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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Buytaert et al. (U.S. 7,004,704).
Regarding claim 1, Buytaert et al. teaches a mounting element 2 for mounting a panel with fixation holes (capable of being used to mount a panel with fixation holes) onto an underlying support structure, the mounting element 2 comprises a spacer insert 2 for insertion into the fixation hole (capable of being received in a hole such as B) of the panel wherein the spacer insert 2 comprises a ring 8 around an open center passage 10 for guiding a screw or nail 15 along a central axis through the center passage 10 when fastening the panel against a support structure by the screw or nail 15, wherein the spacer insert 2 comprises at least three vanes 14 extending from the ring 8 outwards (figure 3) and each of the vanes 8 having an end face (radially outermost surface of 14) for abutting an inner rim of the corresponding fixation hole (B; figure 5), wherein the vanes 14 are resilient (“made of a flexible material”; col. 2 lines 44/47) for allowing lateral movement of the panel relatively to the fastened screw or nail 15 extending through the center passage 10 (depending on diameter of 15), wherein each of the vanes 14 is fastened only to the ring 8 and that the end face (radially outermost surface of 14) of each of the vanes 14 is freestanding, wherein the spacer insert 2 is configured for abutting the corresponding fixation hole (B) only with the end faces (radially outermost surface of 14) of the vanes 14.
Regarding claim 2, the spacer insert 2 is symmetrical relatively to a symmetry plane (transverse to central axis) that is perpendicular to the central axis through the center passage 10 and has two identical faces (upper face and lower face in orientation shown in figure 1) on opposite sides of the symmetry plane for one of the faces abutting the underlying material.
Regarding claim 3, the faces (upper and lower faces) are plane and parallel.
Regarding claim 5, the vanes 14 extend from the ring 8 outwards in radial directions (figure 3).
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buytaert et al. (U.S. 7,004,704) in view of Rollhauser et al. (U.S. 5,426,905).
Regarding claim 6, Buytaert et al. discloses the claimed invention except for the screw being a self-drilling screw. Rollhauser et al. teaches that it is known to use a screw being a self-drilling screw in a mounting element (see col. 4 lines 31-44). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the mounting element of Buytaert et al. with the screw being a self-drilling screw, as taught by Rollhauser et al., in order to penetrate the material without the use of a separate drill.
Additionally, Buytaert et al. does not disclose that the drill tip has a diameter that is 0.2-0.5 mm larger than a diameter of the center passage. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified mounting element of Buytaert et al. with the drill tip having a diameter that is 0.2-0.5 mm larger than a diameter of the center passage, in order to fit snugly within the spacer, and since 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).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buytaert et al. (U.S. 7,004,704).
Regarding claim 7, Buytaert et al. does not disclose dimensions of the spacer. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified mounting element of Buytaert et al. with the spacer having center passage with a diameter in the range of 1.6 - 6.8 mm, a circumscribed circle around the insert spacer having a diameter in the range of 6.0 -13 mm, a height of 3.0 - 9.0 mm and vanes having a length of 0.5 - 1.4 times the center passage diameter, in order to fit snugly within the an appropriately sized hole, and in order to fit an appropriately sized fastener, and since 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).
Further regarding claim 7, the insert spacer 2 is made of a resilient material with a hardness in the range of Shore A 50 – 100 (col. 5 lines 14-17).
Claims 8/1, 8/2, 8/3, 8/5 and 8/7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buytaert et al. (U.S. 7,004,704) in view of Atzwanger et al. (EP 1,876,314).
Regarding claim 8, Buytaert et al. discloses the spacer insert which is secured in a hole but does not disclose the method of fastening a panel. Atzwanger et al. teaches that it is known to use an insert spacer to fasten a panel (see figure 7). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the mounting element of Buytaert et al. so fasten a panel, as taught by Atzwanger et al., in order to secure a screw within an opening in a panel so the panel may be secured to a support, as taught by Atzwanger et al.
Further regarding claim 8 (as dependent on claims 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7), the modified method of Buytaert et al. teaches a method of fastening a panel (as modified by Atzwanger et al.) to an underlying support structure (26 of Atzwanger et al.), the method comprising providing the panel (20 of Atzwanger et al.) with multiple fixation holes (at 21 of Atzwanger et al.) and providing multiple mounting elements 2 as described above, each mounting element 2 comprising the spacer insert 2 and a screw 15, wherein the fixation holes (B of Buytaert et al.; 21 of Atzwanger et al.) of the panel (20 of Atzwanger et al.) have a diameter larger than a diameter of a stem of the screw (figure 4), wherein the method comprises inserting the spacer inserts (figure 7 of Atzwanger et al.) into a fixation hole (figure 7 of Atzwanger et al.) and fixing the panel (20 of Atzwanger et al.) to the support structure (26 of Atzwanger et al.) by the screw (25 of Atzwanger et al.) extending through the center passage 10 of the spacer insert 2, wherein the method further comprises by resilient deformation of the spacer insert compensating for movement of the panel relatively to the screw, as modified by Atzwanger et al.
Claim 8/6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buytaert et al. (U.S. 7,004,704) in view of Rollhauser et al. (U.S. 5,426,905), as applied to claim 6 above and further in view of Atzwanger et al. (EP 1,876,314).
Regarding claim 8/6, Buytaert et al. discloses the spacer insert which is secured in a hole but does not disclose the method of fastening a panel. Atzwanger et al. teaches that it is known to use an insert spacer to fasten a panel (see figure 7). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the mounting element of Buytaert et al. so fasten a panel, as taught by Atzwanger et al., in order to secure a screw within an opening in a panel so the panel may be secured to a support, as taught by Atzwanger et al.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 8/4 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art is cited for the vanes of the spacer.
THIS ACTION IS NON-FINAL.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NIKI MARINA ELOSHWAY whose telephone number is (571)272-4538. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 7: 00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m..
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, Orlando E. Avilés can be reached at 571-270-5531. 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.
/NIKI M ELOSHWAY/Examiner, Art Unit 3736
Prosecution Insights