DETAILED ACTION
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 15-20 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 15 recites, “A method for unboarding a formwork element, wherein the formwork element includes a base element, a tension/compression rod, and at least one boarding/unboarding element configured to extend or retract into a boarding or unboarding position, the at least one boarding/unboarding element coupled laterally with the base element and configured to extend or retract into the boarding or unboarding position through a linear movement of the tension/compression rod, the linear movement being essentially parallel to a rod axis relative to the base element, the method comprising:
a) Providing the formwork element and an unboarding device,
b) Reversibly attaching the arm of the second unboarding element of the unboarding device to the rod end section of the tension/compression rod,
c) Coupling the tilting element of the second unboarding element of the unboarding device to the piston end section of the lifting device of the first unboarding element of the unboarding device so that the tilting element is rotatable around the joint axis relative to the arm,
d) Connecting a drive unit to the lifting device of the first unboarding element of the unboarding device, if the drive unit is not integrated into the lifting device, and
e) Activating the drive unit such that a lifting movement of the piston end section of the lifting device in a direction away from the base element introduces a force into the tension/compression rod essentially parallel to the rod axis for unboarding the formwork element from the tilting element using the first lever arm, and
f) Executing the linear movement of the tension/compression rod relative to the base element to retract the at least one boarding/unboarding element coupled laterally with the base element into the unboarding position.”
There is insufficient antecedent basis for the first instances of each of the underlined limitations in the claim, as shown above. Claim 15 previously depended from Claim 1, which defined the “unboarding device” as including “a first unboarding element” and “a second unboarding element” and further the additional underlined limitations as being a part of either the first or second unboarding elements. Without the details of the first and second unboarding elements as recited in Claim 1, each of these terms in Claim 15 lack antecedent basis.
Claim 17 recites, “A method for boarding a formwork element, wherein the formwork element includes a base element, a tension/compression rod, and at least one boarding/unboarding element configured to extend or retract into a boarding or unboarding position, the at least one boarding/unboarding element coupled laterally with the base element and configured to extend or retract into the boarding or unboarding position through a linear movement of the tension/compression rod, the linear movement being essentially parallel to a rod axis relative to the base element, the method comprising:
a) Executing steps a) to d) according to claim 15,
e) Activating the drive unit and the lifting device such that a lifting movement of the lifting device in a direction toward the base element introduces a force into the tension/compression rod essentially parallel to the rod axis for boarding the formwork element from the tilting element using the second lever arm, and
f) Executing the linear movement of the tension/compression rod relative to the base element to extend the at least one boarding/unboarding element coupled laterally with the base element into the boarding position.”
Because Claim 17 depends from Claim 15, all of the limitations of Claim 15, including the preamble, form a part of Claim 17. However, Claim 17 uses the same limitations in its preamble that were previously recited in Claim 15. Moreover, although it is recognized that Claim 15 is directed to a “method for unboarding a formwork element”, while Claim 17 is directed to a “method for boarding a formwork element”, the inclusion of the same limitations directed to formwork element and the boarding/unboarding element in Claim 17 introduces ambiguity since it is unclear whether these are the same elements introduced in Claim 15, or different/additional elements (i.e., does the method of Claim 17 use two, or different formwork elements and boarding/unboarding elements than what is used in Claim 15?)
Claims 16, 18-19, and 20 are also rejected under 35 USC 112(b) because of their dependence on Claims 15 and 17, respectively.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-14 are allowed.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 LYNN E SCHWENNING whose telephone number is (313)446-4861. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 am - 5 pm EST.
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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 272 -7097. 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.
/LYNN E SCHWENNING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652