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 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 1-15 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 claims 1-15 preambles, the phrase "ladder-like grating" renders the claim(s) indefinite because the claim(s) include(s) elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "-like"), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). The phrase will be interpreted as “grating”.
Claims 10-15 recite in the preamble "a ladder-like". There is already antecedent basis for this limitation earlier in claim 9, thus it is unclear whether this limitation is in reference back to the prior basis, or if the Applicant intended on a separate, new limitation. The examiner believes the Applicant intended this limitation to be in reference back to the prior recitation of this limitation, and thus will interpret the claim as such. To resolve this issue, the phrase may be written as “The method for producing the ladder-like grating …”; however, this phrasing would not resolve the “-like” indefiniteness rejection above.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "assigned a clamping device" in the last line of the claim. There is already antecedent basis for this limitation earlier in claim 14, thus it is unclear whether this limitation is in reference back to the prior basis, or if the Applicant intended on a separate, new limitation. It is believed the applicant has intended to claim a separate clamping device for each extending section, and thus will interpret the claim as such and suggest an amendment of “is assigned a separate clamping device”, to overcome the redundant antecedent rejection, as well as the clarity concerns.
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 1 and 4-9, and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han (KR20210035707A), in view of Andriussi (US3353639A). Han is directed to the attached, machine-translated, English version.
Regarding claim 1, Han teaches a ladder-like grating {[0025] re. trench cover & [0004] re. trench cover is a grating} comprising: a plurality of longitudinally extending support sections; {[0029] re. vertical sections 112 and 113}
a plurality of transversely extending sections; wherein the transversely extending sections extend between the longitudinally extending support sections; {Figure 5 annotation below}
PNG
media_image1.png
621
822
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein each transversely extending section comprises a flat subsection and two connecting subsections, one at each end of the flat subsection.
PNG
media_image2.png
186
276
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Han fails to teach where each connecting subsection is a twisted rectangular strip extending in the transverse direction from one of the longitudinally extending support sections to the flat subsection of the transversely extending section.
Andriussi, drawn to a strip with transversely extending portions through a rectangularly formed piece of metal, teaches where each connecting subsection is a twisted rectangular strip extending in the transverse direction from one of the longitudinally extending support sections to the flat subsection of the transversely extending section. {Column 7 lines 33-36 re. transverse slits (transversely extending section) formed through twisting of the material & Figure 2 annotation below}
PNG
media_image3.png
118
397
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Han with Andriussi’s teachings wherein each connecting subsection is a twisted rectangular strip extending in the transverse direction from one of the longitudinally extending support sections to the flat subsection of the transversely extending section as the twisted vertical structure of Andriussi’s “slits” (transversely extending sections) conform to the motivation taught by Han, wherein Andriussi in combination with Han can utilize these vertical members of a grate to increase the strength of the device. {Han, [0069-0071]} While the two devices may exist in separate fields of endeavor, MPEP § 2141.01(a)(I) supports the use of an additional reference if “the reference is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor (even if it is not in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention)”. (strength of gratings)
Regarding claim 4, Han fails to teach wherein the connecting subsection has a helical shape.
While Andriussi does not explicitly state these connection portions are helical twisted by approximately 90 degrees around a transversely extending axis {Column 7 lines 33-36 re. twisting}, further referencing the twisting shape of the slits in Figure 2 (annotation below), it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the connecting sections (Figure 4 annotation below) are required to be helical, due to the twisting of the slits {Column 7 lines 33-36 re. transverse slits (transversely extending section) formed through twisting of the material}.
PNG
media_image3.png
118
397
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure 2
PNG
media_image4.png
165
392
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Figure 4
While modified Han is silent to twisting the transversely extending section by 90 degrees, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to continue to twist the portions of modified Han further, until they are perpendicular (or 90 degrees) to the longitudinal sections, as this vertical orientation of supporting members, especially with the addition of further bends taught by Han, can increase the strength by more than double to a convention trench cover. {Han, [0069 and 0071}
Regarding claim 5, Han fails to teach wherein the rectangular strip is narrower than the flat part of the transversely extending section to which it is connected.
Andriussi teaches wherein the rectangular strip is narrower than the flat part of the transversely extending section to which it is connected. {Figure 4 annotation below}
PNG
media_image5.png
165
392
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Han with Andriussi’s teachings wherein the rectangular strip is narrower than the flat part of the transversely extending section to which it is connected as twisting these sections, as taught by Andriussi {Column 7 lines 33-36} would stretch the material around the twisted portion, thus changing the width of that section due to the increased distance it must travel, making it thinner than the transversely extending section, which has not been deformed through the twisting process.
Regarding claim 6, Han teaches wherein the grating has anti-slip features. {[0073 re. ant-slip part 120}
Regarding claim 7, Han teaches wherein the anti-slip features comprise a plurality of depressions or projections along the transversely extending edges of the transversely extending sections. {[0073 re. ant-slip part 120 protruding upward}
Regarding claim 8, Han teaches wherein each connecting subsection is connected to a part of the end of the flat subsection.
{Figure 5 annotation below}
PNG
media_image2.png
186
276
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Han teaches a method for producing a ladder-like grating {[0001] re. method of manufacturing for a trench cover & [0004] re. trench cover is a grating} comprising: a material removal step, in which sections of a solid sheet of material extending across a flat plane are removed {[0136] re. punching out material} to form a plurality of elongated holes extending transversely between longitudinally extending support sections of the solid sheet and transversely extending sections of the solid sheet extending between the longitudinally extending support sections; {[0136] re. punching out material for drains 130 (elongated holes)}
a first bending step, in which the longitudinally extending support sections are bent such that they extend substantially perpendicularly from the transversely extending sections. {[0029] re. bending section 11 downward in multiple locations to form sections 112 and 114 (longitudinally extending support sections)}
Han fails to teach a second bending step, in which the transversely extending sections are bent such that a part of each of the transversely extending sections is rotated around the axis in which they extend transversely until it is substantially perpendicular to the flat plane over which the solid sheet originally extends.
Andriussi teaches a second bending step, in which the transversely extending sections are bent such that a part of each of the transversely extending sections is rotated around the axis in which they extend transversely until it is substantially perpendicular to the flat plane over which the solid sheet originally extends. {Column 7 lines 33-36 re. transverse slits (transversely extending section) formed through twisting of the material}
While modified Han is silent to twisting the transversely extending section until it is substantially perpendicular, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to continue to twist the portions of modified Han further, until they are perpendicular to the longitudinal sections, as this vertical orientation of supporting members, especially with the addition of further bends taught by Han, can increase the strength by more than double to a convention trench cover. {Han, [0069 and 0071}
Regarding claims 11-12, Modified Han is silent to wherein the material removing step is a laser cutting process, however Han teaches utilizing a laser to cut out the locking mechanism of their invention. (Claim 11) {Han, [0129]}
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize laser cutting as the material removal step in addition to the formation of the locking mechanism, as it is well known in the art the improvements in precision and accuracy laser-cutting has over alternative cutting methods, such as the disclosed method of punching out material.
It would further be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to again utilize the laser cutting and press method steps disclosed by Han {[0129]} to form the anti-slip features, (Claim 12) because, in addition to the advantages of a laser cutting device as shown above, these anti-slip features are disclosed to contain protrusions or indentations, something that the disclosed press and laser combination of Han, is capable of doing in an efficient manner.
Regarding claim 13, Han teaches wherein the anti-slip features comprise a plurality of depressions or projections along the transversely extending edges of the transversely extending sections. {[0073 re. anti-slip part 120 protruding upward}
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han (KR20210035707A) modified by Andriussi (US3353639A), as applied to the claims above, in view of Kim (KR200449706Y1). Han and Kim is directed to the attached, machine-translated, English version.
Regarding claims 2-3, modified Han fails to teach wherein the longitudinally extending support sections and the transversely extending sections are formed from a single material piece; (Claim 2) wherein the single material piece is a piece of sheet metal. (Claim 3)
Kim, drawn to a water discharge grate {Kim, abstract}, teaches wherein the longitudinally extending support sections and the transversely extending sections are formed from a single material piece; (Claim 2) {Abstract re. being processes using one steel plate} wherein the single material piece is a piece of sheet metal. (Claim 3) {Abstract re. being processes using one steel plate}
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify modified Han with Kim’s teachings wherein the longitudinally extending support sections and the transversely extending sections are formed from a single material piece; (Claim 2) wherein the single material piece is a piece of sheet metal (Claim 3) as Kim, similar to modified Han, teaches a grate for water discharge {Kim, abstract}. Doing so would decrease the welding labor, reducing labor and manufacturing costs, and reducing manufacturing time. {Kim, abstract}.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han (KR20210035707A) modified by Andriussi (US3353639A), as applied to the claims above, in view of Fujimoto (US5953951A). Han is directed to the attached, machine-translated, English version.
Regarding claim 10, modified Han fails to teach wherein the method comprises, after the first bending step and before the second bending step, a pressing step in which each of the transversely extending sections is pressed downward along one of its transversely extending edges to rotate it around the axis in which it extends transversely.
Fujimoto, drawn to an apparatus and method for bending sheet metal, teaches a pressing step in which each of the transversely extending sections is pressed downward along one of its transversely extending edges to rotate it around the axis in which it extends transversely.
Fujimoto is silent to the pressing step occurring after the first bending step and before the second bending step, as the process of Fujimoto does not bend the example material to create additional “longitudinally extending support sections”. However, this as shown in the rejections above, modified Han teaches both of the 1st and 2nd bending steps, as claimed, but fails to teach the pressing step, which is in turn taught by Fujimoto. Unless otherwise stated or disclosed, the order of the method steps are not pertinent to the creation of the invention. In this scenario, the pressing step of the transversely extending sections can be done before or after the other bending steps, thus while Fujimoto is silent to this pressing step between two bending steps, the order of all three steps when Fujimoto is combined with modified Han, is not critical, and thus one of reasonable skill in the art would find it obvious to utilize Fujimoto for the pressing step disclosed. See MPEP 2144.04 (c) “Changes in Sequence of Adding Ingredients”
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify modified Han with Fujimoto’s teachings wherein the method comprises, after the first bending step and before the second bending step, a pressing step in which each of the transversely extending sections is pressed downward along one of its transversely extending edges to rotate it around the axis in which it extends transversely as modified Han teaches the necessity to bend sheet metal in various ways resulting in their invention {Han, [0029]}, however does not disclose a specific method for bending, which is disclosed by Fujimoto. Doing so would result in a final shape having the least amount of deformation as the press die is shaped to allow the most deformed portion pull material from the portions where there is little or no deforming pressure. {Fujimoto, Column 3 lines 26-36}.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han (KR20210035707A) modified by Andriussi (US3353639A), as applied to the claims above, in view of MetalcraftUK (“Practical Twister Tool, metal twisting. metalcraft uk”). Han is directed to the attached, machine-translated, English version.
Regarding claim 14, modified Han fails to teach wherein the rotation of the transversely extending sections in the second bending step is effectuated by contacting each transversely extending section on opposite sides by a clamping device and rotating the clamping device around the transversely extending section, wherein each transversely extending section is assigned a clamping device, wherein each transversely extending section is assigned a clamping device.
MetalcraftUK, drawn to a device and method for twisting flat metal bar, teaches wherein the rotation of the transversely extending sections in the second bending step is effectuated by contacting each transversely extending section on opposite sides by a clamping device and rotating the clamping device around the transversely extending section, wherein each transversely extending section is assigned a clamping device, wherein each transversely extending section is assigned a clamping device. {Timestamp 0:30-0:60}
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify modified Han with MetalcraftUK’s teachings wherein the rotation of the transversely extending sections in the second bending step is effectuated by contacting each transversely extending section on opposite sides by a clamping device and rotating the clamping device around the transversely extending section, wherein each transversely extending section is assigned a clamping device, wherein each transversely extending section is assigned a clamping device as this property of metal is well known in the art, and rotating a metal flat bar at both ends can create a twist in the material. Further, as a do it yourself (DIY) instrument, such as the one depicted in MetalcraftUK, is available to the general public, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize this method of clamping and metal to provide rotations or twists within the metal flat bar (similar to the transversely extending) in an industrial setting, as modified Han fails to teach a specific method for providing the twists within the bar, rather simply reciting that twisting is done on the section. {Andruissi, Column 7 lines 33-36 re. twisting} See MPEP § 2143 rationale (C), “Use of Known Technique To Improve Similar Devices (Methods, or Products) in the Same Way”
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han (KR20210035707A) modified by Andriussi (US3353639A), as applied to the claims above, in view of Blecher (US4367142A). Han is directed to the attached, machine-translated, English version.
Regarding claim 15, modified Han fails to teach wherein, in the second bending step, the transversely extending sections are bent simultaneously.
Blecher, drawn to a ladder-like grating {Blecher, abstract}, teaches wherein, in the second bending step, the transversely extending sections are bent simultaneously. {Column 4 lines 15-27 re. simultaneous bending of the of support bars and cutting of inner grate components}
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify modified Han with Blecher’s teachings wherein, in the second bending step, the transversely extending sections are bent simultaneously as Blecher, similar to modified Han, teaches a ladder-like grate for drainage ducts. {Blecher, abstract} Doing so would decrease the manufacturing time due to the consolidation of multiple bending steps into one bending and cutting step occurring simultaneously.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. (KR100908198B1), drawn to a rainwater grate with bent protrusions formed from a single piece of sheet metal.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CONNOR J ROTONDI whose telephone number is (571)272-2058. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00am-4:30pm.
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, Benjamin Lebron can be reached at (571)272-0475. 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.
/CONNOR J ROTONDI/Examiner, Art Unit 1773
/BENJAMIN L LEBRON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1773
Prosecution Insights