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 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 16-35 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.
Claims 16, 31 and 35 are independent claims that fail to recite a transitional phrase, e.g., comprising or consisting, which renders each of these claims indefinite because it is not clear if the claims are comprising or consisting or essentially consisting of the claimed elements. For the purpose of examination, each of these claims will be interpreted as comprising the claimed elements. It is noted that these claims should also include a colon after the transitional phrase after they have been added. Claims 17-30 and 32-34 depend from at least one of these claims and fail to clarify the indefinite language.
Regarding claim 16, the claim recites “wherein this first subset and this second subset comprise milling tools, whether or not in common, and have the following characteristics” which renders the claim indefinite because the claim already recites the first and second subset are milling tools, so it is unclear what is required for the subsets to further comprise milling tools. Further, it is not clear what is required for the milling tools to be common or not. For the purpose of examination, this phrase will be interpreted as the first subset of milling tools and second subset of milling tools having the following characteristics (with the characteristics being recited in the subsequent claim elements). The claim also recites “both the first milling tool from the first subset and the first milling tool from the second subset are configured to be mounted on a drive shaft that has one and the same inclination with the horizontal plane” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what is required for the drive shaft and the horizontal plane to have “one and the same” inclination, i.e., the longitudinal axis of the drive shaft is parallel to the horizontal plane or any axis of the drive shaft is coincident with the horizontal plane. For the purpose of examination, this phrase will be interpreted as the longitudinal axis of the drive shaft is capable of being parallel to the horizontal plane. It is noted that the claim is directed to tools configured to form the male and female coupling parts, i.e., the tools are the recited apparatus that is capable of forming the coupling parts. With respect to the coupling parts that the tools are capable of forming, the claim also recites the male coupling part and the female coupling part having locking surfaces to bring about horizontal and vertical locking two times, and it is unclear if the second recitations are repeating the earlier recites features or if these are meant to introduce new locking features. For the purpose of examination, this claim will be interpreted as the male coupling part and the female coupling part are each provides with a horizontal locking surface and a vertical locking surface, i.e., there are not two separate locking features to lock the parts horizontally and vertically. Claims 17-30 depend from claim 16 and fail to clarify the indefinite language.
Regarding claim 20, the claim recites “wherein the aforementioned inclination of the drive shaft to the horizontal is between 10° and 35°” which renders the claim indefinite because claim 16, from which claim 20 depends, recites the drive shaft and the horizontal plane have an inclination that is one and the same. As discussed above, this phrase in claim 16 is interpreted as the drive shaft has an inclination that is parallel to the horizontal plane, and claim 20 will be interpreted as the drive shaft is capable of being adjusted to 10 to 35 degrees relative to the horizontal plane.
Regarding claim 21, the claim recites “the male coupling part of both the first and the second type of profiled edge region can be fitted into an identically formed female coupling part” which renders the claim indefinite because an identical part would be another male part, thus it is unclear what “an identically formed female coupling part” would be relative to a male coupling part. For the purpose of examination, this phrase will be interpreted as a complementary female part.
Regarding claim 22, the claim recites “both the second milling tool from the first subset and the second milling tool from the second subset are configured to be mounted on a drive shaft that has one and the same inclination with the horizontal plane” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what is required for the drive shaft and the horizontal plane to have “one and the same” inclination, i.e., the longitudinal axis of the drive shaft is parallel to the horizontal plane or any axis of the drive shaft is coincident with the horizontal plane. For the purpose of examination, this phrase will be interpreted as the longitudinal axis of the drive shaft is capable of being parallel to the horizontal plane. Claims 23-25 depends from claim 22 and fails to clarify the indefinite language.
Regarding claim 23, the claim recites “wherein both the second milling tool from the first subset and the second milling tool from the second subset are configured to be mounted on the same drive shaft, for example a drive shaft that is oriented at right angles to the horizontal plane” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if the feature after “for example” is optional or required for the claim. For the purpose of examination, this claim will be interpreted as wherein both the second milling tool from the first subset and the second milling tool from the second subset are configured to be mounted on the same drive shaft.
Regarding claim 26, the claim recites “wherein the set is suitable for forming profiled edge regions on a first pair of opposite edges and on a second pair of opposite edges of rectangular, elongated panels, wherein the aforementioned first to third subset is suitable for forming the profiled edge regions of the first pair of” which renders the claim indefinite because it is not clear what is required for tools to be “suitable” for forming edges, i.e., the tools are capable of forming the edges or the tools are used to form the edges. For the purpose of examination, suitable will be interpreted as capable, e.g., the tools are capable of forming the recited shapes. Further, it is not clear what “the first pair of” is referring to as it appears a phrase is missing on the end of it. For the purpose of examination, this phrase will be interpreted as the first pair of opposite edges. Further, this claim depends from claim 16 which only recites the first and second subsets, so it is unclear what the “aforementioned” third subset is referring to. For the purpose of examination, this phrase will be interpreted as said first and second subsets and a third subset, i.e., the third subset is being introduced. Claims 27-30 depend from claim 26 and fail to clarify the indefinite language.
Regarding claims 29 and 30, the claims both recite a male or female part being “almost identical” to another part which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what is required for a part to be “almost” identical to another part, e.g., identical or simply close in shape. For the purpose of examination, “almost identical” will be interpreted as the pieces have a similar shape.
Regarding claim 31, the claim recites “wherein at least one subset from a set of milling tools is used, wherein said set of milling tools comprise both a first subset of milling tools and a second subset of milling tools” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if the “at least one subset” includes the first and second subsets or if these are separate from the at least one subset. For the purpose of examination, this phrase will be interpreted as wherein at least one subset from a set of milling tools is used, wherein said at least one subset from a set of milling tools comprise both a first subset of milling tools and a second subset of milling tools, e.g., the at least one subset comprises the first and second subsets. The claim further recites “wherein this first subset and this second subset comprise milling tools, whether or not in common, and have the following characteristics” which renders the claim indefinite because the claim already recites the first and second subset are milling tools, so it is unclear what is required for the subsets to further comprise milling tools. Further, it is not clear what is required for the milling tools to be common or not. For the purpose of examination, this phrase will be interpreted as the first subset of milling tools and second subset of milling tools having the following characteristics (with the characteristics being recited in the subsequent claim elements). The claim also recites the coupled state includes the male coupling part and the female coupling part having locking surfaces to bring about horizontal and vertical locking two times, and it is unclear if the second recitations are repeating the earlier recites features or if these are meant to introduce new locking features. For the purpose of examination, this claim will be interpreted as the male coupling part and the female coupling part are each provides with a horizontal locking surface and a vertical locking surface, i.e., there are not two separate locking features to lock the parts horizontally and vertically.
Regarding claim 35, the claim is directed to a panel but recites the method limitations of claim 31 and includes the indefiniteness issues discussed above with respect to that claim. Further, while the claim is directed to a panel, many of the limitations recite tools that are configured to form male and female coupling parts which renders the claim indefinite because it is not clear if the recited panel is required to have these coupling parts. For the purpose of examination, any claim elements reciting tools configured to form a part will be interpreted as not reciting a feature that is required in the panel.
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 16-32 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2011/0023303 A1 to Pervan.
Regarding claim 16, Pervan teaches a set of milling tools for forming profiled edge regions on at least two opposite edges of panels (Abstract; Figs. 7-12),
wherein the aforementioned profiled edge regions comprise coupling means that allow the respective edges to be coupled to each other (Figs. 11a-c; Para. [0093] and [0095]),
wherein the set of milling tools comprise both a first subset of milling tools 60’ and a second subset of milling tools 61’ (10a-e; Paras. [0093] and [0095]),
wherein this first subset 60’ and this second subset 61’ comprise milling tools, whether or not in common (Figs. 10a-e; Para. [0093]), and the subsets have the following characteristic features:
the aforementioned first subset 60’ allows a first type of profiled edge region to be formed (Figs. 10a-e and Figs. 11a-c; Paras. [0093] and [0095]),
wherein the first type of profiled edge region comprises a male coupling part, which can be fitted by means of a turning motion and/or a horizontal sliding motion into a female coupling part on the opposite edge (Figs. 11a-c; Paras. [0093] and [0095]; the male coupling part is shown best in Fig. 11a on the left side of the panel, e.g., the horizontally extending protrusion by the reference number 10),
wherein the male coupling part and female coupling part are provided with horizontally acting locking surfaces which, in the coupled state, bring about at least locking in a horizontal direction perpendicular to the respective edges and in the plane of the coupled panels (Figs. 11a-c; Paras. [0093] and [0095]),
wherein a first milling tool 60’ from the first subset is configured to form the horizontally acting locking surface of the male coupling part of the first type of profiled edge region (Figs. 10a-e; Para. [0093] and [0095]; Fig. 10a shows the first tool 60’ of the first subset forming a portion the first male coupling part);
the aforementioned second subset 61’ allows a second type of profiled edge region to be formed, wherein the second type of profiled edge region comprises a male coupling part, which can be fitted by means of a downward motion into a female coupling part on the opposite edge (Figs. 10a-e and 11a-c; Paras. [0093] and [0095]; Fig. 10b shows the second tool 61’ forming the second male coupling part, i.e., the vertical protrusion by the face with reference numeral 12),
wherein the male coupling part and female coupling part are provided with horizontally acting locking surfaces which, in the coupled state, bring about at least locking in a horizontal direction perpendicular to the respective edges and in the plane of the coupled panels (Figs. 11a-c; Para. [0095]),
wherein a first milling tool 61’ from the second subset is configured to form the horizontally acting locking surface of the male coupling part of the second type of profiled edge region (Figs. 10a-e and 11a-c; Paras. [0093] and [0095]);
the aforementioned first tool 60’ from the first subset and the aforementioned first tool 61’ from the second subset comprise mutually different cutting edges (Figs. 10a-e); and
both the first milling tool 60’ from the first subset and the first milling tool 61’ from the second subset are configured to be mounted on a drive shaft that has one and the same inclination with the horizontal plane (Figs. 10a-e; Para. [0093]; each of the tools are configured, i.e., capable, of being mounted to a drive shaft that has the same inclination as the horizontal plane).
Regarding claim 17, Pervan teaches the set of milling tools in accordance with claim 16 (Figs. 10a-e), wherein both the first milling tool 60’ from the first subset and the first milling tool 61’ from the second subset are configured to be mounted on the same drive shaft (Figs. 10a-e; each of the milling tools are capable of being mounted to any drive shaft, i.e., they could be mounted to the same shaft).
Regarding claim 18, Pervan teaches the set of milling tools in accordance with claim 16 (Figs. 10a-e), wherein the horizontally acting locking surface of the male coupling part of both the first and the second type of profiled edge region extends in the distal direction downwards at an angle from 55° to 80° (Figs. 11a-c; it is noted that claim 16 is directed to milling tools that are configured to form the male coupling part, i.e., the claim is not directed to a panel having the male coupling part, and the milling tools are capable of making a male coupling part with the recited angle depending on the orientation or position of the tools).
Regarding claim 19, Pervan teaches the set of milling tools in accordance with claim 16 (Figs. 10a-e), wherein the horizontally acting locking surface of the male coupling part of both the first and the second type of profiled edge region extends in the distal direction downwards at a mutually different angle, wherein the difference is 5° or less (Figs. 11a-c; this claim is interpreted as the claimed milling tools are capable of forming a male coupling part having the recited features, and the milling tools are capable of forming such an edge depending on their orientation and position).
Regarding claim 20, Pervan teaches the set of milling tools in accordance with claim 16 (Figs. 10a-e), wherein the aforementioned inclination of the drive shaft to the horizontal is between 10° and 35° (Figs. 10a-e; as discussed in the indefiniteness rejection above, this feature is interpreted as the drive shaft is capable of being inclined in the recited manner, and the drive shaft is capable of doing so as shown by the various inclinations of the drive shafts in Figs. 10a-e).
Regarding claim 21, Pervan teaches the set of milling tools in accordance with claim 16 (Figs 10a-e), wherein the male coupling part of both the first and the second type of profiled edge region can be fitted into an identically formed female coupling part (Figs. 11a-c; Para. [0091]), and in that the set of milling tools also comprises at least one third subset of milling tools 60, which allows said female coupling part to be formed on the aforementioned opposite edge (Figs. 10a-e; Paras. [0091] and [0093]).
Regarding claim 22, Pervan teaches the set of milling tools in accordance with claim 16 (Figs. 10a-e), wherein the male coupling part and the female coupling part of both the first type of profiled edge region and of the second type of profiled edge region provided with vertically acting locking surfaces, formed by an upward-facing surface of the male coupling part and a downward- facing surface, interacting therewith, of the female coupling part (Figs. 11a-c; Paras. [0093] and [0095]),
wherein the aforementioned first subset comprises a second milling tool TB1 that is configured to form a vertically acting locking surface of the male coupling part of the first type of profiled edge region (Figs. 10a-e; tool TB1 forms part of the surface that will act as the vertical locking surface as that area will be sandwiched between top and bottom surfaces of the female part which will restrain movement in the vertical direction), and the aforementioned second subset comprises a second milling tool TB2 that is configured to form a vertically acting locking surface of the male coupling part of the second type of profiled edge region, in each case a vertically acting locking surface that is facing upwards and can interact with a downward-facing surface of the female coupling part of the respective types of profiled edge region (Figs. 10a-e; tool TB2 forms part of the surface that will engage the female coupling part such that the male coupling part is restrained from moving vertically), and
wherein the aforementioned second tool TB1 from the first subset and the aforementioned second tool TB2 from the second subset comprise mutually different cutting edges (Figs. 10a-e show these tools have different cutting edges), and both the second milling tool TB1 from the first subset and the second milling tool TB2 from the second subset are configured to be mounted on a drive shaft that has one and the same inclination with the horizontal plane (Figs. 10a-e; Para. [0093]; the tools are capable of being mounted to a drive shaft that may be inclined to be parallel to the horizontal plane).
Regarding claim 23, Pervan teaches the set of milling tools in accordance with claim 22 (Figs. 10a-e), wherein both the second milling tool TB1 from the first subset and the second milling tool TB2 from the second subset are configured to be mounted on the same drive shaft, for example a drive shaft that is oriented at right angles to the horizontal plane (Figs. 10a-e; Para. [0093]; the tools are capable of being mounted to a drive shaft that could be inclined in the same manner as the horizontal plane).
Regarding claim 24, Pervan teaches the set of milling tools in accordance with claim 22 (Figs. 10a-e), wherein the vertically acting locking surfaces of the male coupling part of the first and the second type of profiled edge region extend in the distal direction downwards at an angle that is mutually different, wherein the difference is 10° or more (Figs. 11a-c; this claim is interpreted as the claimed milling tools are capable of forming a male coupling part having the recited features, and the milling tools are capable of forming such an edge depending on their orientation and position).
Regarding claim 25, Pervan teaches the set of milling tools in accordance with claim 22 (Figs. 10a-e), wherein the aforementioned first milling tools instead of being configured to be mounted on a drive shaft that has one and the same inclination with the horizontal plane, are configured to be mounted on one or more drive shafts that have a mutually different inclination (Figs. 10a-e; Para. [0093]; the tools are capable of being mounted on different shafts with different orientations).
Regarding claim 26, Pervan teaches the set of milling tools in accordance with claim 16 (Figs. 10a-e), wherein the set is suitable for forming profiled edge regions on a first pair of opposite edges and on a second pair of opposite edges of rectangular, elongated panels Figs. 10a-e; Paras. [0093] and [0095]; the tools are capable of forming profiled edges on panels with the recited shaped),
wherein the aforementioned first to third subset 60’, 61’, 68’ is suitable for forming the profiled edge regions of the first pair of (Figs. 10a-e; Paras. [0093] and [0095]; the tools are capable of forming profiled edges on panels with the recited shaped), and
wherein the set further comprises a fourth 67’ and fifth subset 63’ of milling tools, wherein the fourth and fifth subset are suitable for forming a male coupling part, or respectively a female coupling part, on the second pair of opposite edges (Figs. 10a-e; Para. [0093]; the fourth and fifth subsets 63’, 67’ assist in forming the male part, while further subsets form the female part as shown in Figs. 10a-e).
Regarding claim 27, Pervan teaches the set of milling tools in accordance with claim 26 (Figs. 10a-e), wherein the male coupling part of both the first type of profiled edge region and of the second type of profiled edge region can be fitted into the female coupling part of the second pair of opposite edges (Figs. 11a-e; Para. [0095]; the coupling parts are configured to lock together, and it is noted that these claims are directed to the tools so this claim is interpreted as the tools are capable of forming the recited coupling parts).
Regarding claim 28, Pervan teaches the set of milling tools in accordance with claim 27 (Figs. 10a-e), wherein the male coupling part of the second pair of opposite edges can be fitted into the female coupling part of the first pair of opposite edges (Figs. 11a-e; Para. [0095]; the coupling parts are configured to lock together, and it is noted that these claims are directed to the tools so this claim is interpreted as the tools are capable of forming the recited coupling parts).
Regarding claim 29, Pervan teaches the set of milling tools in accordance with claim 27 (Figs. 10a-e), wherein the male coupling part of the second pair of opposite edges is identical or almost identical to the male coupling part of the first type of profiled edge region (Figs. 11a-e; Para. [0095]; the coupling parts are configured to lock together, and it is noted that these claims are directed to the tools so this claim is interpreted as the tools are capable of forming the recited coupling parts).
Regarding claim 30, Pervan teaches the set of milling tools in accordance with claim 27 (Figs. 10a-e), wherein the female coupling part of the second pair of opposite edges is identical or almost identical to the female coupling part that can interact with the male coupling part of the second type of profiled edge region (Figs. 11a-e; Para. [0095]; the coupling parts are configured to lock together, and it is noted that these claims are directed to the tools so this claim is interpreted as the tools are capable of forming the recited coupling parts).
Regarding claim 31, Pervan teaches a method for manufacturing panels (Abstract; Figs 8-11),
wherein at least one subset from a set of milling tools 60’, 61’’ is used (Figs. 10a-d; Para. [0093]),
wherein said set of milling tools comprise both a first subset of milling tools 60’ and a second subset of milling tools 61’ (Figs. 10a-e; Para. [0093]),
wherein this first subset 60’ and this second subset 61’ comprise milling tools, whether or not in common (Figs. 10a-e; Para. [0093]), and the subsets have the following characteristic features:
the aforementioned first subset 60’ allows a first type of profiled edge region to be formed (Fig. 10a),
wherein the first type of profiled edge region comprises a male coupling part, which can be fitted by means of a turning motion and/or a horizontal sliding motion into a female coupling part on the opposite edge (Figs. 10a-e and 11a-c; Paras. [0093] and [0095]; the male coupling part includes a first profile, i.e., the protrusion by reference numeral 10, that may slide horizontally into a female coupling part),
wherein the male coupling part and female coupling part are provided with horizontally acting locking surfaces which, in the coupled state, bring about at least locking in a horizontal direction perpendicular to the respective edges and in the plane of the coupled panels (Figs. 10a-e and 11a-c; Paras. [0093] and [0095]),
wherein in the aforementioned coupled state, also locking between the male coupling part and female coupling part is obtained in a vertical direction perpendicular to the aforementioned plane (Figs. 10a-e and 11a-c; Paras. [0093] and [0095]; there would also be a vertical locking with the tip of the male coupling part being positioned within the cavity in the female part in which a top and bottom surface prevent vertical movement),
wherein a first milling tool 60’ from the first subset is configured to form the horizontally acting locking surface of the male coupling part of the first type of profiled edge region (Fig. 10a-e; Paras. [0093] and [0095]; the tool 60’ forms part of the surface that assists with the horizontal locking);
the aforementioned second subset 61’ allows a second type of profiled edge region to be formed (Figs. 10a-e and 11a-c; Paras. [0093] and [0095]; Fig. 10b shows that the second subset 61’ assists in forming the second profile, e.g., the protrusion extending vertically by reference numeral 12 on the male coupling part in the figures),
wherein the second type of profiled edge region comprises a male coupling part, which can be fitted by means of a downward motion into a female coupling part on the opposite edge (Figs. 10a-e and 11a-c; Paras. [0093] and [0095]; the second type of male coupling part is the portion extending vertically by the vertical face with reference numeral 12),
wherein the male coupling part and female coupling part are provided with horizontally acting locking surfaces which, in the coupled state, bring about at least locking in a horizontal direction perpendicular to the respective edges and in the plane of the coupled panels (Figs. 10a-e and 11a-c; Paras. [0093] and [0095]; the female and male coupling parts would be locked in the horizontal direction by the vertical protrusion by reference numeral 12 in the male part and the cavity with the member overhanging which would prevent the male part from moving horizontally),
wherein in the aforementioned coupled state also locking between the male coupling part and female coupling part is obtained in a vertical direction perpendicular to the aforementioned plane (Figs. 10a-e and 11a-c; Paras. [0093] and [0095]; there would also be a vertical locking with the tip of the male coupling part being positioned within the cavity in the female part in which a top and bottom surface prevent vertical movement),
wherein a first milling tool 61’ from the second subset is configured to form the horizontally acting locking surface of the male coupling part of the second type of profiled edge region (Fig. 10b shows that the first milling tool in the second subset is configured to form a portion of the horizontal locking surface);
the aforementioned first tool 60’ from the first subset and the aforementioned first tool 61’ from the second subset comprise mutually different cutting edges (Figs. 10a-e show that the tools 60’ and 61’ have different cutting edges); and
both the first milling tool 60’ from the first subset and the first milling tool 61’ from the second subset are configured to be mounted on the same drive shaft (Figs. 10a-e; Paras. [0093] and [0095]; the tools 60’ and 61’ are capable of being mounted to the same drive shaft).
Regarding claim 32, Pervan teaches the method according to claim 31 (Figs. 10a-e), wherein the method comprises the step of changing at least the first milling tool 60’ of the first subset with the first milling tool 61’ of the second subset (Figs. 10a and b show that the tools are changed during the forming operation).
Regarding claim 35, Pervan teaches a panel (Figs. 11a-c) obtained by a method wherein at least one subset from a set of milling tools is used (Figs. 10a-e),
said set of milling tools comprising both a first subset of milling tools 60’ and a second subset of milling tools 61’ (Figs. 10a-e; Paras. [0093] and [0095]; it is noted that this claim is directed to a panel, so the limitations directed to the method of using tools are treated as product-by-process claim limitations),
wherein this first subset 60’ and this second subset 61’ comprise milling tools, whether or not in common (Figs. 10a-e; Paras. [0093] and [0095]; it is noted that this claim is directed to a panel, so the limitations directed to the method of using tools are treated as product-by-process claim limitations), and the subsets have the following characteristic features:
the aforementioned first subset 60’ allows a first type of profiled edge region to be formed, wherein the first type of profiled edge region comprises a male coupling part, which can be fitted by means of a turning motion and/or a horizontal sliding motion into a female coupling part on the opposite edge (Figs. 10a-e; Paras. [0093] and [0095]; it is noted that this claim is directed to a panel, so the limitations directed to the method of using tools are treated as product-by-process claim limitations),
wherein the male coupling part and female coupling part are provided with horizontally acting locking surfaces which, in the coupled state, bring about at least locking in a horizontal direction perpendicular to the respective edges and in the plane of the coupled panels (Figs. 10a-e and 11a-c; Paras. [0093] and [0095]),
wherein in the aforementioned coupled state, also locking between the male coupling part and female coupling part is obtained in a vertical direction perpendicular to the aforementioned plane (Figs. 10a-e and 11a-c; Paras. [0093] and [0095]),
wherein a first milling tool 60’ from the first subset is configured to form the horizontally acting locking surface of the male coupling part of the first type of profiled edge region (Figs. 10a-e; Paras. [0093] and [0095]; it is noted that this claim is directed to a panel, so the limitations directed to the method of using tools are treated as product-by-process claim limitations);
the aforementioned second subset 61’ allows a second type of profiled edge region to be formed, wherein the second type of profiled edge region comprises a male coupling part, which can be fitted by means of a downward motion into a female coupling part on the opposite edge (Figs. 10a-e and 11a-c; Paras. [0093] and [0095]; it is noted that this claim is directed to a panel, so the limitations directed to the method of using tools are treated as product-by-process claim limitations),
wherein the male coupling part and female coupling part are provided with horizontally acting locking surfaces which, in the coupled state, bring about at least locking in a horizontal direction perpendicular to the respective edges and in the plane of the coupled panels (Figs. 10a-e and 11a-c; Paras. [0093] and [0095]),
wherein in the aforementioned coupled state also locking between the male coupling part and female coupling part is obtained in a vertical direction perpendicular to the aforementioned plane (Figs. 10a-e; Paras. [0093] and [0095]),
wherein a first milling tool 61’ from the second subset is configured to form the horizontally acting locking surface of the male coupling part of the second type of profiled edge region (Figs. 10a-e; Paras. [0093] and [0095]; it is noted that this claim is directed to a panel, so the limitations directed to the method of using tools are treated as product-by-process claim limitations);
the aforementioned first tool 60’ from the first subset and the aforementioned first tool 61’ from the second subset comprise mutually different cutting edges (Figs. 10a-e; Paras. [0093] and [0095]; it is noted that this claim is directed to a panel, so the limitations directed to the method of using tools are treated as product-by-process claim limitations); and
both the first milling tool 60’ from the first subset and the first milling tool 61’ from the second subset are configured to be mounted on a drive shaft that has one and the same inclination with the horizontal plane (Figs. 10a-e; Paras. [0093] and [0095]; it is noted that this claim is directed to a panel, so the limitations directed to the method of using tools are treated as product-by-process claim limitations).
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 33-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pervan.
Regarding claim 33, Pervan teaches the method according to claim 31 (Figs. 10a-e).
Pervan fails to explicitly teach the horizontally acting locking surface of the male coupling part of both the first and the second type of profiled edge region extends in the distal direction downwards at an angle from 55° to 80°, and at a mutually different angle, wherein the difference is 5° or less.
Pervan teaches that locking angles may be between 30 and 90 degrees (Para. [0017]), but fails to recite the locking angles in the panel formed in Figs. 10a-e and 11a-c. Pervan also teaches that the locking angles of the coupling parts are a result effective variable (Para. [0017]). In particular, Pervan teaches that a high locking angle gives a very strong locking while lower locking angles provide more compact locking systems while saving on material. Para. [0017]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Pervan to include locking angles between 55 to 80 degrees with the both parts within a range of 5 degrees of each other as a matter of routine optimization since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 34, Pervan teaches the method according to claim 31 (Figs. 10a-e).
Pervan fails to explicitly teach wherein the aforementioned inclination of the drive shaft to the horizontal is between 10 and 35°.
Pervan teaches that the tool angle must be equal to or larger than the locking angle to form the locking angle and the driving shaft inclination would be orthogonal to that orientation (Para. [0037]; Figs. 10a-e; for example, a tool angle of 90 degrees would result in a drive shaft being inclined zero degrees to horizontal while a tool angle of 70 degrees would result in a drive shaft being 20 degrees to horizontal, i.e., 20 degrees negative is still 20 degrees to horizontal) and locking angles may be between 30 and 90 degrees (Para. [0017]), which would result in drive shaft inclinations between zero and 60 degrees. Pervan also teaches that the locking angles of the coupling parts are a result effective variable (Para. [0017]), thus the inclination of the drive shaft is also a result effective variable as this is used to form the locking angles. In particular, Pervan teaches that a high locking angle gives a very strong locking while lower locking angles provide more compact locking systems while saving on material. Para. [0017]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Pervan to include locking angles between 55 to 80 degrees (which would result in drive shaft angles of 10 to 35 degrees to horizontal) as a matter of routine optimization since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2013/0133281 A1 (Figs. 1 and 11-14), US 12,325,099 B2 (Figs. 1 and 7) and US 6,209,278 B1 (Figs. 1-4) each teach panels have male and female coupling parts including male coupling parts having a first type of locking part that slides in horizontally and a second type of coupling part that moves vertically into a complementary female coupling part.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW STEPHENS whose telephone number is (571)272-6722. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 930-630.
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, Chris Templeton can be reached at (571)270-1477. 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.
/MATTHEW STEPHENS/Examiner, Art Unit 3725
/JARED O BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725 8 September 2026
Prosecution Insights