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
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 5, 10, 11, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Holawe (US PGPub No 2005/0144886).
Referring to claim 1: Holawe teaches at least one formwork panel (item 12), and at least one longitudinal beam (item 16) and a plurality of cross beams (item 14), which support the at least one formwork panel, wherein the at least one longitudinal beam and the plurality of cross beams are arranged overlapping in a direction perpendicular to a main layer of extension of the formwork panel, wherein the at least one longitudinal beam and the plurality of cross beams each comprise connecting elements (item 18) for connection to a prop head of a formwork prop (figure 1).
Referring to claim 4: Holawe teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Holawe teaches wherein the at least one longitudinal beam and the plurality of cross beams each comprise identical connecting elements for connection to the prop head of the formwork prop (figure 1 shows identical connecting elements on all beams).
Referring to claim 5: Holawe teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Holawe teaches wherein connecting elements of the at least one longitudinal beam and/or the plurality of cross beams are each provided as connection openings (figure 1).
Referring to claim 10: Holawe teaches the formwork table element according to claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Holawe teaches a formwork prop with a support element (item 22) and with a prop head (item 20), wherein the prop head comprises at least one connector (item 46) for connection to one of the connecting elements of the at least one longitudinal beam and/or the plurality of cross beams.
Referring to claim 11: Holawe teaches all the limitations of claim 10 as noted above. Additionally, Holawe teaches wherein at least one connection pin (item 50) is provided, which connects the at least one connector of the prop head to the connecting elements of the longitudinal beam or cross beam (figure 7).
Referring to claim 17: Holawe teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Holawe teaches wherein connecting elements of the at least one longitudinal beam and/or the plurality of cross beams are each provided as passage openings (item 18, figure 1).
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) 2, 6, 7, 9, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holawe in view of Schneider (US PGPub No 2018/0328053).
Referring to claim 2: Holawe teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Holawe does not teach an upper side of the at least one longitudinal beam and upper sides of the plurality of cross beams are arranged essentially in the same layer. However, Schneider teaches an upper side of the at least one longitudinal beam and upper sides of the plurality of cross beams are arranged essentially in the same layer (figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to create the device taught by Holawe with the beam tops arranged in the same layer taught by Schneider in order to provide distributed support to the formwork panel along multiple directions.
Referring to claim 6: Holawe teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Holawe does not teach a surrounding frame with two longitudinal and two transverse frame parts for bordering the formwork panel. However, Schneider teaches a surrounding frame with two longitudinal and two transverse frame parts for bordering the formwork panel (figures 4 and 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to create the device taught by Holawe with the surrounding frame taught by Schneider in order to provide rigidity around the perimeter of the formwork panel.
Referring to claim 7: Holawe and Schneider teach all the limitations of clam 6 as noted above. Additionally, they teach the at least one longitudinal beam extends in each case from one transverse frame part to the other transverse frame part of the surrounding frame. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill that item 16 of Holawe would extend between transverse frame parts item 12 of Schneider.
Referring to claim 9: Holawe teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Holawe does not teach wherein the at least one longitudinal beam and the plurality of cross beams each comprise essentially the same height and/or essentially the same width. However, Schneider teaches wherein the at least one longitudinal beam and the plurality of cross beams each comprise essentially the same height and/or essentially the same width (figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to create the device taught by Holawe with the same widths taught by Schneider in order to allow the prop head to be attachable to any of the beams since they would be a standardized width.
Referring to clam 18: Holawe and Schneider teach all the limitations of claim 6 as noted above. They do not specifically teach wherein more than four cross beams are each provided with connection openings for the prop head between the two transverse frame parts, the plurality of cross beams each extending from one longitudinal frame part to the other longitudinal frame part. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to recognize that the plurality of cross beams taught by Holawe would extend between the longitudinal members of Schneider when the elements were combined.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holawe in view of Schneider and Zhang (US PGPub No 2014/0263941).
Referring to claim 3: Holawe and Schneider teach all the limitations of claim 2 as noted above. They do not teach wherein the connecting elements of the at least one longitudinal beam are arranged at a first distance from an underside of the at least one longitudinal beam and the connecting elements of the plurality of cross beams are arranged at a second distance from undersides of the plurality of cross beams, the first and second distances being essentially identical. However, Zhang teaches connecting elements (item 122a and 122b) on all beams (figures 7, 8, 11, 12) at an identical distance from and underside of the beams.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to create the device taught by Holawe and Schneider with the connecting elements locations taught by Zhang in order to make mounting the beams together and to prop heads easier and standardized.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holawe.
Referring to claim 15: Holawe teaches all the structural limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Holawe does not specifically teach a method. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to recognize that Holawe would teach providing a formwork prop with a support element and with a prop head, wherein the prop head comprises at least one connector, connecting a connector of the prop head to one of the connecting elements of the at least one longitudinal beam and/or the plurality of cross beams (figures 3-7 teach providing and attaching the prop head).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 12, 13, 16, 19, and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK J MAESTRI whose telephone number is (571)270-7859. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7-3.
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.
/PATRICK J MAESTRI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635
Prosecution Insights