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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “52” has been used to designate both the first portion and the central abutment.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description:
21, connecting block
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. 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 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 4-9 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.
Regarding claim 4, line 2, what does “it” refer to?
Regarding claim 4, line 3, it is unclear if the “multiple blocks” are referring to the blocks of claim 1, or if Applicant is reciting additional blocks or different blocks. This also applies to the “second layer of blocks”.
Regarding claim 4, line 4, it is unclear if the “connection elements” are referring to the connecting elements of claim 1, or if Applicant is reciting additional connecting elements. Further, is “a first connection element” one of the connection elements already recited or is the recitation providing additional connection elements. The same applies for the second connection element.
Regarding claim 5, line 2, is it unclear if “a connection element” is reciting additional elements or if the recitation refers back to the connection elements already recited previously.
Regarding claim 7, line 2, what does “it” refer to?
Claims 5-9 either depend from claim 4 or include the limitations of claim 4.
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.
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) 1-4 and 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 0041792 A1 to Bach in view of JP 2021504065 A (JP herein) in view of DE 20303476 U1 to Knickenberg. (See provided translations)
Regarding claim 1, Bach discloses a building element comprising: a block (30, Fig.5) comprising an upper wall (top horizontal surface of 30, Fig.5), a front wall (front wall of block in same formation as Fig.1), a rear wall (opposite surface of block, Fig.1) and two lateral walls (left and right vertical surfaces, Fig.5), defining an inner space (32), the lower portions of the walls defining an inner edge (bottom edge of the block 30) developing seamlessly to form a bottom edge surface; an internal duct (33) disposed in the inner space, each defining a first feedthrough opening (38) provided on the upper wall, and an opposite second feedthrough opening (bottom of 33 near the bottom surface of 30, Fig.5) facing the bottom edge surface; the building element further comprises a connecting element (20, Fig.3 and 7), each inserted in a corresponding duct of the block (Fig.7), so that a first portion of the connection element is exposed outside the first feedthrough opening provided on the upper wall and is suitable to be inserted in a second feedthrough opening facing the bottom edge surface of a duct of a further block superimposed to the block (Fig.7).
Bach does not specifically disclose wherein the blocks are 3D printed, nor does Bach disclose wherein the blocks have different sizes including multiple ducts and multiple connecting elements.
JP discloses wherein the blocks are 3D printed (Abstract; Page 3, lines 7-16). JP also discloses wherein the blocks are four pegs long on to which provides the ability to have multiple ducts and multiple connectors (Fig.1).
Knickenberg discloses providing a block having a plurality of ducts and a plurality of connecting elements (Fig.1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have used an additive manufacturing method as taught by JP to manufacture the blocks of Bach so to provide a method of accurately forming more complex shapes and designs without the increased costs of forming intricate molds and eliminating extensive molding processes. Using molding for complex designs results in many design flaws and wasted materials.
It also would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to form the blocks of Bach having multiple ducts and connecting elements as taught by Knickenberg so to enable larger blocks to be used and also to enable offset stacking of the blocks in the same stacking manner as traditional masonry work.
Regarding claim 2, Bach discloses wherein the duct comprises two internal abutments (39,40 and 41,42), the first internal abutment provided in the upper portion of the duct (39, 40) and the second internal abutment provided in the lower portion of the duct (41, 42).
Regarding claim 3, Bach discloses wherein the connecting element comprises a central abutment (21), an external diameter of the central abutment being greater than an internal diameter of the duct (Fig.7).
Regarding claim 4, Bach in view of JP in view of Knickenberg disclose a masonry structure comprising a plurality of 3D printed building elements according to claim 1 (See claim 1 above).
Bach discloses providing a first block on a lower level, a second block located on top of the first block, and the connecting element inserted into the lower block and connecting into the duct of the second block.
Knickenberg discloses the idea of multiple first blocks in a first row, connecting elements inserted into the ducts of the first row, and further providing multiple blocks on top of the first blocks, a first connecting element from a first block and another connecting elements from a second block inserted into the same block located on top (Fig.1). In other words, Knickenberg teaches using multiple connecting elements into multiple ducts, and offset laying of the blocks.
Regarding claim 7, Bach discloses wherein it further comprises a plurality of anchoring elements (23a) connected to a plurality of blocks of the first layer of the masonry structure (Fig.7).
Regarding claim 8, as recited in claim 1 above, JP discloses 3D printing of the blocks.
Although the idea of identifying, printing, transporting is not specifically taught by Bach in view of JP further in view of Knickenberg, the idea identifying the needed blocks, printing the blocks, and transporting the blocks where they will be installed are obvious design steps in the formation of any structure, and therefore the steps are well known in the art, do not require undue experimentation, nor will the steps yield unexpected results. Any person skilled in the art would be able to identify which shapes, sizes, and count of blocks to be used and will know that the blocks need to be moved to the installation site.
Regarding claim 9, Knickenberg discloses characterized in that it further comprises the steps of: place a first layer of multiple blocks on the ground (Fig.1), inserting a plurality of connection elements into the feedthrough openings provided on the upper wall of each block of the first layer (Fig.1), superimposing a second layer of blocks on the first layer by inserting a first connection element of a block of the first layer in a feedthrough opening provided on the bottom edge surface of a first block of the second layer (Fig.1), and inserting a second connector element of the same block of the first layer in a feedthrough opening provided on the bottom edge surface of a second block of the second layer disposed adjacent to the first block of the second layer (Fig.1).
Claim(s) 5 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 0041792 A1 to Bach in view of JP 2021504065 A (JP herein) in view of DE 20303476 U1 to Knickenberg. (See provided translations) in view of US 4,823,532 to Westerburgen.
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Bach does not disclose wherein a connection element is filled with concrete in order to reinforce the overall structure.
Westerburgen discloses wherein it is known to form toy-like blocks as larger construction blocks and providing concrete within openings of the blocks so to create greater strength for a more permanent structure (Column 1, lines 38-53).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have poured concrete into the openings occupied by the connecting elements of Bach as taught by Westerburgen so to provide the needed strength to ensure the blocks stay in position to form walls of a finished structure.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN D KWIECINSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-5160. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday from 8:30 am to 4:00 pm.
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 Mattei can be reached at (571) 272-3238. 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.
RDK
/RYAN D KWIECINSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635