Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/783,060

COLD FORMED BEAM FOR STRUCTURES AND METHOD OF FORMING THE COLD FORMED BEAM

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jul 24, 2024
Examiner
KENNY, DANIEL J
Art Unit
3633
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Nucor Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
634 granted / 1031 resolved
+9.5% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+21.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
1062
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
49.2%
+9.2% vs TC avg
§102
20.8%
-19.2% vs TC avg
§112
26.9%
-13.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1031 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Claim Objections Claim 3 is objected to because “upper member” should be --the upper member--. Claim 10 is objected to because “first flange” should be --first leg--, “second flange” should be --second leg--, “third flange” should be --third leg--, and “fourth flange” should be --fourth leg--, as a flange is a projecting rim used for strength or attachment, the first through fourth “flange” not being projecting rims because they are connected at both ends. Claim 16 is objected to because “and upper” should be --an upper--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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 1-7, 11, 14-15, and 18-20 - are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Meyer (6,170,217). 1.Meyer teaches a cold-formed beam comprising: an upper member (the upper chord, fig. 2); a lower member (the lower chord, fig. 2); and a web (the beam web between the top and bottom chords) between the upper member and the lower member; wherein the upper member, the lower member, and the web are formed from forming a sheet (col. 2, lines 33-36). 2.Meyer teaches the beam of claim 1, Meyer further teaching the sheet is a single sheet that is rolled to form the upper member, the lower member, and the web (col. 2, lines 33-36). 3.Meyer teaches the beam of claim 1, Meyer further teaching the upper member comprises an upper web flange 240 that extends over at least a portion of the web. 4.Meyer teaches the beam of claim 3, Meyer further teaching the lower member comprises a lower web flange 240 that extends over at least a portion of the web. 5.Meyer teaches the beam of claim 4, Meyer further teaching the upper web flange is operatively coupled to the web and the lower web flange is operatively coupled to the web through the use of a plurality of beam connectors 230. 6.Meyer teaches the beam of claim 5, Meyer further teaching the plurality of beam connectors comprise: an interference connector (“clench press”) formed by deforming a portion of the upper web flange and the web, and a portion of the lower web flange and the web, col. 5, lines 32-34. 7.Meyer teaches the beam of claim 5, Meyer further teaching the plurality of beam connectors comprise: welding (“welding”) the upper web flange to the web and the lower web flange to the web, or assembling fasteners (“screws”) through the upper web flange and the web and the lower web flange and the web, col. 5, lines 32-34). 11.Meyer teaches the beam of claim 1, Meyer further teaching the web comprises: a plurality of stamped apertures extending through the web, col. 4, lines 17-23. 14. Meyer teaches the beam of claim 1, Meyer further teaching the plurality of stamped aperture comprise polygonal apertures (four sided apertures). 15. Meyer teaches the beam of claim 11, Meyer further teaching at least a portion of the web around the plurality of stamped apertures comprise at least one embossment 220, fig. 1. 18.Meyer teaches a structural system, the system comprising: support members 610; cold formed beams, the cold-formed beams comprising: an upper member (the upper chord, fig. 2); a lower member (the lower chord, fig. 2); and a web (the beam web between the top and bottom chords) between the upper member and the lower member; wherein the upper member, the lower member, and the web are formed from forming a sheet, col. 2, lines 33-36; wherein ends of the plurality of cold formed beams are operatively coupled to two of the plurality of support members, fig. 6. 19.Meyer teaches the structural decking system of claim 18, Meyer further teaching the sheet is a single sheet that is rolled to form the upper member, the lower member, and the web, col. 2, lines 33-36. 20. Meyer teaches a method of forming a cold formed beam, the method comprising: rolling a steel sheet to form an upper member, a lower member, and a web between the upper member and the lower member, col. 2, lines 33-36; stamping the web to form web apertures, col. 4, lines 17-23; and forming beam connectors, col. 5, lines 32-34, between an upper flange and the web and a lower flange and the web. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claim 8 - is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meyer. 8. While fig. 1 clearly shows beam connectors 230 are formed between a range of 2 inches to 24 inches along the length of the beam, the written description does not expressly disclose such spacing. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for beam connectors 230 to be formed between a range of 2 inches to 24 inches along the length of the beam for strength. Claims 9-10 - are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of Walker (2002/0020138). 9.The Meyer upper and lower members do not comprise a square or rectangular member, although Applicant discloses that the shape can be other than just rectangular or square, para. 84. In any case, Walker teaches that upper and lower members can comprise square, rectangular member, and “any similar geometric shape which would present a double wall for a fastening means”, para. 31. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the Meyer upper and lower members to comprise a square or rectangular member to improve the “securing means”, para. 9. 10. Meyer in view of Walker teaches the beam of claim 9, Meyer in view of Walker further teaching the square member or the rectangular member (a Meyer in view of Walker beam in which the Meyer upper and lower members are square or rectangular) comprises: a first leg extending from the web; a second leg extending from the first flange; a third leg extending from the second leg; and a fourth leg extending from the third leg; wherein a web flange (240 of Meyer/226 of Walker) extends from the fourth leg over at least a portion of the web. Claims 12-13 - are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meyer in view of Stal (9,290,940). 12.Meyer does not expressly teach the stamped apertures comprise circular apertures. Stal teaches stamped apertures comprise circular apertures, col. 9, lines 4-12. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the stamped apertures to comprise circular apertures for strength. 13.Meyer does not expressly teach the stamped apertures comprise triangle apertures. Stal teaches stamped apertures comprise triangle apertures, col. 9, lines 4-12. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the stamped apertures to comprise circular apertures for strength. Claims 16-17 - are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meyer in view of Strickland (7,587,877). 16. The Meyer upper member does not comprise an upper extension member on at least one end, wherein the upper extension member extends past the web. Strickland comprises an upper extension member on at least one upper member end (the structure protruding from each end, fig. 5), wherein the upper extension member extends past a web. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the Meyer upper member to comprise an upper extension member on at least one end, wherein the upper extension member extends past the web to secure the beam to an adjacent cross beam. 17. Meyer in view of Strickland teaches the beam of claim 16, Strickland further comprising a seat support (the structure below the element labeled 300 in fig. 5) operatively coupled to the at least one upper extension member. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL J KENNY whose telephone number is (571)272-9951. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-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 (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. /DANIEL J KENNY/ Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 24, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601194
C-CLAMP BODY AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURE THEREOF FOR SECURING A FLEXIBLE BUILDING WALL PANEL UNDER TENSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595673
BEAM-COLUMN JOINT OF PREFABRICATED SELF-CENTERING RC FRAME BASED ON SMA MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584516
Bearing adapters for single-axis trackers
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584321
A FLOOR ELEMENT FOR FORMING A FLOOR COVERING AND A FLOOR COVERING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12571201
CONCRETE-FILLABLE PREFABRICATED CARTRIDGES FOR CONSTRUCTING STRUCTURAL CONCRETE BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION METHODS THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
62%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+21.5%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1031 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