Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/773,835

MECHANICAL LOCKING SYSTEM FOR FLOOR PANELS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 16, 2024
Examiner
DEMUREN, BABAJIDE A
Art Unit
3633
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Ceraloc Innovation AB
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
761 granted / 1032 resolved
+21.7% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+22.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
1052
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
45.8%
+5.8% vs TC avg
§102
31.8%
-8.2% vs TC avg
§112
17.1%
-22.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1032 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/12/2024 and 07/23/20205 was considered by the examiner. 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 2-6, 8 and 11-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schitter US20090041987 in view of Heyns US20080092473. Claim 2. Schitter discloses a set of floor panels comprising a first panel and a second panel each comprising a ceramic surface layer (4) and a core (1), wherein a first edge of the first panel comprises a strip provided with a locking element (metal clip – P.0063) a second edge of the second panel comprises a locking groove (8), the locking element and the locking groove being configured to cooperate for locking of the first edge and the second edge in a horizontal direction parallel with the ceramic surface layer (P.0063), wherein the first edge and the second edge comprise a tongue (7) and a tongue groove (6), the tongue and the tongue groove being configured to cooperate for locking of the first edge and the second edge in a vertical direction perpendicular to the horizontal direction, wherein the locking groove is formed in the core of the second panel at the second edge (Fig.1), wherein the tongue groove is formed in the core of the first panel at the first edge or in the core of the second panel at the second edge (Fig.1), wherein the first edge and the second edge are configured to be locked to each other into a locked position by a relative vertical displacement or vertical folding of the first and second panels, wherein the locking element (metal clips from P.0063) and/or the tongue are formed separately from the core of the first panel and the core of the second panel, but is silent on wherein in the locked position of the first edge and the second edge there is a space between the ceramic surface layers of the first panel and the second panel. Heynes before the filing date of the instant invention to discloses a panel with a ceramic upper layer wherein when connected to an adjacent tile defines a space there between. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to form the ceramic upper face with space for the introduction of grout as taught by Heynes, as a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue known options within his or her technical grasp. Claim 3. Schitter as modified discloses a tongue locking surface of the tongue (7) is inclined with respect to a horizontal plane extending along the ceramic surface layers and/or wherein a locking surface of the locking element is inclined with respect to a vertical direction extending perpendicularly to the horizontal plane (Fig.1). Claim 4. Schitter as modified discloses the strip and/or the tongue is arranged in a strip part formed separately from the core of the first panel and the core of the second panel (metal clips, P.0063). Claim 5. Schitter as modified discloses at least a portion of the tongue groove is provided below the ceramic surface layer of the first panel and/or the ceramic surface layer of the second panel (Fig.1). Claim 6. Schitter as modified discloses the entire core (1) of the first and second panel extends below the ceramic surface layer (4) of the first and second panel (Fig.1). Claim 8. Schitter as modified fails to disclose a thickness of the ceramic surface layer is in the range of 2 mm to 5 mm however it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to provide thickness of the ceramic surface layer is in the range of 2 mm to 5 mm with the motivation of creating a superior wear surface. Furthermore, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Claim 11. Schitter as modified fails to disclose a thickness of the core is 3 - 5 mm, however it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to provide a thickness of the core is 3 - 5 mm with the motivation reducing sound from a walking surface. Furthermore, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Claim 12. Schitter as modified fails to disclose a total thickness of the ceramic surface layer and the core is between 5 and 10 mm, however it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to provide a total thickness of the ceramic surface layer and the core between 5 and 10 mm with the motivation creating a solid wear surface of a floor. Furthermore, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Claim 13. Schitter as modified fails to disclose in a locked position of the first edge and the second edge there is a space of about 1- 10 mm between the ceramic surface layers of the first panel and the second panel, however it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to provide a space of about 1- 10 mm between the ceramic surface layers of the first panel and the second panel with the motivation creating a conventional width for an industry standard grout joint. Furthermore, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Claim 14. Schitter as modified discloses the space is configured to be formed when the locking element enters into the locking groove (as shown in Fig.20 of Heyns). , however it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to provide a space of about 1- 10 mm between the ceramic surface layers of the first panel and the second panel with the motivation creating a conventional width for an industry standard grout joint. Furthermore, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Claim 15. Schitter as modified discloses the core of the second panel is exposed in the space from above in the locked position of the first edge and the second edge (as shown in Fig.19 of Heynes). Claim 16. Schitter as modified discloses cooperating surfaces of the locking element and the locking groove are used for preventing separation of the first and second edges away from each other and for preventing displacement of the first and second edges towards each other (as shown in Fig.3). Claim 17. Schitter as modified discloses the locking groove at the second edge of the second panel is provided inwardly of an upper edge of the second panel (Fig.1). Claim 18. Schitter as modified discloses wherein the tongue, the tongue groove, the locking element and the locking groove are configured such that, when the locking element and the locking groove cooperate for locking of the first edge and the second edge in the horizontal direction and the tongue and the tongue groove cooperate for locking of the first edge and the second edge in the vertical direction, the locking element extends below the ceramic surface layer of the second panel, and the tongue extends below the ceramic surface layer of the first panel (see Fig.3). Claim 19. Schitter as modified discloses a flexible grout material is arranged in the space in the locked position of the first edge and the second edge (P.0135 of Heynes). Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schitter US20090041987 Heyns US20080092473 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Olofsson US8006458. Claim 9 and 10. Schitter as modified by Heyns as modified discloses the thermoplastic material comprises PVC, PE or PP (P.0117), but fails to disclose the mineral fillers constitute at least 50% of a weight of the core, however it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to provide mineral fillers constituting at least 50% of a weight of the core with the motivation of increasing the dimension stability but also to increase the adhesion when being glued as taught by Olofsson. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 7 is 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 closest prior art of record fails to teach or adequately suggest the combination of characteristics specified in the independent claim, especially the requirement of a substance concerning the tongue groove comprises an upper lip that is essentially formed by the ceramic surface layer, wherein at least 60% of a thickness of the upper lip comprises ceramic material, hence there is no cogent reasoning that is unequivocally independent of hindsight that would have led one of ordinary skill in the art at the time. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to attached NOTICE OF REFERENCE CITED. 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 16, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601184
ARCHITECTURAL SIDING AND METHOD OF USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12571212
TRUSS ELEMENT, LADDER ELEMENT, COUPLING ELEMENT AND TRUSS SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12565772
PRIVACY SCREEN
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12559952
DEVICE FOR LEVELING AND ALIGNING TILES AND METHOD FOR LEVELING AND ALIGNING TILES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12562673
SUPPORT ASSEMBLY FOR PHOTOVOLTAIC MODULES AND MOUNTING SYSTEM USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+22.4%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1032 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month