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 claims 1 - 14 in the reply filed on June 12, 2024 is acknowledged.
Claims 15 - 21 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on June 12, 2024.
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(s) 1 - 6 and 9 - 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gleich (DE 102019101970).
With regards to claim 1, Gleich teaches a method for producing a veneered building panel (Abstract) comprising:
Providing a substrate (paragraph 16, Claim 1)
Applying a sub-layer on a first surface of the substrate (paragraph 16, Claim 1)
Applying a wood veneer layer on the sub-layer (paragraph 16, Claim 1)
Applying heat and pressure to form the veneered building panel (paragraphs 16 and 34)
Where the method further comprises:
Dehydrating the wood veneer layer prior to applying heat and pressure to form the veneered building panel (paragraph 17, claim 1)
Where dehydrating the wood veneer layer comprises applying one or more of IR radiation, heat, microwaves and/or hot air to the wood veneer layer (paragraph 22)
And where the sublayer comprises a no added formaldehyde binder (paragraphs 36 and 37)
With regards to claim 2, the teachings of Gleich are presented above. Additionally, Gleich teaches that the dehydrating the wood veneer layer comprises dehydrating the wood veneer layer after applying the wood veneer layer on the sub-layer (paragraph 24).
With regards to claim 3, the teachings of Gleich are presented above. Additionally, Gleich teaches that the sub-layer is applied in powder form, as a sheet, in liquid form, and/or as granulates (paragraph 37).
With regards to claim 4, the teachings of Gleich are presented above. Additionally, Gleich teaches that the sub-layer is applied in powder form (paragraph 37).
With regards to claim 5, the teachings of Gleich are presented above. Additionally, Gleich teaches that the binder comprises one or more of PVC, polyester, polyurethane or a combination thereof (paragraph 36).
With regards to claim 6, the teachings of Gleich are presented above. Additionally, Gleich teaches that the method further comprises heating the sub-layer prior to applying the wood veneer layer to the sub-layer (paragraph 33).
With regards to claim 9, the teachings of Gleich are presented above. Additionally, Gleich teaches that dehydrating the wood veneer layer comprises dehydrating the wood veneer layer to have a moisture content of less than 7 wt% (paragraph 21).
With regards to claim 10, the teachings of Gleich are presented above. Additionally, Gleich teaches that the substrate is a wood-based board, optionally an MDF or HDF board (paragraph 26).
With regards to claim 11, the teachings of Gleich are presented above. Additionally, Gleich teaches that an applied dehydration effect, for dehydrating the wood veneer layer, is proportional to a thickness of the wood veneer (paragraphs 21, 22 and 25).
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, 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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gleich (DE 102019101970) in view of Hart et al (US 2019/0152207).
With regards to claim 7, the teachings of Gleich are presented above. Gleich teaches that the resin layer is pre-cured (paragraph 33) where one of ordinary skills would appreciate that heat is required to pre-cure. Gleich fails to explicitly disclose that the pre-curing is performed by using an IR radiation.
Hart discloses a composite laminate system for indoor and outdoor application comprising a wood layer comprised of a thin plank or veneer (Abstract), in the same field of endeavor as Gleich, where Hart discusses that curing a urethane coating by way of an infrared heat improves its hardness (paragraph 76).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used IR heating to heat the resin layer in Gleich as suggested by Hart. The rationale being, as stated by Hart, that it improves or increases the hardness (paragraph 76).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gleich (DE 102019101970) in view of Beuchel et al (US 2015/0086747).
With regards to claim 8, the teachings of Gleich are presented above. Gleich fails to explicitly disclose that the method comprises a step of cooling the substrate, sub-layer and wood veneer layer prior to applying heat and pressure to form the veneered building panel.
Beuchel discloses various examples for polymer reinforced composite plywood and laminates (Abstract), in the same field of endeavor as Gleich, where Beuchel discloses cooling the substrate, sub-layer and wood veneer layer prior to applying heat and pressure to form the veneered building panel (paragraph 52).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have performed a step of cooling the substrate, sub-layer and wood veneer layer prior to applying heat and pressure to form the veneered building panel, as suggested by Beuchel, in Gleich’s method. The rationale being that, as stated by Beuchel, it prevents the resin layer for curing during the layup and spreading operations before the reach the pressing step (paragraph 52).
Claim(s) 12 - 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gleich (DE 102019101970) in view of Bradway et al (US 2018/0127987).
With regards to claim 12, the teachings of Gleich are presented above. Gleich fails to explicitly disclose that the method comprises applying a back side layer arrangement comprising a backing layer to a second surface of the substrate.
Bradway discloses a flooring system (Abstract), in the same field of endeavor as Gleich, where Bradway states that the panel comprises an underlayer (Figure 3 item 70, paragraph 47), which is positioned on a second surface of the substrate opposite the first surface on which the sub layer is applied (Figure 3 item 40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied a back side layer arrangement comprising a backing layer to a second surface of the substrate opposite the first surface on which the sub-layer is applied, as suggested by Bradway, in Gleich’s method. The rationale being that, as stated by Bradway, it can provide an additional protection and added properties to the building panel (paragraph 47).
With regards to claim 13, the teachings of Gleich and Bradway are presented above. Additionally, Bradway teaches that the back side layer arrangement comprises a binder configured to attach the backing layer to a second surface of the substrate and where the binder in the back side layer is the same as the binder in the sub-layer (Figure 3 item 50).
With regards to claim 14, the teachings of Gleich and Bradway are presented above. Additionally, Bradway teaches that the backing layer is configured to form a moisture barrier (paragraph 47).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHEL RIVERA whose telephone number is (571)270-7655. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12pm - 8pm.
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, Michael Orlando can be reached at (571) 270-5038. 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.
/JOSHEL RIVERA/Examiner, Art Unit 1746
/MICHAEL N ORLANDO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1746
Prosecution Insights