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
Claims 14-21 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 8/7/26.
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 1-13 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.
Claim 1 recites “of film-like” which is not clear how much it is like a film. Claims 2-13 are rejected for depending from claim 1.
Claim 11 recites “rounded” which is not clear as to what type of shape rounded is. This will be interpreted broadly as being somewhat circular.
Clarification is required.
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) 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. US 2012/0183724 to Ros et al.
Regarding claims 1-6, 10, as best understood, Ros discloses a plastic element [0024] with an upper side (fig. 1: upper side of 105) and an under side (underside of 105) and an anchoring layer (201, 401), the plastic layer having a plurality of nubs (102) on the upper side, the nubs forming cavities (as they are hollow and spaces around nubs 102, 202) and water discharge channels (between nubs of 102, 202) on the lower side. Regarding dimensions of nubs, Ros discloses the basic claim structure of the instant application but does not disclose specific dimensions of these. Applicant fails to show criticality for specifically claimed dimensions, therefore it would have been an obvious design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ros to use the dimensions such as specified in these claims as larger or more nubs provide more support for an application which requires such.
Regarding claim 7, the nubs and channels have a recurring pattern.
Regarding claim 8, nub cavities (between 102, 202) are connected to adjacent nubs.
Regarding claim 9, the nub cavities are connected to six adjacent nubs (see six nubs surrounding cavities, fig. 1).
Regarding claim 11, the nubs have a rounded appearance as they form a circular type perimeter when viewed from above.
Regarding claim 12, the plastic layer has rectangular outer dimensions (rectangle shape of 301, 401) defined by longitudinal and transverse edges, one, inherently a multiple of the other.
Regarding claim 13, the plastic layer has a nub free edge section (see edge approximately where 201 points).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Basil Katcheves whose telephone number is (571)272-6846. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 8:00 am to 6:30pm EST.
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 Glessner can be reached on (571)272-6754. 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.
/BASIL S KATCHEVES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Prosecution Insights