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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/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 recites the limitation "interior of a slab" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "bottom of the interior of the slab" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "interior of the column” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "top of the interior of the slab" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "neighboring planar constraint portions" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "central portion" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "undersides of the neighboring bottom main bars" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 3, 5-7, 9-10 are rejected as being dependent on a rejected base claim.
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) 1-5, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zavitz (US Pub. 2017/0051495 A1) in view of Ward (US Pub. 2024/0384534 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Zavitz discloses prefabricated shear reinforcement, which is built in the interior of a slab (Fig. 1, beam 100) around a column (Fig. 1, column 20), comprising:
a plurality of bottom main bars (Fig. 1, rebar 112) located on the bottom of the interior of the slab (Fig. 1, rebar extends into column 20) in such a way as to allow one end to extend to the interior of the column (Fig. 1, rebar intersects with the column);
a plurality of top main bars (Fig. 1, rebar 112) located on the top of the interior of the slab in a parallel relation with the plurality of bottom main bars in such a way as to allow one end to extend to the interior of the column (See Fig. 1).
However, Zavitz fails to disclose as taught by Ward, similarly drawn to a concrete reinforcement structure, a spiral stirrup (Fig. 1, helical coil 101) bent continuously to form a plurality of rectangular shapes to surround the plurality of bottom main bars and the plurality of top main bars (Fig. 1, helical coil 101 forms a plurality of rectangular shapes).
Regarding claim 2, as best understood by the Examiner, Zavitz in view of Ward discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Ward, wherein the spiral stirrup consists of a plurality of planar constraint portions bent to surround the bottom and top main bars on the same plane perpendicular to the bottom and top main bars and connection portions each connecting the neighboring planar constraint portions to one another (Fig. 1, the helical coil 101 is substantially within the same plane across both sets of rods 102, 104).
Regarding claim 3, as best understood by the Examiner, Zavitz in view of Ward discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Ward, wherein four top main bars and four bottom main bars are provided, and a pair of spiral stirrups is provided, so that each planar constraint portion surrounds the two top main bars and the two bottom main bars (Fig. 1, helical coil 101 surrounds all of the rods).
Regarding claim 4, as best understood by the Examiner, Zavitz in view of Ward discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Ward, wherein three top main bars and three bottom main bars are provided, and each planar constraint portion of the spiral stirrup is bent to surround the four top and bottom main bars located on both outermost sides thereof and the remaining one top main bar and the remaining one bottom main bar located on the central portion thereof, sequentially (Fig. 1, each rectangle is bent around all of the rebar members).
Regarding claim 5, as best understood by the Examiner, Zavitz in view of Ward discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Ward, wherein four top main bars and four bottom main bars are provided, and each planar constraint portion of the spiral stirrup is bent to the shapes of two rectangles whose central portions overlapping each other (Fig. 1, the center of each rectangle overlaps with the centers of subsequent rectangles).
Regarding claim 7, as best understood by the Examiner, Zavitz in view of Ward discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Zavitz, wherein the bottom main bars are coupled to a fixing plate to which the end portions of the bottom main bars of the prefabricated shear reinforcement in the opposite side to the column are coupled (Fig. 5A, rebar connects to a plate adjacent the column).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zavitz (US Pub. 2017/0051495 A1) in view of Ward (US Pub. 2024/0384534 A1), and further in view of Castellon Lopez (ES 2,434,176 A1).
Regarding claim 6, as best understood by the Examiner, Zavitz in view of Ward discloses the claimed invention except for as taught by Castellon Lopez, similarly drawn to pre-fabricated structural element comprising a pre-stressed concrete base and at least one vertical bar structure, a pair of braces coupled to both side surfaces thereof, respectively, in such a way as to cross each other in a diagonal direction (Fig. 5, longitudinal bracing crossings 11).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the prefabricated shear reinforcement of Zavitz in view of Ward to include the diagonal braces of Castellon Lopez for improved structural rigidity before casting.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zavitz (US Pub. 2017/0051495 A1) in view of Ward (US Pub. 2024/0384534 A1), and further in view of Schock (US Pub. 2023/0392395 A1).
Regarding claim 8, as best understood by the Examiner, Zavitz in view of Ward discloses the claimed invention except for as taught by Schock, similarly drawn to a method of forming a building structure, a spacer located adjustable in height on the undersides of the neighboring bottom main bars (Pg. 1, [0003]: “Conventionally, a steady rising rate for the movement of the slip form would be set and the slip form continuously moves according to the set rate. For vertical building structures, the slip form is typically supported by hydraulic jacks and workers may place steel reinforcing rods into the slip form while the building structure is formed”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the prefabricated shear reinforcement of Zavitz in view of Ward to include the spacer of Schock to allow for fine adjustment of the location of the stirrup.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 9-10 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENRY HOOPER MUDD whose telephone number is (571)272-5941. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-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, Joshua Michener can be reached at 5712721467. 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.
/HENRY HOOPER MUDD/Examiner, Art Unit 3642
/JOSHUA J MICHENER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights