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 .
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.
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 top and bottom plates as claimed in claim 2 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: Under the Descriptions of the Figures section, the descriptions for figures 2, 4, 6, and 8 are incorrect. They are disclosed as “top view of…”, but the steel strands and corrugated pipes are embedded within the segments, so would not be visible from the top. Did Applicant intend “top view of cross-section of…”?
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.
Claims 1-2 (and 3-6 through dependency) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “S1”, “S2”, …”S10”. These recitations are indefinite because they have no meaning. If Applicant intended “step S1”, “step S2”, etc., that should be written out.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the previously erected prefabricated segment" in line 8 and then again in lines 14-15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear what is meant by “the previously erected” because there is no step of erecting anything in S1..
Claim 1 recites the limitation “completing the adhesion of the adhesive joint surface” in S5 which is presumably step 5, but then S6 requires “before the adhesive joint surface epoxy resin glue sets”. It is unclear what is required of “completing the adhesion”.
Claim 1 recites “applying permanent prestress” in line 24. The claim does not make clear what structure applying permanent prestress applies to. For purposes of examination, it will be assumed that Applicant intended “applying permanent prestress to the steel strands”.
Claim 2 recites “the top and bottom plates” in the last two lines. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Additionally, Examiner notes that perhaps “plates” is not the correct word; Applicant’s drawings do not show any plates, and the only two instances of “plates” being disclosed in the specification have the exact same wording as this claim with no further detail. Did Applicant intend “top and bottom portions”?
Correction is required for each rejection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
Claims 2-6 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.
If Applicant simply deletes portions of the claims in an attempt to be rid of the 112(b) rejections, or amends the claims in a way that changes the scope of the claims, the claims may no longer be considered allowable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached Notice of References Cited sheet. CN 115595888 A is cited for teaching prefabricated bridge segments with corrugated pipe lining holes for prestressing strands. CN 108560402 A is cited for teaching prefabricated bridge segments with some segments on top of piers using rebar and epoxy resin glue for splicing.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHERINE J CHU whose telephone number is 571-272-7819. The examiner can normally be reached M-F generally 9:30-5:30.
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, Christopher Sebesta can be reached at 571-272-0547. 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.
/KATHERINE J CHU/Examiner, Art Unit 3671
/CHRISTOPHER J SEBESTA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3671
Prosecution Insights