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 § 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) 1-5, 9, 10, 12-16, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Maeyama et al. (US 2017/0159250).
Regarding claim 1, Maeyama teaches a screed plate for a screed assembly towed by a mobile paver comprising: a forward leading edge and a rearward trailing edge parallel to the forward leading edge (the forward and rearward edges of the base plate of screeds 7, 8, as shown in Figs. 2–4); an upper frame attachment surface extending between the forward leading edge and the rearward trailing edge (the upper surface of the base plate of screeds 7, 8, which is mounted to the remainder of the screed assembly, Figs. 2 and 4); a lower material contacting surface adapted to compact and compress paving material sliding underneath the screed plate (the bottom face of the base plate of screeds 7, 8, which spreads, levels, and compacts the asphalt mixture); and a texturing structure situated laterally along the rearward trailing edge to form a texturing pattern in a paving mat produced by the screed plate by displacement of the paving material (longitudinal groove-forming instrument 11 comprising a plurality of beam members 12 distributed laterally across the bottom face of the screed base plate and extending to the trailing portion thereof; the beam members 12 are pressed into the asphalt and displace the aggregate to both sides to form longitudinal grooves 20).
Regarding claim 2, Maeyama teaches wherein the texturing structure includes a plurality of rigid protuberances aligned parallel with the rearward trailing edge (the plurality of rigid beam members 12 are spaced laterally across the base plate of screeds 7, 8 such that the beam members collectively form a lateral array parallel to the rearward trailing edge, paragraphs [0055–0056] and [0060]; Figs. 2 and 3).
Regarding claim 3, Maeyama teaches wherein the plurality of rigid protuberances are one or more of triangular delta protuberances and ovular protuberances (the beam members may have an inverted triangular cross-section, and the ends 14B and 14C may be formed into trigonal-pyramid, bow-shaped, or high-speed-railway-vehicle-head shapes, paragraphs [0057–0058]; Figs. 3B and 3C).
Regarding claim 4, Maeyama teaches wherein the plurality of rigid protuberances are laterally spaced apart by a protuberance pitch (beam members 12 are arranged at center-to-center intervals of 10–200 mm, preferably 20–100 mm, paragraph [0060]).
Regarding claim 5, Maeyama teaches wherein the plurality of rigid protuberances are joined to the lower material contacting surface by one or more of welding and brazing (beam members 12 may be welded to the bottom face of the base plate of screeds 7, 8, paragraph [0061]).
Regarding claim 9, Maeyama teaches wherein the texturing structure is a texturing rake including a multiplicity of tined laterally aligned parallel to the rearward trailing edge (longitudinal groove-forming instrument 11 includes a multiplicity of rigid, tine-like beam members 12 arranged side-by-side and laterally spaced across the screed plate, paragraphs [0055–0056] and [0060]; Figs. 2 and 3).
Regarding claim 10, Maeyama teaches wherein the lower material contacting surface is flat longitudinally between the forward leading edge and the texturing structure (the base plate of screeds 7, 8 has a flat material-contacting bottom face; Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 12, Maeyama teaches a method of laying and surface texturing a paving mat comprising: receiving a paving material in a hopper (3) of a mobile paver traveling longitudinally in a travel direction over a work surface (asphalt mixture is charged from a dump truck into hopper 3 of the traveling asphalt finisher, paragraph [0052] and [0064]); conveying the paving material from the hopper to an auger arranged laterally and perpendicular to the travel direction of the mobile paver (bar feeder 4 conveys the asphalt mixture rearwardly from hopper 3 to screw spreader 5, which extends across the paving width); laterally distributing the paving material before a screed frame of the floating screed (screw spreader 5 spreads the asphalt mixture uniformly over the pavement width before main screed 7 and expansion screeds 8); directing the paving material underneath a forward leading edge of a screed plate attached to an underside of the screed frame (paragraphs [0064–0072]); compacting the paving material into a paving mat by sliding contact with a lower material contacting surface of the screed plate (6); and surface texturing the paving mat with a texturing structure situated laterally along the rearward trailing edge to produce a tining pattern in the paving mat (11, 12, paragraphs [0055–0060], [0071–0076], and [0082]; Figs. 2–6).
Regarding claim 13, Maeyama teaches wherein the tining pattern includes a plurality of tining grooves (12) continuously disposed in the paving mat parallel with the travel direction (paragraphs [0056, 0073, and 0076]).
Regarding claim 14, Maeyama teaches wherein the tining pattern is characterized by a groove pitch laterally spacing apart the plurality of tining grooves (the distance between the centers of neighboring longitudinal grooves 20 corresponds to the center-to-center spacing between neighboring beam members 12, paragraphs [0060 and 0076]).
Regarding claim 15, Maeyama teaches wherein the texturing structure includes a plurality of rigid protuberances (12) descending from the lower material contacting surface (rigid beam members 12 projects downwardly from the bottom face of the base plate and are pressed into the asphalt mixture; Figs. 3 and 4).
Regarding claim 16, Maeyama teaches wherein the plurality of rigid protuberances are one or more of triangular delta protuberances and ovular protuberances (the beam members may have inverted triangular cross-sections and trigonal-pyramid, bow-shaped, or high-speed-railway-vehicle-head ends 14B and 14C, paragraphs [0057–0058]; Figs. 3B and 3C).
Regarding claim 18, Maeyama teaches wherein the texturing structure is a texturing rake including a multiplicity of tined laterally aligned parallel to the rearward trailing edge (longitudinal groove-forming instrument 11 includes a multiplicity of tine-like beam members 12 laterally spaced across the bottom face of the screed plate, paragraphs [0055–0056] and [0060]; Figs. 2 and 3).
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.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeyama et al. (US 2017/0159250) in view of Cat SDX Brochure (“Cat”).
Regarding claim 6, Maeyama teaches the invention as described above but fails to teach wherein the plurality of rigid protuberances are integrally cast with the screed plate. Cat teaches cast screed plates having integral three-dimensional angular material-contacting surfaces and states that the textured plates are cast from high-strength chromium-carbide material (pp. 2–3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to form Maeyama’s rigid projecting texturing structures integrally with the screed plate by casting, as taught by Cat, in order to eliminate separate joints and fasteners, reduce the possibility that the texturing structures would detach under repeated contact with abrasive paving aggregate, and provide a durable unitary wear component.
Claim(s) 7-8, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeyama et al. (US 2017/0159250) (“Maeyama”) in view of Perkins (3,516,340).
Regarding claim 7, Maeyama teaches the invention as described above but fails to teach the texturing profile is formed in the trailing edge of the plate. Perkins teaches a screed plate with a texturing profile (28) wherein the texturing structure is a texturing profile formed into the rearward trailing edge of the screed plate (11, Figure 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to extend the texturing profile of Maeyama to the rearward trailing edge of the plate as taught by Perkins as it is obvious to use a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way.
Regarding claim 8, Maeyama as modified by Perkins teaches the texturing profile includes serrations (28) formed along the rearward trailing edge.
Regarding claim 17, Maeyama teaches the invention as described above but fails to teach serrations formed into the rearward trailing edge of the screed plate. Perkins teaches a screed plate with a texturing profile (28) wherein the texturing structure is a serrations (28) formed into the rearward trailing edge of the screed plate (11, Figure 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to extend the texturing profile of Maeyama to the rearward trailing edge of the plate as taught by Perkins as it is obvious to use a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way.
Claim(s) 11, 19, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeyama et al. (US 2017/0159250) in view of Frost (RE49,588).
Regarding claim 11, Maeyama teaches the invention as described above but fails to teach wherein the lower material contacting surface includes a textured pattern located longitudinally between the forward leading edge and the texturing structure. Frost teaches a screed plate (101) having a lower material-contacting textured surface (130) comprising a plurality of corrugations (132). The corrugations may be repetitive wave forms 135, V-shaped patterns 136, block-shaped patterns 137, or a crisscross rhombic pattern 133 and may be positioned across the underside of the screed plate to manipulate and homogenize the paving material as the screed plate compacts it (paragraphs [0044–0046] and [0053]; Figs. 2A–5 and 7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide Frost’s textured pattern on Maeyama’s lower material-contacting surface to mix and redistribute the aggregate and binder before the beam members formed the final longitudinal grooves, thereby improving homogeneity and density while retaining Maeyama’s simultaneous groove-forming function.
Regarding claim 19, Maeyama teaches a floating screed assembly comprising: a screed frame adapted to be towed behind a mobile paver (main screed 7 and expansion screeds 8 of the asphalt finisher; Figs. 1 and 2); and a screed plate attached to the screed frame, the screed plate including: a forward leading edge and a rearward trailing edge parallel to the forward leading edge (the parallel forward and rearward edges of the base plate shown in Figs. 2–4); an upper attachment surface extending between the forward leading edge and the rearward trailing edge and a lower material contacting surface opposite the upper attachment surface adapted to compress paving material (the base plate of screeds 7, 8, the bottom face of which contacts, levels, and compacts the asphalt mixture); and a texturing structure situated laterally along the rearward trailing edge to form a texturing pattern in a paving mat produced by the screed plate by displacement of the paving material (longitudinal groove-forming instrument 11 and laterally spaced beam members 12, which displace aggregate and form longitudinal grooves 20, paragraphs [0055–0061] and [0071–0076]). Maeyama fails to expressly teach that the screed plate is releasably attached to the screed frame. Frost teaches a screed plate configured to be releasably attached to a screed assembly, including upper attaching means and a coupling element that releasably secure the screed plate to the screed assembly (paragraphs [0040–0043]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to releasably attach Maeyama’s screed plate to its screed frame as taught by Frost to permit removal and replacement of the screed plate and its groove-forming structures after wear without requiring replacement of the entire screed assembly, thereby reducing maintenance time and cost.
Regarding claim 20, Maeyama as modified by Frost teaches wherein the texturing structure includes one or more rigid protuberances, serrations, and a multiplicity of tines (Maeyama’s plurality of rigid, tine-like beam members 12 projecting from the bottom of the screed plate, paragraphs [0055–0061]; Figs. 2–4).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is listed on the attached PTO-892. Jackson teaches a textured screed plate with serrations.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABIGAIL ANNE RISIC whose telephone number is (571)270-7819. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5, M-Th.
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 Sebesta can be reached at 571-272-0547. 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.
/ABIGAIL A RISIC/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3671 September 4, 2026
