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 .
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 11-20 are 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.
Claim 11 recites “the two walls in each corner”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites “at least one step between a projection and a recess” in line 10, it is unclear if this is the same as or in addition to the “at least one projection at least one recess” previously recited n line 7 causing confusion regarding the scope of the claimed invention.
Claim 12 recites “further comprising at least two steps between a projection and a recess”, it is unclear if this is the same as or in addition to the “at least one step between a projection and a recess” previously recited in claim 11, causing confusion regarding the scope of the claimed invention. Specifically the “a projection and a recess” lack clear antecedent basis and the “at least two steps” lack clear antecedent basis. It is unclear if each of these is the same as or in addition to each of the previous recitations.
Similarly claim 13 recites “the length of a step”, there is lack of antecedent basis for “the length of a step” and it is unclear if the “a step” is the same as or in addition to the “at least one step” of claim 11 and/or the “at least two steps” of claim 12 causing confusion regarding the scope of the claimed invention. Further claim 13 recites “a projection or a recess”, it is unclear if this is the same as or in addition to the “at least one projection and at least one recess” of claim 11 and/or the “a projection and a recess” of claim 12 causing confusion regarding the scope of the claimed invention.
Claims 16,17 recite “at least one wall of the section” it is unclear if this is the same as or in addition to the “walls” previously recited in claim 11 causing confusion regarding the scope of the claimed invention.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the wall sections" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Additionally claim 19 recites “at least one of rectangular trapezoidal and/or triangular”, it is unclear how a wall section can be rectangular and trapezoidal and triangular or a combination of two of those causing confusion regarding the scope of the claimed invention.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the wall sections" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Accordingly the claims will be examined as best understood.
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) 11-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE102015014648 in view of Petersen (760347).
Claim 11. DE102015014648 discloses a tower for a wind turbine or a mobile radio transceiver system, comprising;
at least one section with polygonal walls (14,14a,14b including 16,16a-c), the walls made of a wood-based material (cross-laminated timber, page 4 of the translation provided), wherein the two walls in each corner of the polygon are connected to one another by a vertical joint including a side face (as seen in the figures and disclosure);
at least one connecting element in the side faces of a wall in the vertical joint (as noted at least at page 3 “the wall section s are connected to an adhesive directly or via interpo9sed further connecting elements, preferably wood elements” and page 4 “the walls 14,14a,14b or the wall sections 16,16a,16b,16c can be connected to each other via connecting means... for example wooden wedges, metal plates, anchors or the like can additionally be used”) wherein the at least one connecting element is configured to transmit shear forces in the vertical joint (where the connecting element is capable of the claimed intended use).
DE102015014648 does not disclose at least one projection and at least one recess, in the at least one connecting element wherein the at least one projection of one wall engages in the at least one recess of the other wall in the vertical joint; and, at least one step between a projection and a recess, wherein the projections of two connecting elements of two walls are disposed one above the other in the vertical joint.
Petersen discloses a wooden tower including wall sections having a vertical joint including a side face and at least one connecting element in the side faces; at least one projection (3) and at least one recess 2), in the at least one connecting element wherein the at least one projection of one wall engages in the at least one recess of the other wall in the vertical joint (as seen in the figures); and, at least one step between a projection and a recess, wherein the projections of two connecting elements of two walls are disposed one above the other in the vertical joint (as seen in figures).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to pursue known design options and modify the tower of DE102015014648 to have the connecting element in the side faces with at least one projection and at least one recess as taught by Petersen to achieve the predictable result of preventing warping bursting or otherwise damaging the vertical joints as taught by Petersen.
Claim 12. Tower according to claim 11, further comprising at least two steps (as noted in the annotated figure below) between a projection and a recess.
PNG
media_image1.png
694
273
media_image1.png
Greyscale
or
PNG
media_image2.png
694
273
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 13. DE102015014648 in view of Petersen disclose the tower according to claim 12, but does not expressly disclose wherein the length of a step in the vertical joint is half the length of at least one of a projection or a recess. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to pursue known design options design options and modify the dimensions of the length of the step to be half the length of at least one of a projection or a recess. One of ordinary skill in the art would have readily recognized that the dimension could have been changed since it has been held that changes in sized and proportions are viewed as obvious absent any unpredictable results. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that dimensioning the length of the step as claimed would result in projections that are structurally stable and resist breaking off during expansion/shrinkage of the wood thus improving the strength of the joint.
Claim 14. Tower according to claim 11, wherein the number of connecting elements is evenly distributed over the length of the vertical joint on the side wall (as noted in figures and throughout the disclosure of Petersen).
Claim 15. Tower according to claim 11, wherein the wood-based material is laminated veneer lumber (as noted in page 4 of DE102015014648).
Claim 16. Tower according to claim 11, wherein at least one wall of the section is a rectangular shape (as noted in DE102015014648).
Claim 17. Tower according to claim 11, wherein at least one wall of the section is at least one of a triangular or trapezoidal shape (as noted in DE102015014648).
Claim 18. Tower according to claim 11, wherein the walls are composed of wall sections (126,16a-c).
Claim 19. Tower according to claim 11, wherein the wall sections are at least one of rectangular, trapezoidal and/or triangular (as noted in the translation provided and seen in the figures).
Claim 20. Tower according to claim 11, wherein the wall sections are assembled into superimposed segments (as noted in the translation provided and seen in the figures).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA LAUX whose telephone number is (571)272-8228. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-3:30.
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, Brian Mattei can be reached at 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 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.
JESSICA L. LAUX
Examiner
Art Unit 3635
/JESSICA L LAUX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635