DETAILED ACTION
Applicant's submission filed on 06/26/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 3-8, 10, 12-16, and 21-23 are pending. Claim 1 has been amended. Claim 2 has been cancelled. Claims 21-23 has been added. Claims 8 and 10-16 remain withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claim 1, line 7, “from outer end” should be “from the/said outer end” because an outer end was introduced at line 5.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 5, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wendt US4255910.
Claim 1. Wendt discloses a tile clip (16) for use in retaining a tile on a support frame of a wall panel, the tile clip comprising: a base (20) extending between a first end (denoted 30 below) and a second end (denoted 32 below) and having first and second sides (denoted 33 and 35 below); an end wall (19) integrally formed with the base and extending perpendicular to the base from the second end (32 below) of the base to an outer end, the end wall being configured to flex outwardly from the second end in a first direction away from the first end of the base (all materials are flexible to some degree, even if that bending is very tiny before the material breaks); an engagement tip (17) extending from outer end of the end wall, wherein the engagement tip extends perpendicular to the end wall (17 is perpendicular from 19) toward the first end of the base (30); an attachment arm (23) extending from the base in a second direction opposite the end wall (as illustrated in extract of Fig.4 below), wherein the attachment arm is configured to engage the support frame of the wall panel to securely hold the tile clip on the support frame; wherein the end wall (19) is configured to flex outward such that the retaining tile can be received and retained between the base and the engagement tip such that the engagement tip holds the tile in place on the support frame.
PNG
media_image1.png
433
385
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 5. Wendt discloses the attachment arm (23) includes a body that extends between a first end (denoted 36 above) and a second end (denoted 34 above), wherein the first end is attached to the base and the second end is spaced from the base (as illustrated in extract of Fig.4 above).
Claim 6. Wendt discloses attachment of the body to the base is flexible to allow a spacing between the second end and the base to change (such that flange of 33 can be accommodated as shown in Fig.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, 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.
Claims 3, 4, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wendt US4255910 as applied to claim 1 above.
Claim 3-4. Wendt fails to disclose the tile clip is formed from a clear plastic material, however it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to form the tile clip from a clear plastic material with the motivation of providing relatively cheaper yet equally rigid clips as those made from metal with it being clear for aesthetic feature since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Claim 7. Wendt discloses the base includes a central opening (24) aligned with the attachment arm (23) but is silent that the attachment arm extends into the central opening when the tile clip is not installed on the support frame of the wall panel. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to form the attachment arm such that it extends into the central opening to provide a spring like effect such that when installed the arm is pressed firmly against the flange of the stud (33, Fig.1). Furthermore, it has been held that a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue known options within his or her technical grasp.
Claim 21. Wendt discloses the attachment arm has an inwardly portion between the first end and the second end but is silent the portion is curved and has an inner edge that is generally coplanar with the base. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to make the inwardly portion curve such that an inner edge that is generally coplanar with the base with the motivation of providing a spring like effect such that when installed the arm is pressed firmly against the flange of the stud (33, Fig.1). Furthermore, it has been held that there is no invention in merely changing the shape or form of an article without changing its function except in a design patent.
Claim 21. Wendt as amended discloses the second end of the attachment arm (at 34 in Fig above) is spaced from the base by a distance that is greater than a distance that the inner edge is spaced from the base (as shown by the dashed lines of 23 in Figure above).
Claim 23. Wendt as amended discloses the base includes a central opening (24) aligned with the attachment arm (23) but is silent on the inner edge of the inwardly curved portion extends into the central opening when the tile clip is not installed on the support frame of the wall panel. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to make the curved inwardly portion extend into the central opening with the motivation of providing a stronger spring like effect such that when installed the arm is pressed firmly against the flange of the stud (33, Fig.1).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues Wendt fails to disclose or teach the end wall 70 is capable of flexing outwardly such that a bias can be exerted onto the tile by the end wall 70. Such a configuration provides flexure of the clip in two perpendicular directions such that the engagement tip can securely hold the tile in place on the support frame when the tile is initially installed or after removal of the tile. Examiner disagrees with Applicants assertion. As stated above and according to the law of elasticity; all materials are flexible to some degree, even if that bending is very tiny before the material breaks, as such the end wall is capable of flexing. Regarding the engagement tip being perpendicular to the end wall, the Figure above clearly shows engagement tip 17 at right angle to the endwall 19.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 BABAJIDE A DEMUREN whose telephone number is (571)270-7017. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-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 Glessner can be reached at 5712726754. 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.
BABAJIDE A. DEMUREN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3633
/BABAJIDE A DEMUREN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Prosecution Insights