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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The listing of references in the PCT international search report is not considered to be an information disclosure statement (IDS) complying with 37 CFR 1.98. 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2) requires a legible copy of: (1) each foreign patent; (2) each publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; (3) for each cited pending U.S. application, the application specification including claims, and any drawing of the application, or that portion of the application which caused it to be listed including any claims directed to that portion, unless the cited pending U.S. application is stored in the Image File Wrapper (IFW) system; and (4) all other information, or that portion which caused it to be listed. In addition, each IDS must include a list of all patents, publications, applications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office (see 37 CFR 1.98(a)(1) and (b)), and MPEP § 609.04(a), subsection I. states, “the list ... must be submitted on a separate paper.” Therefore, the references cited in the international search report have not been considered. Applicant is advised that the date of submission of any item of information in the international search report will be the date of submission of the IDS for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements for the IDS with 37 CFR 1.97, including all timing statement requirements of 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
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 1-3 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 claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors. For brevity, some examples of the recited indefinite language appear below, however, the list does not encompass all of the rejections.
Regarding claim 1, it is unclear what components are made of reinforcement net. The examiner will examine as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 1, welding is a process limitation. A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the pedestal" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 1, it is unclear what component is referred to as “them” in line 6. The examiner will examine as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 1, wooden bars are recited multiple times and it is unclear if the wooden bars are one in the same. The examiner will examine as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 1, it is unclear what is meant by “by means of screws or nails matchboarding,” rendering the claim indefinite. The examiner will examine as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 1, it is unclear what is meant by “in places of between the pedestal and lateral sides. The examiner will examine as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 1, it is unclear what comprises a pedestal foundation. The examiner will examine as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 1, it is unclear what comprises a tegola. The examiner will examine as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claims 2 and 3, it is unclear what is meant by variant. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 2, in line 4, the term “them” is indefinite in that it is unclear what components are referred to. The examiner will examine as best understood. Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kremenovic, Serbian Patent Document RS59823B1 in view of Rowan, U.S. Patent 8,776,449.
Regarding claim 1, Kremenovic discloses a portable structure , the foundation of which is a cage (3) consisting of lateral sides (see figures), roof (see figures), and bottom (see figures) made of reinforcement net (3) and fastened to the pedestal (16) made of welded steel boxes (paragraph 19) by welding, characterized in the fact that, and that, on the pedestal, lateral sides and roof on both sides by means of nails (1) wooden bars (2) were fastened, between which insulation panels (6) made of environmentally friendly insulation materials are glued to the reinforcement net (paragraph 22), with wooden floor mats (15) glued to the pedestal (paragraph 21) on the wooden on the upper side, whereas on the lower side, by means of screws or nails (1), boards (8) are fastened, and that on lateral sides externally, by means of screws or nails (1), aesthetic wooden logs (5) are fastened to wooden bars, and wooden matchboarding (7) was glued on their interior, and that, on the roof externally, by means of screws (1) boards with tegola (13) are fastened to wooden bars, and on the interior, by means of screws or nails (1) matchboarding (13), but does not disclose on the pedestal [foundations], laterally in the middle, shafts were fastened horizontally, with wheels attached to them, and that, in the corners of the cage, diagonally and in places of joints between the pedestal and lateral sides, as well as the joints between lateral sides and roof, reinforcement trusses were installed. Rowan teaches a portable structure comprising trusses (Q), and wheels (see Fig. 51). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the wheels to aid in transportation and trusses depending on expected loads in the environment in which the structure is intended to be utilized.
Regarding claim 2, the prior art discloses a portable building but does not specifically disclose attached to the reinforcement net by means of plastic ties are fibre nets with openings of 1-3 mm and wooden bars, with PUR foam sprayed between them, thus gaining layer cut in line with upper edges of wooden bars, after which a cement layer was applied to the layer and wooden bars on all surfaces on both sides, coated on the outside with a waterproof coat. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a second net tied to the first net, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St, Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 3, the prior art discloses a portable building but does not specifically disclose characterized in the fact that, on lateral sides on both sides of the reinforcement net bricks are placed, with a layer of Styrofoam coated with facade colour glued on the facade side by means of a cement layer or PUR foam, and with a layer of skimming coat coated with colour for inside coating, applied on the inside. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to apply a color and a coating to protect the color as an obvious matter of design choice, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GISELE D FORD whose telephone number is (571)270-7326. The examiner can normally be reached M-T,Th-F 7:30am-4:30pm.
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.
GISELE D. FORD
Examiner
Art Unit 3633
/GISELE D FORD/Examiner, Art Unit 3633