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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I, claim 30 in the reply filed on December 19, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 31-32 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: the reference numbers are: 318, 326, 311, 310, 310a, 312, 312a, 312b, 314, 314a 316, 316a, 328, 320 and 322, which are mentioned in paragraphs [0091]-[0101] and in paragraphs [0286]-[0295]. 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. 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 § 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.
Claim(s) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elmore (US 5,372,349).
Regarding Claim 30, Elmore discloses a concrete-casting mold system (Col. 1 ll. 15-15, Col.10 ll. 31-33 (claim 1) & Col. 11 ll. 17-18 (claim 6)) comprising
a concrete-casting mold (abs, form system capable of molding pre-cast wall panels), the concrete-casting mold comprising
a base comprising an upper smooth flat surface (Figs. 2, 3 Col. 2 ll. 45-49 base assembly defining bottom of mold space which supports at least one form liner imparting an architectural finish, where this finish could have an intended use as an upper smooth flat surface; Col 4, l. 63 base assembly – 3 Col. 5 ll. 2-3 sheet like form liners – 7, which appears in Fig. 3 where the upper surface of the base assembly appears smooth and flat),
a plurality of walls (Figs 1A, 1B Col. 5 ll. 6-7 plurality of left and right side wall members – 9a, b which appear in the figures to be sloped), the plurality of walls comprising
a first sloped wall (Fig. 3 inner wall – 50 included in 9a left wall) comprising a major upper length element (Figs.1, 2, 3 Col. 6 ll. 45-52 where the left wall – 9a appears sloped and has an inner wall – 50 attached to the base assembly – 3);
a second sloped wall (Fig. 3 Col. 6 ll. 46-47 side wall – 26a) adjacent to the first sloped wall (Fig. 3 inner wall – 50), the second sloped wall comprising a major upper length element (Figs.1, 2, 3 Col. 6 ll. 45-52 where the inner wall – 50 abuts against the side wall – 26a of the base);
a third sloped wall (Fig. 3 Col. 7 ll. 26-30 right side wall member – 9b includes inner wall – 50) opposing the first sloped wall, the third sloped wall comprising a major upper length element (Fig. 3 Col. 7 l. 27 where right side wall member – 9b inner wall – 50 is opposite the left side wall member – 9a);
a fourth sloped wall (Fig. 3 Col. 5 ll. 32-35 side wall – 26b side wall – 26a opposing the second sloped wall (Fig. 3 Col.5 ll. 34-35 where side wall – 26b is mentioned , the fourth sloped wall comprising a major upper length element (Figs.1, 2, 3 Col. 6 ll. 45-52 where the inner wall – 50 abuts against the side wall – 26b of the base), wherein the first sloped wall, the second sloped wall, the third sloped wall, and the fourth sloped wall are each undetachably coupled to the base (Figs, 3, 5 Col. 5 ll. 53-555; Col. 6 ll. 60-61 Inner wall – 50 on both sides fastened and stiffened by a plurality of reinforcing gussets – 58 with the side walls – 126a, b includes a plurality of bolt holes – 38) See Fig. 3 below:
PNG
media_image1.png
713
1410
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, while Elmore further discloses that the plurality of walls and the base collectively define an internal cavity (Figs. 2, 3 Col. 2 ll. 50-64 mold space), Elmore is silent as to the internal cavity having a height equal to at least 6 inches, the internal cavity comprising
a lower internal perimeter being substantially 36 inches by substantially 80 inches; and,
an upper internal perimeter being substantially 30.6 inches by substantially 81.6 inches.
However, Elmore does disclose that this mold space (internal cavity) has adjustable walls (Figs. 6, 8A Col. 5 ll. 11-26 height adjustable mounting system – 13 length adjustable mounting system – 17) and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the height adjustable at 6 inches and the lower internal perimeter of the mold space being substantially 36 inches by substantially 80 inches and an upper internal perimeter being substantially 30. 6 inches by substantially 81.6 inches, since it have been held that adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art. One would have been motivated to make the height, and the lower and upper perimeters defining the internal cavity adjustable for the purpose of allowing the system of the invention to produce structural wall panels of a variety of different dimensions and thicknesses in a rapid and economical manner (Col. 4 ll. 9-14). .
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WAYNE K. SWIER whose telephone number is (571)272-4598. The examiner can normally be reached M-F generally 8:30 am - 5:30 pm PST.
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, Abbas Rashid can be reached at 571-270-7457. 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.
/WAYNE K. SWIER/ Examiner, Art Unit 1748
/Abbas Rashid/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1748