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 .
Response to Arguments
The applicant has amended claim 30 (claims 1-29 previously canceled) and added new claims 33-37. Non-elected claims 31 and 32 canceled.
Applicant has addressed the drawings objections from the previous non-final office action whereby replacement drawing sheets are provided with previously missing reference numerals now included in the drawings. As a result, the previous drawings objection is withdrawn by the examiner.
Applicant argues regarding independent claim 30 rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Elmore (US 5,372,349), that Elmore discloses a multi-piece system with a base assembly and side wall members that are separate components which are bolted together. Amended claim 30 now recites that the first, second, third and fourth sloped walls are now “continuously-sloped.” Additionally, the concrete-casting mold “assembly” now comprise a monolithic concrete-casing mold.
From these amendments of claim 30, new grounds of rejection are provided.
However, new claims 33-36 are objected to as being allowable subject matter dependent on a rejected base claim.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Fig. 4 (replacement sheet) has a reference numeral designated as "47~0". This should be corrected to "470". 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 Objections
Claims 33-36 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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 and 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benson (US 4,572,711).
Regarding Claim 30, Benson discloses a concrete-casting mold assembly (abs) comprising
a monolithic concrete-casting mold (Col. 6.ll. 1-4), the monolithic concrete-casting mold comprising
a base comprising an upper smooth flat surface (Figs. 1, 2 Col. 7 ll. 47-48 base member – 14 having a base portion – 26 which is smooth in the figures); a plurality of walls (Fig. 1, a plurality of support structures - 10 are employed in a spaced relationship with prestressed wall segments – 12 extending between support structures – 10), the plurality of walls comprising
a first continuously-sloped wall (Col. 4 ll. 44-46 facia panel means for providing an external appearance of a continuous uniform slope between a plurality of adjacent retaining wall units) comprising a major upper length element (Fig. 2 Col. 57-62 leg portion – 34 adjoining base portion – 36 and substantially centered on the base portion – 36 where leg portion – 34 extends beyond base portion – 36 in a lengthwise direction by a predetermined distance)
a second continuously-sloped wall adjacent to the first continuously-sloped wall, the second continuously-sloped wall comprising a major upper length element;
a third continuously-sloped wall opposing the first continuously-sloped wall, the third continuously-sloped wall comprising a major upper length element;
a fourth continuously-sloped wall opposing the second continuously-sloped wall; the fourth continuously-sloped wall comprising a major upper length element, (Col.11, ll. 57-65 where Figs. 12, 13 show a front elevation and a cross-sectional diagram where fourth continuous sloped wall with a third continuously sloped wall opposing a first continuously sloped wall with Fig. 12 illustrating the manner in which facia panels – 112 are utilized to form a continuously uniform slope from Col. 4 ll. 44-46 and claim 10 )
wherein the first continuously-sloped wall, the second continuously-sloped wall, the third continuously- sloped wall, and the fourth sloped wall are each undetachably coupled to the base (Figs. 1, 2 , 10, 1 Col.11, 26-40, ll 43-48) where counterbalance slabs – 15 are disposed on tail portions – 110 and foot portion – 30 of the base member – 14 to resist horizontal sliding from in any lengthwise direction and slippage of unitary support structure – 10 in same manner as wall segments – 12 to prevent slippage after installation which is inherently undetachable);
However, Benson is silent as to the plurality of continuously-sloped walls and the base collectively define an internal cavity having a height equal to at least 6 inches.
But it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for the plurality of continuously-sloped and the base collectively to define an internal cavity having a height equal to at least 6 inches since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. One would have been motivated to use this parameter for the purpose of optimizing the height of the vertical walls in relation to the cross-tie member to effectively offset bending moment forces and overturning moment forces in the concrete structure formation (Col. 12 ll. 16-21).
Regarding Claim 37, Benson discloses all the limitations of claim 30 and further discloses that concrete- casting mold assembly comprises metal (Col. 12 ll. 2-10); wherein the first continuously-sloped wall, the second continuously-sloped wall, the third continuously-sloped wall , and the fourth continuously-sloped wall each comprise at least two notch pairs (800) (Fig. 19 Col.13 ll. 41-64 pairs of notches – 156, 166, 172, 160), wherein each of the at least two notch pairs (800) are configured to detachably receive a pair of prongs (810) of a detachable barrier wall (820) (Fig. 19, Col. 13 ll. 41-64 where a footer flange – 154, base – 144, upper retaining flange – 150 and counterbalancing slabs – 158 are all disposed into these notches acting as prongs and fit in these notches in a detachable manner as evident from Fig. 19).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 33-36 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art does not disclose, teach or suggest a concrete-casting assembly where continuously-sloped walls comprising a first channel-shaped recess further comprise a detachable barrier wall comprising a barrier flange with a first flange and a second flange each detachably resting on a first channel-shaped recess and a second channel-shaped recess as recited in claim 33.
This configuration is not found in any of the prior references searched and considered which included Tengstedt (US 1,759, 070), which included flange portions for a concrete casing assembly,, but were not part of a monolithic structure, Elmore (US 5,372,349), of record, Hammer (US 2009/0000233 A1), Strickland (US 5,755,982), Benson (US 4,572,711), Wilson (US 5,393,033), Duwe (US 4,033,545), Andrews (GB 631,677) and Debitsuto (JPH01234208A) with machine translation, however, these references were all modular units of concrete systems with non-detachable wall units that were joined by mechanical means and not flanges with channel shaped recesses (See Fig. 4) such that none of these references disclosed, taught or suggested the combination of a concrete-casting assembly where continuously-sloped walls comprising a first channel-shaped recess further comprise a detachable barrier wall comprising a barrier flange with a first flange and a second flange each detachably resting on a first channel-shaped recess and a second channel-shaped recess as recited in claim 33.
Claims 34-36 are allowable subject matter through dependency on claim 33.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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 /JACOB T MINSKEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1748
Prosecution Insights