produced upon a finished article in a mold, see Col. 4, lines 32-42. This is a change in shape of the mold surface, see MPEP2144.04 (IV) (B) in forming the desired shaped product from the molds.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the surface of the mold of the DOWNING reference with the desired shape via the texture as taught by the LYMAN reference upon the mold surface whereby forming the desired shape upon the molded surface.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892 form, many were also noted in the parent application, of particular note:
Ball (US 3728211), see Col. 15, lines 10-15, the use of reinforced castable concrete that includes fibers, which would be a concrete composite mixture used in forming structures. Further, Ball includes teaching of composite concrete mixtures for casting and hardening/setting particularly with reinforcements such as dispersed filaments/fibers of various materials are known in the art as taught by Ball, see Col. 1, lines 40-56, see background of the invention section. Ball that teaches of concrete with fibers of aluminum, see Col. 15, lines 10-15. Ball, claim 1, Col. 16, lines 5-6, wherein thickness is of .001-.03 inch (.0254-0.762 mm), width .005-0.15 inches (0.127- 3.81 mm), and length of 0.25-3 inches (6.35-76.2 mm).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EMMANUEL S LUK whose telephone number is (571)272-1134. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 to 5.
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, Xiao S Zhao can be reached at 571-270-5343. 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.
/EMMANUEL S LUK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744 January 22, 2026