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 Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1, line 5, “horizontal portions” should be “horizontal portion”. Only one horizontal portion was listed above at line 2 in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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. 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.
(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) 1-2, 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable by Johnston et al. (US 8375663 B2)
With regard to claim 1, Johnston et al. discloses a vent cove base (100) , comprising: a horizontal portion (104) configured to contact a floor, a vertical portion (102) configured to contact a wall, a curved center portion (106) connecting the horizontal portion (104) to the vertical portion (102); and a notch (114) in one of the horizontal portion (104) or the vertical portion (102) (Fig. 2; Col. 6: Lines 59-67; Col. 7: Lines 1-15).
With regard to claim 2, Johnston et al. discloses the notch (114) is disposed in the vertical portion (102) and spaced apart from the center portion (106) (Fig. 2; Col. 6: Lines 59-67; Col. 7: Lines 1-15).
With regard to claim 4, Johnston et al. discloses the horizontal portion (104), vertical portion (102) curved center (106) and notch (114) comprise a continuous extruded member (Fig. 2; Col. 6: Lines 59-67; Col. 7: Lines 1-15; Col. 9, 18-30).
PNG
media_image1.png
531
327
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2, Johnston et al. (US 8375663 B2)
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnston et al. (US 8375663 B2)
With regard to claim 3, Johnston et al. discloses wherein the notch (114) is away from the center (106) (Fig. 2; Col. 6: Lines 59-67; Col. 7: Lines 1-15).
Johnston et al. does not disclose the notch being at least 1 inch away from the center.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the notch on the vertical portion in Johnston et al. at least one inch way from the center, so that the notch does not act as a stress concentrator in the center portion, preventing the vent cove from breaking in the center. No new or unpredictable results would have been obtained from modifying the notch in the Johnston et al. to be one inch or more away from the center.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnston et al. (US 8375663 B2) in view of Ryan et al. (US 12,071,772 B1).
With regard to claim 5, Johnston et al. does not disclose the angle between the horizontal portion, and the vertical portion is greater than 90 degrees.
Ryan et al. does disclose the angle between the horizontal portion, and the vertical portion is greater than 90 degrees (Col. 2: Line 34-61).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the structure of the vent cove base in Johnston et al. with the angle of the cove base in Ryan et al. to allow for a sloped foot and/or a sloped face of the vent cove. No new or unpredictable results would have been obtained from combining the vent cove structure in Johnston et al. with the angle between the vertical and horizontal portions in Ryan et al.
Allowable Claims
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With regard to claim 6: the combination of the structural limitations disclosed as well as the elements of a clip extending between the floor member and the wall member, where the clip holds the floor member off the wood floor is not adequately taught or suggested in the cited prior art of record. The examiner notes that the allowability of the claims is subject to reconsideration should the scope of the claims change.
With regard to claim 7: the combination of the structural limitations disclosed as well as the particular method steps of lifting the distal end of the vent cove to reveal the floor and installing a clip between the distal end of the horizontal member and the vertical member , forming a gap between the horizontal member and the floor. The method steps listed above are not adequately taught or suggested in the citied prior art of record. The examiner notes that allowability of the claims is subject to reconsideration should the scope of the claims change.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art cited are directed to cove bases.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EVERETT RANDOLPH JEF ABELES whose telephone number is (571)272-0599. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7am-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 (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.
/EVERETT RANDOLPH JEFFERSON ABELES/Examiner, Art Unit 3633
/BRIAN E GLESSNER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Prosecution Insights