DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-21 are pending.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,180,709. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Re claim 1 of the pending application and claim 1 of ‘709, each discloses a ceiling panel, a panel body including an upper surface, a lower surface, a first end, a second end, a first lateral side, and a second lateral side; and a bracket extending upward from the upper surface of the panel body and offset from a center of gravity of the panel body toward the first end, the bracket including an upper fastener configured to attach the ceiling panel to a frame element of a ceiling grid, wherein an angle of the panel body is adjustable with respect to the attachment of the upper fastener of the bracket.
Re claim 2 of the pending application and claim 2 of ‘709, each discloses the angle of the panel body is adjustable about an axis extending in a lateral direction.
Re claim 3 of the pending application and claim 3 of ‘709, each discloses the panel body is curved.
Re claim 4 of the pending application and claim 5 of ‘709, each discloses a width of the panel body tapers along a longitudinal direction that extends between the first end and the second end.
Re claim 5 of the pending application and claim 6 of ‘709, each discloses an entirety of the lower surface is unencumbered.
Re claim 6 of the pending application and claim 7 of ‘709, each discloses an area of the upper surface that surrounds the bracket is unencumbered.
Re claim 10 of the pending application and claim 8 of ‘709, each discloses wherein the upper fastener of the bracket includes a channel configured to surround a portion of the first frame element of the ceiling grid.
Re claim 11 of the pending application and claim 1 of ‘709, each discloses a lower fastener that attaches to the upper fastener.
Re claim 12 of the pending application and claim 1 of ‘709, each discloses wherein an attachment between the upper fastener and lower fastener is adjustable and provides the adjustability of the angle of the panel body.
Re claim 13 of the pending application and claim 9 of ‘709, each discloses wherein at least one of the upper fastener and the lower fastener includes a plurality of openings for selectable connection with the other of the upper fastener and lower fastener.
Re claim 14 of the pending application and claim 13 of ‘709, each discloses a ceiling panel, a panel body including an upper surface, a lower surface, a first end, a second end, a first lateral side, and a second lateral side; and a bracket extending upward from the upper surface of the panel body and offset from a center of gravity of the panel body toward the first end, the bracket including an upper fastener configured to attach the ceiling panel to a frame element of a ceiling grid, wherein an angle of the panel body is adjustable with respect to the attachment of the upper fastener of the bracket (claim 1 of the pending application; claim 13 of ‘709) and the lower fastener including a fin that extends upward from the upper surface of the panel body.
Re claim 15 of the pending application and claim 14 of ‘709, each discloses a ceiling panel, a panel body including an upper surface, a lower surface, a first end, a second end, a first lateral side, and a second lateral side; and a bracket extending upward from the upper surface of the panel body and offset from a center of gravity of the panel body toward the first end, the bracket including an upper fastener configured to attach the ceiling panel to a frame element of a ceiling grid, wherein an angle of the panel body is adjustable with respect to the attachment of the upper fastener of the bracket (claim 1 of the pending application; claim 13 of ‘709) and wherein the upper fastener includes a lower web plate that attaches to the fin of the lower fastener.
Re claim 16 of the pending application and claim 16 of ‘709, each discloses a ceiling panel, a panel body including an upper surface, a lower surface, a first end, a second end, a first lateral side, and a second lateral side; and a bracket extending upward from the upper surface of the panel body and offset from a center of gravity of the panel body toward the first end, the bracket including an upper fastener configured to attach the ceiling panel to a frame element of a ceiling grid, wherein an angle of the panel body is adjustable with respect to the attachment of the upper fastener of the bracket (claim 1 of the pending application; claim 13 of ‘709) and wherein the lower fastener is integrally formed with the panel body in a single piece.
Re claim 17 of the pending application and claim 17 of ‘709, each discloses a ceiling system comprising: a first ceiling panel and a second ceiling panel each according to claim 1 (though, written fully out in ‘709); and ceiling grid formed by a plurality of frame elements including a first frame element, wherein the first ceiling panel is attached to the first frame element and the second ceiling panel is attached to the first frame element.
Re claim 20 of the pending application and claim 17 of ‘709, each discloses wherein a second end of the first ceiling panel overlaps the first end of the second ceiling panel.
Re claim 21 of the pending application and claim 18 of ‘709, each discloses a method of forming a ceiling panel according to claim 11, the method comprising: forming the panel body; forming the fin of the lower fastener of the bracket on the upper surface of the panel body; and attaching the upper fastener of the bracket to the fin of the lower fastener of the bracket.
Claim(s) 7-9, 18-19 is/are rejected as being dependent on a rejected claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1-21 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.
Re claim 1, claim 1 recites, “the attachment” in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. It appears this language is intended to recite, “attachment” and will be interpreted as such.
Re claim 2, claim 2 recites, “the lateral direction” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. It appears this language is intended to recite, “a lateral direction” and will be interpreted as such.
Re claim 5, claim 5 recites, “the entire lower surface” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. It appears this language is intended to recite, “an entire lower surface” and will be interpreted as such.
Re claim 6, claim 6 recites, “the area” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. It appears this language is intended to recite, “an area” and will be interpreted as such.
Re claim 12, claim 12 recites, “the attachment” in line 1 and “the adjustability” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. It appears this language is intended to recite, “attachment” and “adjustability” and will be interpreted as such.
Claim(s) 3-4, 7-11, 13-21 is/are rejected as being dependent on a rejected claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 11-12, 14-16 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caimi (US 2014/0299407) in view of Feng (CN111075098; provided in 17/320,651, now US Pat. No. 12,180,709).
Re claim 1, Caimi discloses a ceiling panel (Fig. 8, 100) comprising:
a panel body (110) including an upper surface (upper surface of 110), a lower surface (lower surface of 110), a first end (top end of 110), a second end (bottom end of 110), a first lateral side (one side of 110), and a second lateral side (another side of 110), and
a bracket (120/130) extending upward from (Fig. 1) the upper surface (upper surface of 110) of the panel body (110), the bracket (120/130) including an upper fastener (130) configured to attach the ceiling panel to a frame element of a ceiling grid (130 is capable of attaching the ceiling panel to a frame element of a ceiling grid, as this is a statement of intended use),
wherein an angle of the panel body (110) is adjustable ([0091], Fig. 8) with respect to the attachment of the upper fastener (130) of the bracket (120),
but fails to disclose the bracket offset from a center of gravity of the panel body towards the first end.
However, Feng discloses that it is known to provide a bracket (1) offset from (Fig. 3) a center of gravity (of 8) of the panel body (8) towards the first end (left end of 8).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ceiling panel of Caimi with the bracket offset from a center of gravity of the panel body towards the first end, such as by moving the bracket 120 of Caimi to a side, as disclosed by Feng in order to provide greater control of the directable, sound-absorbing ceiling panels, as shifting the bracket 120 to the side would allow the ceiling panel to extend further into the room upon adjustment providing greater directional sound-absorption.
Re claim 2, Caimi as modified discloses the ceiling panel according to claim 1,
wherein the angle ([0091]) of the panel body (120) is adjustable about an axis (along 130) extending in the lateral direction (lateral direction of 130).
Re claim 3, Caimi as modified discloses the ceiling panel according to claim 1,
wherein the panel body (120) is curved (Fig. 3, [0079] disclosing that the features of Fig. 3 apply to Fig. 4a).
Re claim 4, Caimi as modified discloses the ceiling panel according to claim 1,
wherein a width (Fig. 4a, width of 100) of the panel body (100) tapers along a longitudinal direction (Fig. 1) that extends between the first end (left end of 100) and second end (right end of 100).
Re claim 5, Caimi as modified discloses the ceiling panel according to claim 1, wherein the entire lower surface (lower surface of 120) is unencumbered (Fig. 8).
Re claim 6, Caimi as modified discloses the ceiling panel according to claim 1, wherein the area of the upper surface (upper surface of 120) that surrounds the bracket (120) is unencumbered (Fig. 5).
Re claim 7, Caimi as modified discloses the ceiling panel according to claim 1, wherein a perimeter of the panel body (110) along the first lateral side (one side of 110), second end (bottom end of 110), and second lateral side (another side of 110) is free and unattached (Fig. 5 showing each end/side of 110 being free and unattached).
Re claim 11, Caimi as modified discloses the ceiling panel according to claim 1, wherein the bracket (120/130) further comprises a lower fastener (120) that attaches to the upper fastener (130).
Re claim 12, Caimi as modified discloses the ceiling panel according to claim 11,
wherein the attachment between the upper fastener (130) and lower fastener (120) is adjustable (via 140) and provides the adjustability of the angle ([0091], Fig. 8) of the panel body (110).
Re claim 14, Caimi as modified discloses the ceiling panel according to claim 11,
wherein the lower fastener (120) includes a fin (121) that extends upward from (due to having a thickness) the upper surface (top of 110) of the panel body (110).
Re claim 15, Caimi as modified discloses the ceiling panel according to claim 14, wherein the upper fastener (130) includes a lower web plate (145, 140 and/or the bottom of 130) that attaches to (Fig. 7) the fin (122) of the lower fastener (120).
Re claim 16, Caimi as modified discloses the ceiling panel according to claim 11, but fails to disclose wherein the lower fastener is integrally formed with the panel body in a single piece.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ceiling panel of Caimi to wherein the lower fastener is integrally formed with the panel body in a single piece in order to simplify installation eliminating the need for attaching the lower fastener to the panel body. It has been held that making integral by using a once piece construction is within the level of ordinary skill in the art absent persuasive evidence that a particular configuration of the claimed shape is significant. In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968.
Re claim 21, Caimi discloses a method of forming (Fig. 1-8 showing 100 formed) a ceiling panel (100) according to claim 11 (see above), the method comprising:
Forming (Fig. 4a showing 110 formed) the panel body (110);
forming (Fig. 4a showing 120 formed) the fin (of 120) of the lower fastener (120) of the bracket (120/130) on the upper surface (upper surface of 110) of the panel body (110); and
attaching (Fig. 4a showing 120/130 attached) the upper fastener (130) of the bracket (120) to the fin (of 120) of the lower fastener (120) of the bracket (120/130).
Claim(s) 8, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caimi (US 2014/0299407) in view of Feng (CN111075098; provided in 17/320,651, now US Pat. No. 12,180,709) and Ahren et al (“Ahren”) (US 2007/0101670).
Re claim 8, Caimi as modified discloses the ceiling panel according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the upper fastener of the bracket includes a support flange configured to hook over a horizontal flange of the frame element of the ceiling grid.
However, Ahren discloses wherein the upper fastener (11) of the bracket (10) includes a support flange (35) configured to hook over (Fig. 4) a horizontal flange (39) of the frame element (36) of the ceiling grid (Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ceiling panel of Caimi wherein the upper fastener of the bracket includes a support flange configured to hook over a horizontal flange of the frame element of the ceiling grid as disclosed by Ahren in order to securely fasten to the frame element in a tool-less manner.
Re claim 10, Caimi as modified discloses the ceiling panel according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the upper fastener of the bracket includes a channel configured to surround a portion of the frame element of the ceiling grid.
However, Ahren discloses wherein the upper fastener (11) of the bracket (10) includes a channel (under 35) configured to surround a portion (Fig. 4; 39) of the frame element (36) of the ceiling grid (Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ceiling panel of Caimi wherein the upper fastener of the bracket includes a channel configured to surround a portion of the frame element of the ceiling grid as disclosed by Ahren in order to securely fasten to the frame element in a tool-less manner.
Claim(s) 9-10, 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caimi (US 2014/0299407) in view of Feng (CN111075098; provided in 17/320,651, now US Pat. No. 12,180,709) and Porter (US 2016/0053489).
Re claim 9, Caimi as modified discloses the ceiling panel according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the upper fastener of the bracket includes an upper web plate configured to connect to a vertical web of the frame element of the ceiling grid.
However, Porter discloses wherein the upper fastener (16, 28, 32) of the bracket (10) includes an upper web plate (28/32) configured to connect to (Fig. 3) a vertical web (20) of the frame element (12) of the ceiling grid (Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ceiling panel of Caimi wherein the upper fastener of the bracket includes an upper web plate configured to connect to a vertical web of the frame element of the ceiling grid as disclosed by Porter in order to securely fasten to the frame element in a removable, yet rigid manner.
Re claim 10, Caimi as modified discloses the ceiling panel according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the upper fastener of the bracket includes a channel configured to surround a portion of the frame element of the ceiling grid.
However, Porter discloses wherein the upper fastener (16, 28, 32) of the bracket (10) includes a channel (18) configured to surround a portion (Fig. 3) of the frame element (12) of the ceiling grid (Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ceiling panel of Caimi wherein the upper fastener of the bracket includes a channel configured to surround a portion of the frame element of the ceiling grid as disclosed by Porter in order to securely fasten to the frame element in a tool-less manner.
Re claim 17, Caimi discloses a ceiling system (Fig. 8 200) comprising:
a first ceiling panel (100) and a second ceiling panel (100) each according to claim 1 (see above); and
a first frame element (210), wherein the first ceiling panel (100) is attached to (Fig. 8) the first frame element (210) and the second ceiling panel (100) is attached to (Fig. 8) the first frame element (210),
but fails to disclose a ceiling grid formed by a plurality of frame elements.
However, Porter discloses a ceiling grid ([0040]) formed by a plurality of frame elements (12).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ceiling panel of a ceiling grid formed by a plurality of frame elements as disclosed by Porter in order to support additional ceiling panels over a larger area.
Re claim 18, Caimi as modified the ceiling system according to claim 17, wherein the first ceiling panel (100) is attached to (Fig. 8) the ceiling grid (210 as modified) only by an attachment (Fig. 8) of the bracket (120/130) of the first ceiling panel (100) to the first frame element (210).
Re claim 19, Caimi as modified discloses the ceiling system according to claim 17, wherein an outer edge (outer edge of 100) of the panel body (100) of the first ceiling panel (100) is free (Fig. 8).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caimi (US 2014/0299407) in view of Feng (CN111075098; provided in 17/320,651, now US Pat. No. 12,180,709), Porter (US 2016/0053489) and Firinga (US 2015/0240490).
Re claim 20, Caimi as modified discloses the ceiling system according to claim 17, but fails to disclose wherein a second end of the first ceiling panel overlaps the first end of the second ceiling panel.
However, Firinga discloses wherein a second end (Fig. 5, right end of left panel) of the first ceiling panel (leftmost panel) overlaps (Fig. 5) the first end (left end of middle panel) of the second ceiling panel (middle panel).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ceiling panel of Caimi wherein a second end of the first ceiling panel overlaps the first end of the second ceiling panel as disclosed by Firinga in order to in order to support additional ceiling panels over a larger area.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Modification of Caimi such that the lower fastener 120 is connected to the upper fastener 130 would eliminate the articulated joint 140, rendering Caimi non-adjustable and unsuitable for its intended purpose.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE WALRAED-SULLIVAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8838. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am - 5:00pm.
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, Brian Mattei can be reached at (571)270-3238. 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.
KYLE WALRAED-SULLIVAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3635
/KYLE J. WALRAED-SULLIVAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Prosecution Insights