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 7/24/24 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “wherein the third coupling element is positioned at a vertical distance from the outermost point of the curved portion” as recited in claim 1, lines 36 and 37 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the” is omitted before “further panel” in line 26. Appropriate correction is required.
Each of claims 9 and 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: “extends” is omitted after “second extension region” in line 2.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1, lines 21-23 recite “a third locking element;… a fourth locking element”. No first and second locking elements are previously introduced. However, “a first coupling profile” and “a second coupling profile” are previously introduced in the claim. Are the claim components intended to be referred to as “a third coupling profile” and “a fourth coupling profile”? Or are they intended to be introduced as “a first locking element” and “a second locking element”?
Claim 1, line 36 recites “the third coupling element” lacking antecedent basis. Should this recite “the third locking element”? Claim terms should be consistent and unambiguous for clarity.
Claim 1, lines 36 and 37 recites “wherein the third coupling element is positioned at a vertical distance from the outermost point of the curved portion”. This vertical distance is not identified in the figures and it appears that the vertical distance is essentially “0” as shown in Applicant’s Figure 4L reproduced below. Where is the vertical distance measured from? The top of the third coupling element? The bottom? The middle?
PNG
media_image1.png
322
657
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 5, line 2 recites “the recess of the fourth locking element”. “The recess” lacks antecedent basis. It is unclear what structure is being referenced.
Claim 11 recites “the downward first inner flank” lacking antecedent basis. A “first inner flank” is introduced in claim 1 but a coupling element on it cannot associate with a coupling element on the second inner flank based on their geometries. Should it the second inner flank and the upward tongue? This is the best understanding of the claim and has been examined as such.
Claim 12 recites “the upward flank”. It is unclear if this is referring to the upward flank of the upward tongue or downward tongue.
Claims 14, 16 and 17 each recites “the first flank portion” lacking antecedent basis. It is unclear what structure is being referenced.
Claims 15 and 16 each recites “the second flank portion” lacking antecedent basis. It is unclear what structure is being referenced.
Claim 18 recites “the downward tongue comprises an upward flank”. However, parent claim 1 already introduces an upward flank on the downward tongue. Is this the same upward flank? Antecedence should be reflected.
Claim 18 appears to be conflating two different embodiments of the invention – Fig. 4B having 3rd and 4th locking elements as set forth in parent claim 1, and Fig. 4E. These embodiments are not shown to be functional together.
PNG
media_image2.png
353
1033
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 21 recites “the first locking element” and “the second locking element” lacking antecedent basis. It is unclear what structure is being referenced.
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, 4, 9, 12, 14-17, 19, 20 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DeRick, US 2020/0318360.
Regarding claim 1:
DeRick discloses a panel configured to be used for constructing a floor covering that comprises a plurality of said panels, the panel comprising:
a core (1A/1B) having a first side that is provided with a first extension region and a second side that is provided with a second extension region, wherein the first side is oppositely arranged relative to the second side, wherein the first extension region comprises a first coupling profile and wherein the second extension region comprises a second coupling profile that is complementary to the first coupling profile;
wherein the first coupling profile comprises an upward tongue that runs at a distance from and parallel to a first inner flank of the core, wherein a clearance between the first inner flank of the core and the first upward tongue forms an upward groove;
wherein the second coupling profile comprises a downward tongue that runs at a distance from and parallel to a second inner flank of the core, wherein a clearance between the second inner flank of the core and the downward tongue forms a downward groove;
wherein the downward tongue comprises an upward flank forming an outer edge of the panel; and
wherein the upward tongue comprises a curved portion, an upward flank extending from a bottom of the upward groove to the curved portion, and a downward flank extending from the curved portion and forming an outer edge of the panel;
wherein the first inner flank is provided with a third locking element;
wherein the upward flank of the downward tongue is provided with a fourth locking element;
wherein the third locking element is configured to co-act with the fourth locking element of an adjacently arranged further panel for the purpose of mutually locking the panel and the further panel;
wherein an outermost point of the curved portion is positioned further away from the first inner flank than a center point of the upward tongue;
wherein the upward tongue has a width that corresponds to a distance in a direction parallel to the panel between a starting point of the upward flank and an outer point on the downward flank of the upward tongue,
wherein a distance between the starting point of the upward flank of the upward tongue and the outermost point of the curved portion in a direction parallel to the panel equals x number of times the width of the upward tongue, wherein x is equal to or larger than 0.5 (~1.0),
wherein the third coupling (locking? – refer to the 112 set forth above) element is positioned at a vertical distance from the outermost point of the curved portion, and
wherein the panel is configured to be coupled with an adjacent panel in a drop-and-lock configuration achieved by a vertical movement of the panel and the adjacent panel relative to one another.
PNG
media_image3.png
597
1036
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4:
DeRick discloses wherein the fourth locking element comprises a protruding portion.
Regarding claim 9:
DeRick discloses wherein the first extension region extends from the bottom side of the panel and the second extension region extends from the bottom side of the panel.
Regarding claims 12 and 17:
DeRick discloses wherein the upward flank of the upward tongue comprises a curved first flank portion extending from the starting point of the upward flank, and a second flank portion extending between the first flank portion and curved portion.
Regarding claim 14:
DeRick discloses wherein a first flank portion of the upward flank of the downward tongue is essentially flat.
Regarding claim 15:
DeRick discloses wherein a second flank portion of the upward flank of the downward tongue is essentially flat.
Regarding claim 16:
DeRick discloses wherein an angle of the first flank portion relative to a normal of the plane is smaller than an angle of the second flank portion relative to the normal of the plane (refer to Fig. 11, the top portion is 0° and the bottom portion is around 45°)
Regarding claim 19:
DeRick discloses wherein the downward flank extends substantially parallel to a normal of the panel.
Regarding claim 20:
DeRick discloses wherein the downward flank is, apart from the first locking element, essentially flat (refer to Fig. 12).
Regarding claim 22:
DeRick discloses wherein the first coupling profile of a given panel among the plurality of panels is coupled to the second coupling profile of another panel among the plurality of panels that is arranged adjacent to said given panel.
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 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeRick, US 2020/0318360.
Regarding claim 10:
DeRick discloses wherein the first extension region extends from the bottom side of the panel and the second extension region extends from the bottom side of the panel.
DeRick does not disclose the opposite as claimed.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention (PHOSITA) was made to have the first extension region extend from the top side of the panel and the second extension region extend from the bottom side of the panel, since it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167. There would be no unexpected or unpredictable result obtained from reversing the location of the extension regions.
Regarding claim 11:
DeRick discloses third and fourth coupling elements as well as first and second coupling elements as shown in the figures reproduced above. However, DeRick does not expressly disclose wherein the coupling elements are used together in the same embodiment.
It would have been to a PHOSITA before the effective filing date of the invention to provide both sets of coupling elements in order to provide increased coupling force. No extraordinary or unexpected results would be achieved by having third and fourth locking elements in conjunction with first and second locking elements as taught by DeRick.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3, 5-8, 13 and 21 appear that they would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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:
Regarding claims 2-3, the prior art discloses a panel as claimed in claim 1 but the details of the third locking element are not reasonably suggested by the prior art of record and the third locking element of the most relevant prior art to DeRick could not be modified to include the third locking element details without improper hindsight reconstruction.
Regarding claims 5-7, the prior art discloses a panel as claimed in claim 1 but the details of the protruding portion of the fourth locking element are not reasonably suggested by the prior art of record and the fourth locking element of the most relevant prior art to DeRick could not be modified to include the fourth locking element details without improper hindsight reconstruction.
Regarding claim 8, the prior art of record does not disclose nor reasonably suggest the panel as claimed in claim 1 further including a protruding portion on each of the first inner flank and the upward flank in or on which the third and further locking elements are arranged respectively.
Regarding claim 13, the prior art of record does not reasonably suggest wherein x lies in the range between 0.5 and 0.7, wherein the downward flank extends in an outwardly inclined manner relative to the normal of the plane. The prior art could not be modified to include this structure in the combination without improper hindsight reasoning.
Regarding claim 21, the prior art discloses a panel as claimed in claim 1 but the details of the protruding portion of the first and second locking elements are not reasonably suggested by the prior art of record and the first and second locking elements of the most relevant prior art to DeRick could not be modified to include the locking element details without improper hindsight reconstruction.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRENT W HERRING whose telephone number is (571)270-3661. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30a-6:00p MT.
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 (571)272-6754. 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.
/BRENT W HERRING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633