DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is a reply to the amendment filed on 8/13/2026. Currently, claims 1-12 are pending. No claims have been withdrawn, cancelled or added.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on 10/30/2024. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the CN 202411528001.3 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The Replacement Drawings filed on 8/13/2026 are acceptable for examination.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, “so as to achieve floorboard connection” (line 13) is objected to because the limitation appears to contain a typo. This objection can be overcome by reciting, “so as to achieve a floorboard connection” or equivalent.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-12 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, “the direction away from the second tenon” (line 22) is indefinite because the limitation lacks antecedent basis. This rejection can be overcome by reciting, “a direction away from the second tenon” or equivalent.
The remainder of claims in this section are rejected by virtue of dependency upon a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Grimm (US 20070022689).
Claim 1, Grimm provides a floorboard, comprising:
a main body 210;
a first coupling structure 212; and
a second coupling structure 222;
wherein the first coupling structure comprises a first tenon 215A and a second tenon 215B arranged spaced apart from each other (spaced apart by 217A; Fig. 3);
the first tenon is configured to be partially inclined relative to the main body ([0029]; Fig. 3), and the second tenon is configured to be partially inclined relative to the main body ([0029]; Fig. 3);
the first coupling structure and the second coupling structure are provided at opposite sides of the main body, respectively (Fig. 3);
the second coupling structure is provided with a first mortise 227A and a second mortise 227B; the first mortise is configured to fit the first tenon (Fig. 3), and the second mortise is configured to fit the second tenon (Fig. 3), so as to achieve floorboard connection (see 112b rejection above; floorboard connection shown in Fig. 3);
in a situation when the floorboard is coupled to another floorboard (see connected configuration shown in Fig. 3), the first coupling structure of the floorboard is engaged with the second coupling structure of the other of the another floorboard to generate a first locking force in a first direction and a second locking force in a second direction, wherein the first direction is perpendicular to the second direction (it is understood that when the floorboards are engaged, the floorboards “snap together” and generate a first locking force in a horizontal direction based in part on the vertical interlocking of 215A/215B with 227A/227B, and a second locking force in a vertical direction based in part on the horizontal interlocking at the bulbous portions of 215A/215B with 227A/227B; claim 13; Fig. 3); and
the first tenon comprises a first side portion (see annotated Fig. 3 of Grimm shown below in Examiner’s Notes), a first bottom structure (annotated Fig. 3) and a second side portion (annotated Fig. 3) sequentially connected (annotated Fig. 3); and the second side portion is configured to at least partially incline downward in the direction away from the second tenon (under the broadest reasonable interpretation of “incline downward” meaning to slope downwardly, the second side portion is curved and nonetheless at least partially inclines downward in a direction that is away from the second tenon; see “second side portion” that is curved and connects with 217A in annotated Fig. 3), and is connected to an end of the first bottom structure (annotated Fig. 3).
Claim 2, Grimm further provides wherein the first side portion comprises a first inclined section (218; [0029]; annotated Fig. 3), and the first inclined section is configured to at least partially incline downward in a direction away from the second tenon (annotated Fig. 3); and the first bottom structure is configured to extend from a bottom end of the first inclined portion toward the second tenon (annotated Fig. 3).
Claim 3, Grimm further provides wherein the first mortise comprises a first inclined surface (surface on 227A corresponding to the first side portion; annotated Fig. 3), a first bottom surface (surface on 227A corresponding to the first bottom structure; annotated Fig. 3) and a second inclined surface (surface on 227A corresponding to the second side portion; annotated Fig. 3) sequentially connected (annotated Fig. 3); the first inclined surface is configured to at least partially incline downward in a direction away from the second mortise ([0029]; annotated Fig. 3), and is configured to abut against the first inclined portion (annotated Fig. 3); the first bottom surface is configured to extend from a bottom end of the first inclined surface toward the second mortise (annotated Fig. 3), and is configured to abut against the first bottom structure (annotated Fig. 3); the second inclined surface is configured to at least partially incline downward in the direction away from the second mortise ([0029]; annotated Fig. 3), and is connected to an end of the first bottom surface (annotated Fig. 3); and the second inclined surface is configured to abut against the second side portion (annotated Fig. 3).
Claim 4, Grimm further provides wherein the first bottom structure comprises a first bottom portion and a second bottom portion (under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the first bottom structure comprises two portions defined by areas including a first bottom portion at the middle left and a second bottom portion at the middle right, as no structure is required; annotated Fig. 3); an end of the first bottom portion is connected to an end of the first side portion (annotated Fig. 3); and the first bottom portion is arranged horizontally (annotated Fig. 3); and the second bottom portion is convex downward relative to the first bottom portion (the middle right portion of the bottom structure is convex downward relative to the first bottom portion, as exceedingly broadly claimed; annotated Fig. 3), the first bottom surface is matched with the first bottom structure (see engaged panels in Fig. 3), and an area of the first bottom surface corresponding to the second bottom portion is configured to recess downward to fit the second bottom portion (annotated Fig. 3); or the second bottom portion is configured to recess upward relative to the first bottom portion, and the area of the first bottom surface corresponding to the second bottom portion is convex upward to fit the second bottom portion (not required by the claim due to recitation of “or”).
Claim 5, Grimm further provides wherein the second tenon comprises a third side portion (annotated Fig. 3), a second bottom structure (annotated Fig. 3) and a fourth side portion (annotated Fig. 3) sequentially connected (annotated Fig. 3); the third side portion is configured to at least partially extend downward (annotated Fig. 3), and is connected to a first end of the second bottom structure (annotated Fig. 3); the second bottom structure is configured to extend from a bottom end of the third side portion in a direction away from the first tenon (annotated Fig. 3); and the fourth side portion is configured to at least partially extend downward (annotated Fig. 3), and is connected to a second end of the second bottom structure (annotated Fig. 3).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-12 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: the prior art of record, specifically Grimm (US 20070022689) does not teach or disclose, alone or in combination, all the elements and features of the claimed invention, including inter alia wherein the third side portion comprises a first straight section, a second inclined section and a second straight section; the first straight section is configured to extend downward; the second inclined section is configured to at least partially incline downward from an end of the first straight section toward the first tenon; and the second straight section is configured to extend downward from an end of the second inclined section away from the first straight section, as recited in claim 6. Modifying Grimm’s floorboard to include the arrangement as claimed would prevent the floorboard from obtaining the snap fit connection. Thus, it would have been beyond the level of ordinary skill to combine or modify Grimm with any of the cited prior art references of record to arrive at the claimed invention. Claims 7-12 each depend, directly or indirectly from claim 6.
Examiner’s Notes
PNG
media_image1.png
505
700
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 3 of Grimm (US 20070022689)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks filed 8/13/2026, in light of the claim amendments filed on 8/13/2026, with respect to the 102(a)(1) rejections of claim 1 under CN 2622307 (‘CN ‘307’) and CN 267990 (‘CN ‘990’), with respect to the 103 rejections of claims 2-5 over CN ‘990 in view of CN ‘307, and with respect to the 103 rejections over CN ‘990 and CN ‘307 further in view of Pletzer et al. (US 20030154681) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-5 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES M FERENCE whose telephone number is (571)270-7861. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7-4pm.
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.
JAMES M. FERENCE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3635
/JAMES M FERENCE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Prosecution Insights