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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to the communication filed on 11/21/2025. Currently claims 1-5, and 7-8 are pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 103 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-5, and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being obvious over Whispell et al. (US Patent Application Publication Number 2011/0167744 A1), hereafter, referred to as “Whispell”, in view of Bussels et al. (US Patent Application Publication Number 2011/0207870 A1), hereafter, referred to as “Bussels”.
Regarding claim 1, Whispell teaches in Fig. 3, a method of manufacturing a floor covering (equivalent to an engineered plank) (element 10A) comprising: a surface layer (element 33), and a plastic composite base material layer (element 31) joined to surface layer without the use of intermediate adhesive materials with the surface layer forming a top surface of the plank and the plastic composite base material forming a bottom surface of the plank and wherein the plastic composite base layer comprises an extrusion of a mixture of polyvinyl chloride powder, coarse whiting powder (e.g. calcium carbonate), stabilizer, lubricant, plasticizer, and impact modifier, (para. [0008] - para. [0010]; para. [0173] - para. [0187]; claims 17-20; and Fig. 3). Whispell teaches that the floor covering (engineered plank) is formed by stacking and then thermally pressing by a hydraulic press to form a sheet (para. [0203]).
But Whispell fails to explicitly teach the steps of mixing the plurality of materials in a mixer, and extruding the mixture. However, Bussels teaches the manufacturing of PVC profiles for use in flooring (para. [0002], [0071]). The profile is made using conventional preparation methods, including compounding, granulating and extruding; by teaching that profile is made with raw material obtained by means of two mixing steps; each mixing step involves the mixing of PVC with a naturally occurring mineral filler and a temperature treatment. The mixing steps results in avoiding mixing problems (para. [0018]). The mixing steps that are taken into consideration are classical preparation steps, like compounding, granulating and extruding (para. [0032]). The process involves mixing (stirring) PVC with the desired ingredients together followed by extrusion of the material (para. [0032-0034]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the claimed invention, to incorporate the teaching of Bussels, and of combine the feature of mixing the plurality of materials in a mixer, and extruding the mixture; followed by stacking the layers and then thermally pressing by a hydraulic press to form the engineered plank; because that would allow for proper mixing of the ingredients and avoid any mixing issue (KSR Rationale A, MPEP 2143). Since both the reference deal with PVC profiles for floor covering, one would have reasonable expectation of success from the combination.
Regarding the limitation that the surface layer comprises one or more of ceramic, glass, rubber, leather, metal materials, stone, and cloth; Whispell teaches that the top layer(s) can be, for example, PVC, olefins, urethane, ionomer, acrylic, polyester, thermoplastic polyolefin (TPO), thermoset polyurethane (TPU), or other materials conventionally used for this type of layer(s) or materials such as illustrated herein (para. [0077]). Among the above items, olefins (such as EPDM) are used to make synthetic rubbers. Additionally, urethane (polyurethane elastomer) is considered a type of rubber material, and thermoset polyurethane (PU) is also considered a type of rubber material due to its high elasticity and performance. Therefore, it would have been obvious to any ordinary artisan that Whispell teaches to use rubber materials as the top layer. Additionally, Whispell also teaches the use of carpet layer 12a in Fig. 61 as a floor covering (engineered plank). Whispell further teaches that the carpet layer 12a is not particularly limited, and generally comprises a textile substrate (equivalent to cloth). Examples of textile substrates include, for example, hard backed or cushion backed textile substrates. The textile substrate can comprise, for example, textile fibers defining a fibrous face, a primary backing to which the textile fibers are secured, and a secondary backing secured to the primary backing. The term "textile substrate" can relate to, for example, a woven fabric, a knitted fabric, a nonwoven fabric, an upholstery fabric (equivalent to cloth) (para. [0207]). Therefore, the use cloth would also be obvious as a surface layer. Therefore, in light of the teaching of Whispell, it would have been obvious to any ordinary artisan that surface layer comprises one or more of ceramic, glass, rubber, leather, metal materials, stone, and cloth.
Regarding claims 2-4, Bussels teaches a method, wherein the mixing comprises a hot mixing followed by a cold mixing (para. [0075]). Bussels teaches that the temperature is controlled at a range of 110 °C - 120 °C during the hot mixing; by teaching that upon reaching the temperature of 120 °C, the mixture is discharged into the cold mixer para. [0075]). Bussels further teaches that the plurality of materials are fully mixed, the temperature is cooled down to 40 °C - 45 °C; by teaching that the mixture was cooled down until a discharge temperature of 40° C was reached para. [0075]).
Regarding claim 5, Whispell teaches that the plurality of materials comprise one or more of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) powder, coarse whiting and light calcium compound powder, stabilizer, polyethylene (PE) wax, internal lubricant, plasticizer, and impact modifier; by teaching that a typical compound used in the planks to form the base layer portion can include, but is not limited to, polymer(s), plasticizer(s), pigments, impact modifiers, stabilizers, processing aids, lubricants, fillers, and/or wood floors, and/or other conventional additives, and the like (para. [0173]).
Regarding claims 7-8, Whispell teaches that the floor covering (engineered plank) is formed by stacking and then thermally pressing by a hydraulic press to form a sheet (para. [0203]). Additionally, Whispell also teaches that the plank material can further include a top layer, which can include at least a printed design and wear layer(s), arranged on top of the base layer or layers (para. [0066]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to any ordinary artisan that the method would comprising thermally pressing to generating one or more patterns on the surface layer.
Responses to Arguments
Applicant’s argument filed on 11/21/2025 for the 103 rejections has been fully considered. Applicant’s argument with respect to amended independent claim 1 has been considered, but is not persuasive. Applicant amended the claim 1 by incorporating the limitation of now cancelled claim 6, As has been explained in the rejection section, regarding this limitation that the surface layer comprises one or more of ceramic, glass, rubber, leather, metal materials, stone, and cloth; Whispell teaches that the top layer(s) can be, for example, PVC, olefins, urethane, ionomer, acrylic, polyester, thermoplastic polyolefin (TPO), thermoset polyurethane (TPU), or other materials conventionally used for this type of layer(s) or materials such as illustrated herein (para. [0077]). Among these, olefins (such as EPDM) are used to make synthetic rubbers. Additionally, urethane (polyurethane elastomer) is considered a type of rubber material, and thermoset polyurethane (PU) is also considered a type of rubber material due to its high elasticity and performance. Therefore, it would have been obvious to any ordinary artisan that Whispell teaches to use rubber materials as the top layer. Moreover, Whispell further teaches the use of carpet layer 12a in Fig. 61 as a floor covering (engineered plank). Whispell teaches that the carpet layer 12a is not particularly limited, and generally comprises a textile substrate. Examples of textile substrates include, for example, hard backed or cushion backed textile substrates. The textile substrate can comprise, for example, textile fibers defining a fibrous face, a primary backing to which the textile fibers are secured, and a secondary backing secured to the primary backing. The term "textile substrate" can relate to, for example, a woven fabric, a knitted fabric, a nonwoven fabric, an upholstery fabric (equivalent to cloth) (para. [0207]). Therefore, the use cloth would also be obvious as a surface layer based on the teaching of Whispell. Therefore, the Examiner maintains that based on the teaching of Whispell, in view of Bussels, the rejection set forth in this office action address the scope of the claim, and is relevant.
Because the rejection is being maintained on the amended independent claim, and since there is no substantive argument on the rejections against the references applied against rest of the dependent claims, these rejections are being maintained.
Conclusion
Applicant’s amendment necessitated the rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD M AMEEN whose telephone number is (469) 295 9214. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 9.00 am to 6.00 pm (Central Time).
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, Christina Johnson can be reached on (571) 272-1176. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MOHAMMAD M AMEEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742