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) 33, 35-37, 46 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.
Regarding claim 33, the phrase "for example" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
The term “decorative top structure” in claim 35 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “decorative top structure” 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.
The term “decorative layer” in claim 36 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “decorative layer” 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.
The term “decorative” in claim 46 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “decorative” 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(s) 37 is/are rejected as being dependent on a rejected base claim.
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) 28, 30-33, 35-37, 39, 41-43 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Josefsson (US Pat. 11,725,398 B2).
Regarding claim 28, Josefsson discloses a panel, comprising:
an extruded core (Fig. 5a, panel 1) provided with an upper side and a lower side on opposite sides of the core (Fig. 5a, panel 1 has a top and bottom surface), wherein the core comprises at least an extruded polymer material (Col. 4, lines 24-27: “At least one upper and/or lower layer of the building panel may be extruded, such as coextruded. Preferably, each extruded or coextruded layer comprises a thermoplastic polymer”), coupling profiles arranged on at least two opposite edges of said core (Fig. 6b, on either end of the panel 1 are tongue-and-groove fastening means), wherein the coupling profiles are integrated with the core material (Fig. 6b, the tongue-and-groove fastening means are integral with the core), wherein said coupling profiles are designed to interlock with coupling profiles of an adjacent panel with coupling profiles to provide locking both in a horizontal direction and/or in a vertical direction (See Figs. 7b, 7c), and wherein the core comprises at least one channel, wherein the at least one channel is arranged at a distance both from the lower side and the upper side of said core (Fig. 5a, grooves 10, 11), wherein the core comprises two core layers, patterned with complementary patterns to define the location, the length, and the width of the at least one channel, and mutually enclosing said at least one channel, and/or wherein the at least two core layers together define a circumferential wall of said at least one channel (Col. 15, lines 44-51: “As shown in the embodiments in FIGS. 1e, 2c-2d, 5a, 5c, 6b-6c and 7a, an innermost portion 11a of one or several of a plurality of grooves 11 may be separated from the balancing layer 4 by a distance Sa in a vertical direction Z of the panel. In some embodiments, and as shown in FIG. 2a for a pair of transversely outermost grooves, but is clearly conceivable for any, some or each of the grooves, the distance Sa may be vanishing (Sa=0)”).
wherein the core comprises a centre portion and a peripheral portion enclosing said centre portion, wherein the panel edges and coupling profiles make part of said peripheral portion, and wherein said peripheral portion is free of core channels (Fig. 5a, the panel is comprised of multiple layers, with some of the layers comprising no grooves).
Regarding claim 30, Josefsson discloses multiple channels, wherein one channel is located next to each other or on top of another channel, wherein at least one channel comprises the same or a different shape compared to at least one other channel (Fig. 5b, multiple grooves 10, 11 are shown with similar shapes).
Regarding claim 31, Josefsson discloses wherein the at least one channel is arranged at a distance from the sides of the core or from the coupling profiles (Fig. 5b, grooves 10, 11 are spaced apart from the coupling ends of the panel 1).
Regarding claim 32, Josefsson discloses wherein the at least one channel is surrounded at the top and bottom by at least one of the core material(s) (See Figs. 5b, 5c).
Regarding claim 33, Josefsson discloses wherein the extrudable polymer material at least comprises of a thermoplastic and/or a thermoset material, for example, ethylene- vinyl acetate (EVA), which is a copolymer of ethylene and vinyl acetate, rubber, polyurethane (PU), polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP), polystyrene (PS), polyvinylchloride (PVC), polyethylene terephthalate (PET), or mixtures thereof (Col. 7, lines 53-59: “In accordance with a third aspect of the disclosure, there is provided a thermoplastic-based building panel, such as a floor panel, comprising an upper layer arrangement and/or a lower layer arrangement, a balancing layer comprising a thermoplastic polymer, and a mechanical locking system for horizontally and/or vertically locking the building panel to an adjacent building panel”).
Regarding claim 35, as best understood by the Examiner, Josefsson discloses wherein the panel comprises at least one decorative top structure affixed, directly or indirectly, to the core and at least partially covering the upper side of the core and optionally at least partially at least one side edge of the core. the upper layer arrangement may comprise a wear layer and/or a print layer, such as a print film (Col. 10, lines 47-48: “The upper layer arrangement may comprise a wear layer and/or a print layer, such as a print film”).
Regarding claim 36, as best understood by the Examiner, Josefsson discloses wherein the decorative top structure comprises at least one decorative layer and least one protective layer covering said decorative layer (See id).
Regarding claim 37, as best understood by the Examiner, Josefsson discloses wherein the decorative layer comprises a decor formed by an ink layer printed either directly or indirectly onto the core (See id).
Regarding claim 39, Josefsson discloses wherein the panel comprises a first pair of a first panel edge comprising a first coupling profile and an opposite second panel edge comprising a second coupling profile being designed to interlock with said first coupling profile of an adjacent panel in a tongue and groove connection (Col. 8, lines 24-28: “The balancing layer may at least partially extend through a tongue portion, such as through a lower portion of the tongue portion, wherein the tongue portion is configured to engage with a tongue groove of the adjacent building panel for vertical locking”), both interlock in a horizontal direction and in a vertical direction, wherein the pair of opposite edges comprises:
a first edge comprising a sideward tongue extending in a direction substantially parallel to the upper side of the panel, a bulge on top of the edge of the sideward tongue (Fig. 6b, cooperating surface 21 comprises a locking surface 22), an opposite, second edge comprising a recess for accommodating at least a part of the sideward tongue of a further panel (Fig. 6b, locking groove 14), said recess being defined by an upper lip and a lower lip, said upper lip comprises a recess formed by means of extrusion (Fig. 6b, locking groove 14 comprises upper and lower portions), the sideward tongue being designed such that locking takes place by an introduction movement into the recess of the sideward tongue and an angling down movement about an axis parallel to the first edge, as a result of which the bulge on the top side of the sideward tongue will engage the upper lip, leading to a locking of adjacent panels at the first and second edges in both horizontal direction and vertical direction (Col. 9, lines 60-65: “The adjacent building panel may be configured to be angled downwards and/or displaced vertically downwards towards the building panel during locking. Alternatively, however, the building panel may be configured to be angled downwards and/or displaced vertically downwards towards the adjacent building panel during locking”).
Regarding claim 41, Josefsson discloses wherein at least one coupling profile is at least partially formed by the core (See Fig. 6b).
Regarding claim 42, Josefsson discloses wherein at least one pair of opposing panel edges is entirely free of coupling profiles (Lateral edges of the panels do not have tongue-and-groove coupling profiles).
Regarding claim 43, Josefsson discloses wherein the core is formed along an extrusion direction, and wherein the channels and/or grooves is formed in said extrusion direction (Col. 14, lines 41-48: “In an illustrative embodiment, the grooves are bounded by a panel portion located below grooves. Alternatively, the grooves may include an opening at a bottom-facing surface of the panel 1. For example, these internal grooves 11 may be pre-formed in the lower layer arrangement, such as being formed during manufacturing of the lower layer arrangement and/or the panel, e.g., by (co-extrusion)”).
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) 29, 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Josefsson (US Pat. 11,725,398 B2).
Regarding claim 29, Josefsson discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the volume enclosed by at least one channel is at least 20% of the total volume enclosed by the core. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to designate the size of the channels to be 20% of the volume of the core for improved weight and material reduction, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 34, Josefsson discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the areal density of the core is less than 9000 g/m2. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to select a polymer having the designated density for adequate strength and optimally low weight, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claim(s) 38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Josefsson (US Pat. 11,725,398 B2) in view of Elsasser (US Pat. 5,826,382).
Regarding claim 38, Josefsson discloses the claimed invention except for as taught by Elsasser, wherein the upper side of the core and/or of the panel comprises a plurality of parallel, extruded grooves (Fig. 4, friction elements 35).
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 panel of Josefsson to include the extruded grooves of Elsasser to increase friction and prevent undue sliding.
Claim(s) 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Josefsson (US Pat. 11,725,398 B2) in view of Boucke (WO 2021/018918 A1).
Regarding claim 40, Josefsson discloses the claimed invention except for as taught by Boucke, wherein the panel comprises a second pair of a third panel edge comprising a third coupling profile, and a fourth panel edge comprising a fourth coupling profile (Pg. 2, lines 6-9: “a third panel edge comprising a third coupling profile, and a fourth panel edge comprising a fourth coupling profile being designed to engage interlockingly with said third coupling profile of an adjacent panel, both in horizontal direction and in vertical direction”), wherein the third coupling profile comprises an upward tongue, at least one upward flank lying at a distance from the upward tongue and an upward groove formed in between the upward tongue and the upward flank, wherein the upward groove is adapted to receive at least a part of a downward tongue of the second coupling profile of another panel, wherein the side of the upward tongue facing towards the upward flank is the inside of the upward tongue and the side of the upward tongue facing away from the upward flank is the outside of the upward tongue (Fig. 3c, profile 303 mates with an adjoining profile 304 of another panel);
wherein the fourth coupling profile comprises a downward tongue, at least one downward flank lying at a distance from the downward tongue, and a downward groove formed in between the downward tongue and the downward flank, wherein the downward groove is adapted to receive at least a part of the upward tongue of the first coupling profile of another panel, wherein the side of the downward tongue facing towards the downward flank is the inside of the downward tongue and the side of the downward tongue facing away from the downward flank is the outside of the downward tongue (See id).
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 panel of Josefsson to include the coupling profile configuration of Boucke to provide the locking system that prevents both horizontal and vertical movement.
Claim(s) 44-47 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boucke (WO 2021/018918 A1) in view of Breezer (US Pat. 5,635,129).
Regarding claim 44, Boucke discloses a method of producing a panel, comprising the steps of:
a. liquifying a polymer-based core composition; b. extruding said liquified polymer-based core composition to form a soft core sheet (Pg. 3, lines 6-11: “During the formation of the grooves, the core is still liquified, which should be understood as viscous or paste-like, wherein the grooves are formed by deformation of the (still liquified) core. As indicated above, the formation of the core grooves is preferably realized by an extruder, but may also be realized (directly) downstream the extruder, for example by means of shaping tools, such as a stamp, as long as the core is still sufficiently liquified and therefore deformable”);
c. forming said at least one channel in the core sheet, at a distance from a lower side and/or an upper side of the core sheet (Pg. 37, lines 13-15: “creating into the liquified core at least two vertically extending core grooves having a groove opening connected to the lower side and/or upper side of the core, such that the core grooves do not intersect any edge of the core”);
d. forming tongue and groove coupling profiles at the edges of the core sheet (Pg. 18, line 35 – pg. 19, line 3: “machining the panel edges, such that a first panel edge is provided with a first coupling profile, and a second panel edge is provided with a second coupling profile being designed to engage interlockingly with said first coupling profile of an adjacent panel, preferably both in horizontal direction and in vertical direction”);
e. allowing the core sheet provided with the at least one core channel to solidify (Pg. 18, line 32: “allowing the core to solidify”);
wherein the core comprises a centre portion and a peripheral portion enclosing said centre portion, wherein the panel edges and coupling profiles make part of said peripheral portion (Pg. 2, lines 29-32: “An important additional advantage of the decorative panel according to the invention is that the grooves are applied merely within a centre portion of (the lower side and/or upper side of) the core and not in the peripheral portion of (the lower side and/or upper side of) the core”), and wherein said peripheral portion is free of core channels (Pg. 23, line 34 – pg. 24, line 2: “This means that the core grooves 106 are provided in a center portion of the core 105, and that a peripheral (edge) portion of the core 106, being provided with the coupling profiles 101 , 102, 103, 104, is free of any core grooves 106”).
However, Boucke fails to disclose as taught by Breezer, providing complementary patterns in two soft core layers (Col. 2, lines 10-13: “The first step in the process for producing a reinforced article of this invention is to heat first and second sheets of thermoplastic material. The heated sheets are then formed in first and second molds”), defining a location, a length, and a width of at least one channel, covering the patterned side of a first of the two core layers with the patterned side of a second of the two core layers (Col. 6, lines 25-29: “pressing the heated second sheet in the second mold into contact with the heated first sheet in the first mold such that the two sheets are fused together at selected areas of contact and mate to form a hollow cavity at a selected reinforced location”).
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 method of forming a panel as disclosed by Boucke to mate two patterned soft core layers as taught by Breezer as doing so applies a known thermoplastic forming technique.
Regarding claim 45, Boucke in view of Breezer discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Boucke, wherein during step c) the extruded core is actively cooled down by means of cooling liquid or gas or surface (Pg. 38, lines 25-26 :”the extruded core is actively cooled down, preferably by means of cooling water”).
Regarding claim 46, Boucke in view of Breezer discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Boucke, wherein after step c) a decorative top structure is applied onto the upper side of the core sheet either directly or indirectly, as such a decorative plate is formed and at least one transparent wear layer covering said decorative side or a decor pattern is applied onto the upper side of the core sheet (Pg. 18, lines 33-34: “applying a decorative top structure, either directly or indirectly, onto the upper side of the core, such that a decorative panel or decorative plate is formed”).
Regarding claim 47, Boucke in view of Breezer discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Boucke, further comprising the step of: f. cutting the solid core sheet or decorated sheet into a plurality of panels (Pg. 20, lines 2-4: “Preferably, the method comprises step G), comprising sawing the decorative plate formed during step E) into decorative panels”).
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
