DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office Action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 08/04/2026 has been entered.
This communication is a Non-Final rejection Office Action on the merits. Claim(s) 1, 2, 7, and 11 have been amended. Claims 1-15 are pending and have been considered below.
Response to Amendment
The previous specification, drawing, and claim objections have been withdrawn in light of applicant's amendments.
The previous 35 USC 112 rejections are withdrawn in light of applicant's amendments.
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 of this title, 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) 1-3, 7-10, 13, and 14, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lura et al. (EP 3106446 A1) in view of Rieder et al. (AU 3565302 A).
Regarding claim 1, Lura et al. teaches a concrete slab (title; col. 4, lines 15-17) comprising concrete (title) and a reinforcement of post-tension steel strands (para 73), the post-tension steel strands being steel strands (steel tendons; para 73) that have been tensioned only after casting of the concrete slab (because the system is post-tensioned, it is understood that tension would be applied to said post-tension steel strands only after the concrete has been cast), wherein the post-tension steel strands have a diameter ranging from 5 mm to 20 mm (para 84), and a tensile strength higher than 1700 MPa (2500 MPa; para 85), wherein the concrete is expanding concrete (expansive concrete; para 81), and wherein the concrete slab has a thickness (figure 6).
Lura et al. does not specifically disclose a reinforcement of fibers and said fibers are either steel fibers and being present in a dosage ranging from 10 kg/m3 to 75 kg/m3 or macro-synthetic fibers and present in a dosage ranging from 1.5 kg/m3 to 9 kg/m3, and the fibres are distributed over the thickness of the concrete slab.
Rieder et al. discloses a reinforcement of fibers (concrete reinforcing fibers; abstract) and said fibers are macro-synthetic fibers (polypropylene; col. 16, line 14) and present in a dosage ranging from 1.5 kg/m3 to 9 kg/m3 (col. 17, line 1), and the fibres are distributed over the thickness of the concrete slab (col. 5, lines 20-30).
Therefore, from the teaching of Rieder et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the post-tensioned concrete structure of Lura et al. to include a reinforcement of fibers and said fibers are either steel fibers and being present in a dosage ranging from 10 kg/m3 to 75 kg/m3 or macro-synthetic fibers and present in a dosage ranging from 1.5 kg/m3 to 9 kg/m3, and the fibres are distributed over the thickness of the concrete slab, as taught by Rieder et al., in order to further reinforce the concrete structure for more durability, increased load capacity, and optimized tensile strength depending on the design requirements of the structure.
Regarding claim 2, Lura et al. teaches expanding concrete comprises one or more additives selected from: CaO, MgO, CaSO4 (para 34).
Regarding claim 3, Rieder et al. in the combination teaches macro-synthetic fibers are selected from non-steel based fibers, and/or wherein said fibers are steel fibers (polypropylene; col. 16, line 14).
Regarding claim 7, Lura et al. teaches said concrete slab is free of a vapor barrier (no vapor barrier is disclosed).
Regarding claim 8, Lura et al. teaches the post-tension steel strands have a tensile strength higher 1800 MPa (2500 MPa; para 85).
Regarding claim 9, Lura et al. teaches the concrete slab further comprises plastic slip-sheets are not present between the slab and the supports (no plastic slip-sheets are disclosed).
Regarding claim 10, Rieder et al. in the combination teaches the fibers are substantially homogenously or homogeneously distributed in the slab (col. 5, line 25).
Regarding claim 13, Lura et al. as modified in view of Rieder et al. teaches wherein the combination of post-tensioned steel strands and fibers increases the structural capacity for flexure, deflection, shear, punching shear, structural integrity, temperature resistance and/or shrinkage resistance over a slab without steel fibers and/or steel strands (since all of the structural limitations of the combination are taught, it is understood that the combination of post-tensioned steel strands and fibers would increase the structural capacity for flexure, deflection, shear, punching shear, structural integrity, temperature resistance and/or shrinkage resistance over a slab without steel fibers and/or steel strands).
Regarding claim 14, Lura et al. teaches a method to obtain a concrete slab according to claim 1 (abstract).
Claim(s) 4-6, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lura et al. (EP 3106446 A1) in view of Rieder et al. (AU 3565302 A), and further in view of Lambrechts et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2013/0269572).
Regarding claim 4, Lura et al. as modified does not specifically disclose said steel fibers comprise a straight middle portion that have a tensile strength above 1400 MPa.
Lambrechts et al. discloses a steel fiber for reinforcing concrete (abstract) wherein said steel fibers comprise a straight middle portion (figure 4) that have a tensile strength above 1400 MPa (paragraph 67).
Therefore, from the teaching of Lambrechts et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the modified concrete structure of Lura et al. such that said steel fibers comprise a straight middle portion that have a tensile strength above 1400 MPa, in order to optimize the performance of the fibers under high loads, depending on the design requirements of the structure for enhanced efficiency.
Regarding claim 5, Lura et al. as modified does not specifically disclose said steel fibers comprise anchorage ends at both ends, said anchorage ends each comprise three or four bent sections.
Lambrechts et al. discloses a steel fiber for reinforcing concrete (abstract) wherein said steel fibers comprise anchorage ends (at 404) at both ends (figure 4), said anchorage ends each comprise three or four bent sections (figure 4).
Therefore, from the teaching of Lambrechts et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the modified concrete structure of Lura et al. such that said steel fibers comprise anchorage ends at both ends, said anchorage ends each comprise three or four bent sections, in order to optimize the anchoring performance of the fibers under high loads, depending on the design requirements of the structure for enhanced efficiency.
Regarding claim 6, Lura et al. as modified does not specifically disclose said steel fibers are present in the slab in a dosage ranging from 25 kg/m3 to 60 or 65 kg/m3, and/or wherein the fibers have a length of 10 mm to 100 mm.
Lambrechts et al. teaches said steel fibers for reinforcing concrete (abstract) wherein the steel fibers are present in the slab in a dosage ranging from 25 kg/m3 to 60 or 65 kg/m3 (40kg/m3; para 191).
Therefore, from the teaching of Lambrechts et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the modified concrete structure of Lura et al. such that said steel fibers are present in the slab in a dosage ranging from 25 kg/m3 to 60 or 65 kg/m3, in order to improve the performance of the fibers depending on the dosage required for the design requirements of the structure for enhanced efficiency.
Claim(s) 11 and 12, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lura et al. (EP 3106446 A1) in view of Rieder et al. (AU 3565302 A), and further in view of Kollegger et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2009/0301011).
Regarding claim 11, Lura et al. as modified does not specifically disclose wherein the slab and the supports are either permanently fully connected, so that the slab is not free to move from the supports, permanently fully disconnected, so that the slab is free to move, partially connected, so that the slab is partially free to move in certain directions or temporarily disconnected, so that the slab is free to move at least temporarily.
Kollegger et al. discloses a reinforced concrete structure (abstract) wherein the slab rests on at least two supports (8), the slab and the supports are permanently fully connected, so that the slab is not free to move from the supports (figure 1).
Therefore, from the teaching of Kollegger et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the modified concrete structure of Lura et al. such that the slab and the supports are permanently fully connected, so that the slab is not free to move from the supports, as taught by Kollegger et al., in order to provide a rigid structure depending on the desired design structure for a concrete slab ceiling.
Regarding claim 12, Kollegger et al. in the combination teaches said supports are arranged to form a regular rectangular pattern (figure 1).
Claim(s) 15, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lura et al. (EP 3106446 A1) in view of Rieder et al. (AU 3565302 A), and further in view of in view of Yu et al. (CN 111663434 A) with examiner provided Espacenet translation.
Regarding claim 15, Lura et al. as modified in view of Rieder et al. teaches casting a concrete slab (para 92 of Lura et al.), the slab comprising concrete (title of Lura et al.) and a combined reinforcement of both post-tension steel strands (para 73 of Lura et al.) and fibers (polypropylene; col. 16, line 14 in view of Rieder et al.), wherein said post-tension steel strands have a diameter ranging from 5 mm to 20 mm (para 84 of Lura et al.), and a tensile strength higher than 1700 MPa (2500 MPa; para 85 of Lura et al.), wherein said fibers are macro-synthetic fibers and present in a dosage ranging from 1.5 kg/m3 to 9.0 kg/m3 (col. 17, line 1 of Rieder et al.), wherein the concrete is expanding concrete (expansive concrete; para 81 of Lura et al.).
Lura et al. as modified does not specifically disclose applying a tensile stress of between 5 and 15% of the final stress in the post-tension steel strands in the first 24 hours after casting the slab.
Yu et al. discloses tensioning assembly for prestressed concrete (paragraph 1) including applying a tensile stress of between 5 and 15 % of the final stress in the post tension steel strands after casting the slab (paragraph 23). Although Yu et al. does not specifically disclose apply the tensile stress in the first 24 hours, the examiner takes official notice that it is well-known in the art to apply tensile stress for post-tensioning within the first 24 hours after casting in order to control for early shrinkage cracking to provide for sufficient strength depending on the design requirements of the concrete structure.
Therefore, from the teaching of Yu et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the modified concrete structure of Lura et al. to include applying a tensile stress of between 5 and 15 % of the final stress in the post-tension steel strands in the first 24 hours after casting the slab, as taught by Yu et al., in order to optimize the initial strength of the post-tensioned structure to control for early shrinkage cracking to provide for sufficient strength of the concrete structure.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments and amendments have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection. New reference(s) Lura et al. (EP 3106446 A1) and Rieder et al. (AU 3565302 A) have been added to overcome the newly added limitations. Applicant’s amendment regarding the fibres that are distributed over the thickness of the concrete slab overcomes the previous grounds of rejection in view of Khayrullin et al. and the ASTM Publication, and the rejection has been withdrawn. The new amendments are overcome in view of new references Lura et al. and Rieder et al.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR F HIJAZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5790. The examiner can normally be reached on 8-6 EST Monday-Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brian Mattei can be reached on (571) 270-3238. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/OMAR F HIJAZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Prosecution Insights