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 without traverse of Invention I in the reply filed on 12/19/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 16-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Objections
Claims 5 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities: “one or more magnet holder” should be written as –one or more magnet holders--. 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) 11 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent 10,017,933 (hereinafter Kirby).
Regarding claim 11, Kirby discloses a drain system kit comprising: a main drain piece (10) having first and second ends (left side, right side, fig. 1) and defining a drain opening (14); an elongated drain extension piece (30) configured for being cut into a first drain extension piece and a second drain extension piece (fig. 5, col. 6, ln. 62-67); wherein said first drain extension piece is configured to connect to the first end of said main drain piece and said second drain extension piece is configured to connect to the second end of said main drain piece (fig. 5); a first end cap (32) and a second end cap (32), wherein said first end cap is configured to connect to the first drain extension piece and said second end cap is configured to connect to the second drain extension piece (fig. 5); and wherein said drain system is configured for installation at a bottom section of a tile wall (col. 6, ln. 3-9).
Regarding claim 13, Kirby discloses a grate (40) configured for attachment to said main drain piece and said first and second drain extension pieces (fig. 5).
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.
Claim(s) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent 10,550,563 (hereinafter Kozlowski) in view of US Patent 10,017,933 (hereinafter Kirby).
Regarding claim 1, Kozlowski shows a drain system (100) comprising: a drain body (102) comprising first and second ends (left end, right end, fig. 1, 5) and having a base (104) connected to an upright wall (112), the base defining a drain opening (111) and the upright wall comprising an elongated shelf (116) extending from said first end to said second end (fig. 1); wherein said drain body comprises a main drain piece (100) extension piece to allow a user to create a specified drain length depending on installation needs as evidenced by the teachings of Kirby mentioned above.
Regarding claim 2, Kozlowski discloses wherein: a portion of said drain system is configured to be overlayed by one or more tiles of the tile wall (col. 5, ln. 3-13).
Regarding claim 3, under the modification in view of Kirby, Kirby discloses wherein: said drain extension piece comprises a first drain extension piece (left side; fig. 5); said drain body further comprises a second drain extension piece connected to said main drain piece (right side; fig. 5); and said first drain extension piece and said second drain extension piece are connected to said main drain piece on opposite sides of said main drain piece (fig. 5).
Regarding claim 4, under the modification in view of Kirby, Kirby discloses wherein: said end cap (32) comprises a first end cap; and said drain body further comprises a second end cap (32) connected to said second drain extension piece (fig. 5).
Regarding claim 5, Kozlowski discloses wherein: said drain body further comprises one or more magnet holder (150, 152, 154, 156), each magnet holder configured to house a magnet (160, 162, 164, 166) along the longitudinal length of the drain body.
Regarding claim 6, Kozlowski discloses further comprising: a faceplate (122) configured to magnetically interact with each said magnet within each said magnet holder (col. 5, ln. 52-60). Kozlowski fails to show the faceplate is configured as a grate. Attention is again turned to Kirby which shows using a grate (40) to cover a linear drain. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to configure the faceplate of Kozlowski as a grate to allow more water to flow therethrough as is known in the art and evidenced by the teachings of Kirby mentioned above.
Regarding claim 7, Kozlowski discloses further comprising: a faceplate (122) configured for connection to said drain body. Kozlowski fails to show the faceplate is configured as a grate. Attention is again turned to Kirby which shows using a grate (40) to cover a linear drain. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to configure the faceplate of Kozlowski as a grate to allow more water to flow therethrough as is known in the art and evidenced by the teachings of Kirby mentioned above.
Regarding claim 8, under the modification in view of Kirby, Kirby discloses wherein: said grate (40) further comprises two or more spacer legs (46).
Regarding claim 9, Kozlowski discloses wherein: said grate (122) is configured to be positioned approximately in line with said tile wall (col. 5, ln. 3-13; fig. 4).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kozlowski and Kirby as applied to claims 1-9 above, and further in view of US Patent 9,611,634 (hereinafter Erlebach).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Kozlowski and Kirby fails to show wherein: said main drain piece further comprises a portion of said upright wall which flares inward around said drain opening creating more surface area around said drain opening. Attention is turned to Erlebach in the same field of endeavor of linear drains which shows configuring a sidewall/upright wall of a main drain piece (210) to flare inward around a drain opening (245) to create more surface area around the drain opening (fig. 1A). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the main drain piece upright wall to flare inward around the drain opening to create more surface area around the drain opening as is known in the art and evidenced by the teachings of Erlebach mentioned above.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirby in view of US Patent 11,454,017 (hereinafter Larson).
Regarding claim 12, Kirby fails to show further comprising: an adhesive configured to sealingly attach pieces of said drain system together. Attention is turned to Larson in the same field of endeavor of linear drains which shows using adhesive is a suitable attachment means for connecting drain channel portions (col. 9, ln. 54-59). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to utilize adhesive to connect the pieces of the drain system together as is known in the art and evidenced by the teachings of Larson mentioned above.
Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirby in view of Kozlowski.
Regarding claim 14, Kirby fails to show one or more magnet holder, each magnet holder configured to house a magnet; and wherein each said magnet holder is configured for attachment to said main drain piece, said first drain extension piece, or said second drain extension piece along the longitudinal length of the drain system. Attention is turned to Kozlowski in the same field of endeavor of linear drains which shows using one or more magnet holders (150, 152, 154, 156) configured to house a magnet (160, 162, 164, 166) on a faceplate of a linear drain system along its longitudinal length. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the system of Kirby to include one or more magnet holder, each magnet holder configured to house a magnet; and wherein each said magnet holder is configured for attachment to said main drain piece, said first drain extension piece, or said second drain extension piece along the longitudinal length of the drain system in order to allow a user to easily remove the grate for cleaning and attachment as evidenced by the teachings of Kozlowski mentioned above.
Regarding claim 15, under the modification in view of Kozlowski, Kozlowski shows magnets (160, 162, 164, 166) are configured to magnetically interact with a faceplate/grate (122).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US Patent 11,613,883 is directed to the state of the art of linear drains.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANIE M LOEPPKE whose telephone number is (571)270-5208. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM ET.
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, David Angwin can be reached at (571) 270-3735. 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.
/JANIE M LOEPPKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754