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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-15 and 23 and Species group II (claim 9) in the reply filed on 07/07/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 50-51 and 58-59 and Species group II (claims 12-14) are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention(s) and species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 07/07/2026.
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim 2 be found allowable, claim 15 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yin et al. (CN 111331968).
Regarding claim 1, Yin et al. teaches an aluminium-wood multi-layer composite board comprising a first board, a first metal plate, a second wood board, the second metal plate and the third board (See Abstract).
Regarding claims 2 and 15, Yin et al. teaches further comprising glue in between each layer (page 6).
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.
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) 3-11 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yin et al. (CN 111331968).
Yin et al. is relied upon as disclosed above.
Regarding claims 3 and 9, Yin et al. teaches wherein the first wood board (1) and the third board (5) are the same, the thickness is 1 mm-30 mm (See Abstract, page 3) and adjacent the metal layer. As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); see MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claims 4 and 5, Yin et al. teaches wherein the board is oak or ash (page 3) which is identical to that presently claimed and therefore, would be capable of being adhered to metal with an adhesive. Further, Yin et al. teaches glue in between each layer (page 6).
Regarding claim 6, Yin et al. teaches wherein the first metal plate (2) and the second metal plate (4) have thickness or 0.5 mm-5 mm (page 3).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Yin et al. teaches wherein the metal plate is aluminium plate, copper plate, iron plate, or steel plate (page 3) which is identical to that presently claimed and therefore, would be capable of being a machinable metal.
Regarding claims 10 and 11, Yin et al. teaches wherein the board is oak or ash (page 3) which is identical to that presently claimed and therefore, would be capable of being adhered to metal with an adhesive. Further, Yin et al. teaches glue in between each layer (page 6).
Regarding claim 23, Yin et al. teaches glue in between each layer (page 6).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHENG HUANG whose telephone number is (571)270-7387. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday from 7 AM to 5 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Callie Shosho, can be reached at 571-272-1123. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHENG YUAN HUANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1787
Prosecution Insights