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 .
Drawings
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121 (d) are required in this application because black and white photographs, including photocopies of photographs, are not ordinarily permitted in utility and design patent applications. Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/09/2025 and 05/29/2026 was considered by the examiner.
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 18 and 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 18 recites the limitation "a " in line 1. There is no first construction element defined for this limitation in the claim.
The term “substantially level” in claim 19 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially level” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
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.
Claims 1 and 7-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shaw US5487249 in view of Valente et al. (Journal of Cleaner Production 333 (2022) 130013).
Claim 1 and 12. Shaw discloses at least partially enclosed structure formed by one or more nailable (34) formworks (14) comprising a first concrete composition (40) ;wherein the at least partially enclosed structure comprises a defined area (38) configured to receive a second concrete composition (42) wherein the second concrete composition is the same as or different from the first concrete composition (same concrete but different pour) but is silent on the first concrete composition is a nailable concrete composition comprising a cement in an amount of about 25 wt% to about 70 wt%, a rubber in an amount of about 15 wt% to about 35 wt%, and fine aggregates in an amount of about 10 wt% to about 35 wt% based on a total mass of dry material.
Valente et al. before the filing date of the instant invention teach a concrete composition comprising, based on dry weight: 63 wt% cement, 19 wt% rubber particles (RG), and 18 wt% fine aggregate (6 wt% RP and 12 wt% Admixtures); water in an amount of 29 wt% based on the water-to-cement ratio; and the composition is free of coarse aggregates (Table 1; RP25-RG75-OPC). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to use the concrete of Valente with the motivation of obtaining a nailable and/or screwable concrete slab.
Claim 7. Shaw as modified is silent on the at least partially enclosed structure is formed by two or more nailable formworks. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to enclose the formwork so as to contain the concrete during curing, as a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue known options within his or her technical grasp.
Claim 8. Shaw as modified is silent at least one boundary of the at least partially enclosed structure is a preexisting construction element, and wherein the one or more nailable formworks abut the preexisting construction element. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to enclose the formwork so as to contain the concrete during curing, as a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue known options within his or her technical grasp.
Claim 9. Shaw as modified discloses the defined area further comprises an internal nailable formwork partitioning (14) the defined area.
Claim 10. Shaw as modified by Valente et al. teach that the RG rubber particles have a particle size of 1-3 mm (0.04 to 0.12 inches) (page 4).
Claim 11. Shaw as modified by Valente et al. teach ground tire rubber, which is styrene-
butadiene rubber (page 4)
Claim 13. Shaw as modified by Valente et al. teach a plasticizer in their Admixtures (page 4; Table 1).
Claim 13. Shaw as modified disclose a concrete slab formed by providing the concrete slab precursor of claim 1; and filling the defined area with the second concrete composition; wherein the one or more nailable formworks are incorporated into the concrete slab and are not removed (Fig.3).
Claim 15. Shaw as modified is silent on the at least partially enclosed structure is formed by four or more nailable formworks, or by at least one nailable formwork and a preexisting construction element. Examiner takes official notice that the form would be enclosure since it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to enclose the formwork so as to contain the concrete during curing, as a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue known options within his or her technical grasp.
Claim 16. Shaw as modified discloses a first construction element (12) nailed into the at least one of the one or more nailable formworks (via 34), wherein the first construction element comprises a first wall, a first retaining wall, a first beam, or a first column.
Claim 17. Shaw as modified discloses an internal nailable formwork (14) partitioning the defined area but does not show two or more sides of the internal nailable formwork are in contact with the second concrete composition. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to enclose the formwork so as to contain the concrete during curing, as a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue known options within his or her technical grasp.
Claim 18. Shaw as modified discloses a second construction element (18) nailed (34) into the internal nailable formwork, wherein the second construction element comprises a second wall, a second retaining wall, a second beam, or a second column.
Claim 19. Shaw as modified disclose the concrete slab is substantially level (Fig.4).
Claim 20. Shaw as modified disclose providing the concrete slab of claim 14; nailing a construction element (34) into at least one of the one or more nailable formworks.
Claims 2-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shaw US5487249 and Valente et al. (Journal of Cleaner Production 333 (2022) 130013) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hernandez US20110023410 .
Claim 2-5. Shaw as modified is silent on the one or more nailable formworks further comprises a first concrete reinforcing element and/or a second concrete reinforcing element, wherein the first concrete reinforcing element is embedded in the one or more nailable formworks such that at least a portion of the first concrete reinforcing element extends outside of a body of the one or more nailable formworks, wherein the second concrete reinforcing element if present is disposed along at least a portion of the defined area or such that it covers an entire area of the defined area, wherein the first concrete reinforcing element and/or the second concrete reinforcing element is rebar or reinforcement wire.
Hernandez before the filing date of the instant invention discloses concrete slab for floor and walls with reinforcement embedded in the slab such that at least a portion of the concrete reinforcing element extends outside of a body of the one or more formworks (Fig.29), wherein the reinforcement are steel rebars (P.0024). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to employ the reinforcement of Hernandez in the system of Shaw as modified to reinforcement the concrete, as a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue known options within his or her technical grasp.
Claim 6. Shaw as modified is silent the first concrete reinforcing element is configured to support the second concrete reinforcing element. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the instant invention to support the reinforcement upon each other to reduce materials used since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to attached NOTICE OF REFERENCE CITED.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BABAJIDE A DEMUREN whose telephone number is (571)270-7017. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-5pm.
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 at 5712726754. 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.
BABAJIDE A. DEMUREN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3633
/BABAJIDE A DEMUREN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Prosecution Insights