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 .
DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
This communication is a first Office Action on the Merits. Claims 1-28, as originally filed 21 JUN. 2024, are pending and have been considered as follows:
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 21 JUN. 24 was filed and is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Examiner has corrected three publication dates and marked all the citations as considered:
PNG
media_image1.png
152
545
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
93
544
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.83 or 1.84 because of the following informalities:
The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims, therefore the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s):
“laid in a plurality of courses”
“internal walls”
“external walls”
“perp joint”
“aligns”
“tied into external walls”
“lay flush”
“applied between”
“between adjacent”
“alternating courses”
“aligns with a corresponding larger hole”
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.
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.
Claim 1-28 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Cl. 1 ln. 12; Cl. 20 ln. 12; and Cl. 21 ln. 12: the recitation(s) of ”end portions at opposing ends” is vague, indefinite, and confusing as lacking proper antecedent basis as no “end portions” or “opposing ends” were introduced. It is suggested to claim “[[end]] --block-- portions at [[opposing]] --the opposed-- ends” and the claims have been interpreted as such.
Cl. 1 ln. 7; Cl. 10 ln. 5; Cl. 20 ln. 7; Cl. 21 ln. 7: The term “slender” —as in “slender webs”—in claims 1, 10, 20 and 21 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “slender” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Cl. 20 ln. 15; and Cl. 21 ln. 15: the recitation(s) of ”tongues/tongue at the opposite end of the block” is vague, indefinite, and confusing as lacking proper antecedent basis as no “opposite end” has been introduced. It is suggested to use the phrase “tongues/tongue at [[opposite]] --other opposed-- end" and the claims have been interpreted as such.
Cl. 1 ln. 15; Cl. 20 ln. 15; and Cl. 21 ln. 15: the recitation(s) of ”tongues/tongue at the opposite end of the block” is vague, indefinite, and confusing as lacking proper antecedent basis as no “opposite end” has been introduced. It is suggested to use the phrase “tongues/tongue at [[opposite]] --other opposed-- end" and the claims have been interpreted as such.
Cl. 24 ln. 2; and Cl. 25 ln. 2: the phrase “applied to the base”/”applied onto the base” is vague, indefinite and confusing as to “base” has been introduced. It is suggested to replace “base” with --bottom-- and the claims have been interpreted as such.
Claims 2-19, 22, 23, 26, and 27-28 not particularly referenced in this section are rejected as being dependent upon an indefinite claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-11, 13, 15-16, and 18-21 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by MEGALITH BAUSTOFFWERKE VERKAUF DE 29513122 U1 (Megalith).
As per claim 1, Megalith teaches a block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) for automated building construction,
said block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) comprising a cuboid body (body of member, FIG. 1) including an opposed top (proximally facing surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see tops of members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) and a bottom (unviewed surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see bottoms of top-most members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4),
a pair of opposed ends (left and right side surfaces 16, 18, FIG. 1), and
a pair of opposed sides (inner side 12, outer side 14, FIG. 1);
the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) dividable (see breaking surfaces 42, 42, FIG. 1) lengthwise into a plurality of block portions (see 28, 30, middle piece between 42, 42, FIG. 1),
one or more dividing slots (breaking surfaces 42, 42, 34, FIG. 1) between each pair of adjacent block portions (see 28, 30, middle piece between 42, 42, FIG. 1) extending between the top (proximally facing surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see tops of members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) and the bottom (unviewed surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see bottoms of top-most members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) and transversely across the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5),
each of the one or more dividing slots (breaking surfaces 42, 42, 34, FIG. 1) being separated from the opposed sides (inner side 12, outer side 14, FIG. 1) or an adjacent dividing slot (breaking surfaces 42, 42, 34, FIG. 1) by slender webs (see interfaces between surfaces at 36, 42, 42 and sides 12, 34, FIG. 1) which bridge and connect the adjacent block portions (see 28, 30, middle piece between 42, 42, FIG. 1);
each of the block portions (see 28, 30, middle piece between 42, 42, FIG. 1) including a plurality of holes (See plurality of open areas, FIG. 1) extending between the top (proximally facing surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see tops of members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) and the bottom (unviewed surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see bottoms of top-most members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) thereof,
where the plurality of holes (See plurality of open areas, FIG. 1) comprises one or more larger holes (central through hole 32, FIG. 1)(central through hole 32, FIG. 1), and
a plurality of smaller holes (channels 56 of varying shape and size, FIG. 1) spaced apart around the one or more larger holes (central through hole 32, FIG. 1); and
wherein each of the [[end]] --block-- portions at [[opposing]] --the opposed--]] ends of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) comprises one or more protruding tongues (teeth 24, FIG. 1) extending between the top (proximally facing surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see tops of members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) and the bottom (unviewed surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see bottoms of top-most members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5),
each of the one or more protruding tongues (teeth 24, FIG. 1) is transversely offset with respect to the one or more protruding tongues (teeth 24, FIG. 1) at the [[opposite]] --other opposed-- end of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5).
As per claim 2, Megalith teaches the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) of claim 1, wherein each of the one or more protruding tongues (teeth 24, FIG. 1) at one end of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) are rotationally symmetrical to the one or more protruding tongues (teeth 24, FIG. 1) at the [[opposite]] --other opposed-- end of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5).
As per claim 3, Megalith teaches the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) of claim 1, wherein each of the [[end]] --block-- portions at [[opposing]] --the opposed-- ends of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) comprises a pair of transversely spaced protruding tongues (teeth 24, FIG. 1) extending between the top (proximally facing surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see tops of members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) and the bottom (unviewed surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see bottoms of top-most members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5).
As per claim 4, Megalith teaches the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) of claim 1, wherein each of the one or more larger holes (central through hole 32, FIG. 1) is positioned on a centreline of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) portion.
As per claim 5, Megalith teaches the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) of claim 1, wherein each of the one or more larger holes (central through hole 32, IG. 1) is substantially square.
As per claim 6, Megalith teaches the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) of claim 1, wherein each of a plurality of the smaller holes (channels 56 of varying shape and size, FIG. 1) is elongate.
As per claim 7, Megalith teaches the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) of claim 1, wherein each of a plurality of the smaller holes (channels 56 of varying shape and size, FIG. 1) is a slot (the above identified channels —56, FIG. 1— are recognized as slots)(the above identified channels —56, FIG. 1— are recognized as slots).
As per claim 8, Megalith teaches the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) of claim 7, wherein at least one slot (the above identified channels —56, FIG. 1— are recognized as slots) extends parallel to each side and end edge of each block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) portion.
As per claim 9, Megalith teaches the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) of claim 8, wherein where two or more slots (the above identified channels —56, FIG. 1— are recognized as slots) extend parallel to a side or end of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) portion,
wherein the two or more slots (the above identified channels —56, FIG. 1— are recognized as slots) extending parallel to a side or end of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) portion are aligned lengthwise.
As per claim 10, Megalith teaches the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) of claim 1, wherein where two or more of the dividing slots (breaking surfaces 42, 42, 34, FIG. 1) are located between a pair of adjacent block portions (see 28, 30, middle piece between 42, 42, FIG. 1),
the two or more dividing slots (breaking surfaces 42, 42, 34, FIG. 1) between a pair of adjacent block portions (see 28, 30, middle piece between 42, 42, FIG. 1) are aligned lengthwise in a direction extending transversely (see 34 extending vertically in FIG. 1) across the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5), and
separated by one or more of the connecting slender webs (see interfaces between surfaces at 36, 42, 42 and sides 12, 34, FIG. 1).
As per claim 11, Megalith teaches the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) of claim 1, wherein each of the block portions (see 28, 30, middle piece between 42, 42, FIG. 1) comprises a pair of larger holes (central through hole 32, FIG. 1) spaced apart transversely across the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) portion.
As per claim 13, Megalith teaches the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) of claim 1, wherein each of the block portions (see 28, 30, middle piece between 42, 42, FIG. 1) comprises a single larger holes (central through hole 32, FIG. 1) positioned at or proximate a geometric centre of a top (proximally facing surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see tops of members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) portion.
As per claim 15, Megalith teaches the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) of claim 1, wherein the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) is made of clay (“fired clay”, Translation).
As per claim 16, Megalith teaches the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) of claim 1, wherein each of the tongues (teeth 24, FIG. 1) comprises a flat surface (see outermost flat edge of 24, FIG. 1) extending parallel to the surface of the end of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5), and
sloping ramp surfaces (see angled sides of 24, FIG. 1) extending on either side down from the flat surface (see outermost flat edge of 24, FIG. 1) to the surface of the end of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5).
As per claim 18, Megalith teaches the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) of claim 1, wherein the pair of opposed sides (inner side 12, outer side 14, FIG. 1) comprise a plurality of grooves (see unidentified grooves of 12 and 14, FIG. 1) that extend between the top (proximally facing surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see tops of members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) and bottom (unviewed surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see bottoms of top-most members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) and are spaced equidistant between the ends.
As per claim 19, Megalith teaches the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) of claim 1, wherein the pair of opposed sides (inner side 12, outer side 14, FIG. 1) comprises a plurality of grooves (see unidentified grooves of 12 and 14, FIG. 1) that extend between the top (proximally facing surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see tops of members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) and bottom (unviewed surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see bottoms of top-most members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5),
wherein for each block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) portion a pair of grooves (see grooves between 24, 24 FIG. 1) are separated by a smooth flat side portion (see relatively “smooth” flat side portions at 26, 26, FIG. 1) that is aligned with and has a width substantially the same (see “width” of the above identified flat portions “substantially the same” as hole 32) as a width of the one or more larger holes (central through hole 32, FIG. 1).
As per claim 20, Megalith teaches a block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) for automated building construction,
the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) for use in constructing an internal wall of a building,
said block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) comprising a cuboid body (body of member, FIG. 1) including an opposed top (proximally facing surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see tops of members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4)(proximally facing surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see tops of members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) and a bottom (unviewed surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see bottoms of top-most members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4),
a pair of opposed ends (left and right side surfaces 16, 18, FIG. 1), and
a pair of opposed sides (inner side 12, outer side 14, FIG. 1);
the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) dividable (see breaking surfaces 42, 42, FIG. 1) lengthwise into a plurality of block portions (see 28, 30, middle piece between 42, 42, FIG. 1),
where between each pair of adjacent block portions (see 28, 30, middle piece between 42, 42, FIG. 1) there is at least one dividing slot (breaking surfaces 42, 42, 34, FIG. 1) extending between the top (proximally facing surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see tops of members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) and the bottom (unviewed surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see bottoms of top-most members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) and transversely across the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5),
the at least one dividing slot (breaking surfaces 42, 42, 34, FIG. 1) being separated from the opposed sides (inner side 12, outer side 14, FIG. 1) or an adjacent dividing slot (breaking surfaces 42, 42, 34, FIG. 1) by slender webs (see interfaces between surfaces at 36, 42, 42 and sides 12, 34, FIG. 1) which bridge and connect the adjacent block portions (see 28, 30, middle piece between 42, 42, FIG. 1);
each of the block portions (see 28, 30, middle piece between 42, 42, FIG. 1) including a plurality of holes (See plurality of open areas, FIG. 1) extending between the top (proximally facing surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see tops of members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) and the bottom (unviewed surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see bottoms of top-most members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) thereof,
wherein the plurality of holes (See plurality of open areas, FIG. 1) comprises one larger holes (central through hole 32, FIG. 1) positioned at or near a geometric centre of a top (proximally facing surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see tops of members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) portion, and
a plurality of smaller holes (channels 56 of varying shape and size, FIG. 1) spaced apart around the larger holes (central through hole 32, FIG. 1); and
wherein each of the [[end]] --block (product 10, FIG. 1-5)-- portions at [[opposing]] --the opposed-- ends of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) comprises at least one protruding tongue (teeth 24, FIG. 1-3) extending between the top (proximally facing surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see tops of members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) and the bottom (unviewed surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see bottoms of top-most members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5),
the at least one protruding tongue (teeth 24, FIG. 1-3) is transversely offset with respect to the at least one protruding tongue (teeth 24, FIG. 1-3) at the [[opposite]] --other opposed-- end of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5).
As per claim 21, Megalith teaches a block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) for automated building construction,
the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) for use in constructing an external wall of a building,
the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) comprising a cuboid body (body of member, FIG. 1) including an opposed top (proximally facing surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see tops of members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4)(proximally facing surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see tops of members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) and a bottom (unviewed surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see bottoms of top-most members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4), a pair of opposed ends (left and right side surfaces 16, 18, FIG. 1), and a pair of opposed sides (inner side 12, outer side 14, FIG. 1);
the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) dividable (see breaking surfaces 42, 42, FIG. 1) lengthwise into a plurality of block portions (see 28, 30, middle piece between 42, 42, FIG. 1),
where between each pair of adjacent block portions (see 28, 30, middle piece between 42, 42, FIG. 1) there is at least one dividing slot (breaking surfaces 42, 42, 34, FIG. 1) extending between the top (proximally facing surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see tops of members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) and the bottom (unviewed surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see bottoms of top-most members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) and transversely across the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5),
the at least one dividing slot (breaking surfaces 42, 42, 34, FIG. 1) separated from the opposed sides (inner side 12, outer side 14, FIG. 1) or an adjacent dividing slot (breaking surfaces 42, 42, 34, FIG. 1) by slender webs (see interfaces between surfaces at 36, 42, 42 and sides 12, 34, FIG. 1) which bridge and connect the adjacent block portions (see 28, 30, middle piece between 42, 42, FIG. 1);
each of the block portions (see 28, 30, middle piece between 42, 42, FIG. 1) including a plurality of holes (See plurality of open areas, FIG. 1) extending between the top (proximally facing surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see tops of members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) and the bottom (unviewed surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see bottoms of top-most members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) thereof,
wherein the plurality of holes (See plurality of open areas, FIG. 1) comprises a pair of larger holes (central through hole 32, FIG. 1) spaced apart transversely across the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) portion, and
a plurality of smaller holes (channels 56 of varying shape and size, FIG. 1) spaced apart around and between the larger holes (central through hole 32, FIG. 1); and
wherein each of the [[end]] --block (product 10, FIG. 1-5)-- portions at [[opposing]] --the opposed-- ends of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) comprises at least one protruding tongue (teeth 24, FIG. 1-3) extending between the top (proximally facing surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see tops of members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) and the bottom (unviewed surface of elements shown FIG. 1-3; see bottoms of top-most members at 14, 28, 30 FIG. 4) of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5), the at least one protruding tongue (teeth 24, FIG. 1-3) is transversely offset (compare 24-26 left side and 26-24 right side, FIG. 1; these are recognized as transversely offset) with respect to the at least one protruding tongue (teeth 24, FIG. 1-3) at the [[opposite]] --other opposed-- end of the block (product 10, FIG. 1-5).
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 12, 14, 22, 24-26, 23, and 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Megalith in view of Gravier et al. US 5623797 A (Gravier).
As per claim 12, and 14 the primary reference of Megalith teaches the limitations according to claim 11 and 13 above but fails to explicitly disclose:
(Cl. 12) comprising one of:
a length of approximately 490 mm/49 cm;
a width of approximately 190 mm/19 cm; and,
a height of approximately 250 mm/25 cm,
a length of approximately 600 mm/60 cm;
a width of approximately 190 mm/19 cm; and,
a height of approximately 400 mm/40 cm,
a length of approximately 600 mm/60 cm;
a width of approximately 290 mm/29 cm; and
a height of approximately 400 mm/40 cm;
and
(Cl. 14) comprising one of:
a length of approximately 500 mm/50 cm;
a width of approximately 90 mm/9 cm; and,
a height of approximately 250 mm/25 cm,
a length of approximately 600 mm/60 cm;
a width of approximately 90 mm/9 cm; and,
a height of approximately 400 mm/40 cm.
Gravier teaches such typical relative block dimensions, specifically ( “6 inches wide, 18 inches long, and 8 inches in height” 5:29; these are recognized as approximately 490-600 mm by 19-290 mm by 250-400 mm).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the product of Megalith by making the dimensions be approximately as claimed as taught by Gravier in order to provide a commonly useful size block and because changes in size/proportion do not constitute a patentable difference (see Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), MPEP § 2144; also The Ward Machinery Company v. Wm. C. Staley Machinery Corporation, in which the court stated that “[i]mprovement resulting from change in size, proportion, or degree of element contained in prior art, no matter how desirable or useful, does not constitute patentable invention.”)
As per claim 22, Megalith teaches a wall assembly (FIG. 4-5) comprised of a plurality of blocks (product 10, bricks 28, 30, at inner side 12 and outer side 14, FIG. 4) as in claim 1, wherein the blocks are laid in a plurality of courses (see courses extending upwards, FIG. 4; this is recognized as an obvious intended use), and
a construction material (see “it is also possible to mortar the brick” [0011] translation and “mortar pocket” Cl. 3, translation) is applied between each course of blocks and a successive course to bond the courses of blocks .
but fails to explicitly disclose:
the construction material is adhesive
Gravier teaches such an obvious construction material, specifically:
the construction material is adhesive (“Construction adhesive may be employed between courses, it being noted, of course, that mortar is not required” 6:21)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the assembly of Megalith by substituting adhesive as taught by Gravier in order to more firmly align the blocks.
As per claim 24 Megalith in view of Gravier teaches the limitations according to claim 22, and Gravier further discloses wherein the adhesive is machine applied (“adhesive may be employed between courses” 6:21; see MPEP §2113) to the [[base]] --bottom-- of a block before the block is laid onto a lower course (MPEP §2`3 details concerning Product-by-Process Claims: “[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the assembly of Megalith in view of Gravier by applying the adhesive before the blocks are laid as taught by Gravier in order to form a more cohesive assembly.
As per claim 25 Megalith in view of Gravier teaches the limitations according to claim 22, and Gravier further discloses wherein at least two parallel beads of adhesive are applied onto the [[base]] --bottom-- of a block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) along a lengthwise extent thereof (see “adhesive may be employed between courses” 6:21; this is recognized as “along a lengthwise extent” as broadly claimed). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the assembly of Megalith in view of Gravier by applying the adhesive in any number of parallel beads to the blocks —including two beads onto the base— as taught by Gravier in order to distribute the adhesive evenly.
As per claim 26 Megalith in view of Gravier teaches the limitations according to claim 22, and Gravier further discloses wherein the adhesive is further applied onto one or more end faces of a block (see “adhesive may be employed between courses” 6:21; this is recognized as “onto one or more end faces” as broadly claimed) to form a perp joint with an adjacent block in a course. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the assembly of Megalith in view of Gravier by applying the adhesive on any number of faces of the blocks —including one or more end faces— as taught by Gravier in order to distribute the adhesive in a way which deters separation.
As per claim 23, Megalith teaches a wall assembly (FIG. 4-5) comprised of one or more internal walls constructed using the blocks (product 10, bricks 28, 30, at inner side 12 and outer side 14, FIG. 4) of internal wall block (see inner face of product 10, FIG. 1-5) of claim 20 and one or more external walls (see outer face of product 10, FIG. 1-5) constructed using blocks of an external wall block (product 10, FIG. 1-5),
wherein the blocks are laid in a plurality of courses (see courses extending upwards, FIG. 4; this is recognized as an obvious intended use), and
a construction material (see “it is also possible to mortar the brick” [0011] translation and “mortar pocket” Cl. 3, translation) is applied between each course of blocks and a successive course to bond the courses of blocks but fails to explicitly disclose:
the construction material is adhesive
Gravier teaches such an obvious construction material, specifically:
the construction material is adhesive (“Construction adhesive may be employed between courses, it being noted, of course, that mortar is not required” 6:21)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the assembly of Megalith by substituting adhesive as taught by Gravier in order to more firmly align the blocks.
As per claim 27 Megalith in view of Gravier teaches the limitations according to claim 23, and Gravier further discloses internal walls (see inner face of product 10, FIG. 1-5) are tied into external walls (see outer face of product 10, FIG. 1-5) by inserting internal wall blocks between adjacent external wall blocks for at least alternating courses of blocks so that ends of the internal wall lay flush with an outer face of an external wall (see FIG. 5; these elements are recognized to “lay flush” with one another, as broadly claimed). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the assembly of Megalith in view of Gravier by arranging the products in a row —i.e. arranged to “lay flush”— as taught by Gravier in order to form a wall.
As per claim 28 Megalith in view of Gravier teaches the limitations according to claim 27, and Gravier further discloses each of the larger holes (central through hole 32, FIG. 1) in an external wall block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) or block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) portion aligns with a corresponding larger holes (central through hole 32, FIG. 1) in an internal wall block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) or block (product 10, FIG. 1-5) portion when one is stacked atop of the other (see “stacked” FIG. 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the assembly of Megalith in view of Gravier by aligning the open spaces in the blocks in a way which allows a filler to traverse through the so aligned products.
Claim 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Megalith in view of Woolford US 5709062 A.
As per claim 17 Megalith teaches the limitations according to claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose:
each of the protruding tongues protrudes approximately 5 mm/0.2 in. from an end of the block.
Woolford teaches such a protrusion for a mating block assembly and this depth is capable of integration into the assembly of the primary reference, specifically:
each of the protruding tongues (protrusion 26, FIG. 16) protrudes approximately 5 mm/0.2 in. (“the protrusion will have a height ranging from one-quarter inch to three-quarter inches“ 9:64; this is recognized as approximately 5 mm) from an end of the block (inset 22B, FIG. 16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the assembly of Megalith by substituting the nominal extension of the tongue to be approximately 5mm as taught by the Woolford in order to form a secure engagement with the neighboring elements.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH J SADLON whose telephone number is (571)270-5730. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8AM-5PM.
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 D 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/JJS/
/BRIAN D MATTEI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Prosecution Insights