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 .
Drawings
Color photographs and color drawings are not accepted in utility applications unless a petition filed under 37 CFR 1.84(a)(2) is granted. Any such petition must be accompanied by the appropriate fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(h), one set of color drawings or color photographs, as appropriate, if submitted via the USPTO patent electronic filing system or three sets of color drawings or color photographs, as appropriate, if not submitted via the via USPTO patent electronic filing system, and, unless already present, an amendment to include the following language as the first paragraph of the brief description of the drawings section of the specification:
The patent or application file contains at least one drawing executed in color. Copies of this patent or patent application publication with color drawing(s) will be provided by the Office upon request and payment of the necessary fee.
Color photographs will be accepted if the conditions for accepting color drawings and black and white photographs have been satisfied. See 37 CFR 1.84(b)(2).
The gray shaded photos/ CAD renderings do not provide adequate reproduction characteristics for clarity.
Applicant indicated that replacement drawings have been submitted. However, no replacement drawings were received.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/10/26 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-5 and 7-16 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.
Each of claims 1 and 10 recite “positioned and bonded, with sub-millimeter accuracy, to the tile frame unit within the interior space”. It is unclear what “sub-millimeter accuracy” structurally entails. This appears to be a product-by-process limitation directed to the means by which the tile is positioned and bonded to the tile frame unit (i.e. placing with a machine that provides sub-millimeter accuracy).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1, 7, 10 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang, US 7,487,622 in view of Pilz et al., US 5,867,965
Regarding claims 1 and 10:
Wang discloses an interlocking modular tile frame system comprising:
a tile frame unit (10) comprising four sides (11) and a plurality of mechanical connectors (16, 38) disposed on the four sides, the plurality of mechanical connectors positioned to enable end-to-end and side-to-side connection of the tile frame unit to adjacent tile frame unit at each of the four sides, wherein the four sides define an interior space;
a tile (22) positioned and bonded to the tile frame unit within the interior space; and
a column (25) factory-affixed to two of the four sides of the tile frame unit.
Wang suggests wherein the tiles are form-fitted with accuracy within the tile frame unit but Wang does not specify positioning and bonding with sub-millimeter accuracy.
Pilz discloses a tile setting machine that allows positioning and bonding of a tile with precise positioning (17th paragraph).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to position and bond the tiles of Wang with precision and accuracy as suggested by Pilz in order to provide a clean appearance to the set tiles.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the before the effective filing date of the invention, to contrive any number of desirable ranges for the accuracy/tolerance limitation disclosed by Applicant, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Further, 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). Refer to MPEP § 2144.05. There is no evidence that the claimed accuracy/tolerance of sub-millimeter accuracy provides a criticality that would not be achievable and expected with a reasonable amount of experimentation.
Regarding claims 7 and 15:
Wang discloses wherein the mechanical connectors comprise male connectors and female connectors on respective sides.
Claims 1-5, 8 and 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Della Pepa, US 2004/0139679 in view of Pilz et al., US 5,867,965
Regarding claims 1 and 10:
Della Pepa discloses an interlocking modular tile frame system comprising:
a tile frame unit (segments 1 in Fig. 1 and segments 21 in Fig. 9 are combined to form a unit) comprising four sides (28) and a plurality of mechanical connectors (25, 26) disposed on the four sides, the plurality of mechanical connectors positioned to enable end-to-end and side-to-side connection of the tile frame unit to adjacent tile frame unit at each of the four sides, wherein the four sides define an interior space;
a tile (2) factory-affixed (it may be installed in a factory) to the tile frame unit within the interior space; and
a column (33) factory-affixed to two of the four sides of the tile frame unit.
PNG
media_image1.png
975
964
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Above figure: Segments combinable to form a tile frame unit where a tile (x4) may be affixed to the tile frame unit within the interior space
Della Pepa suggests wherein the tiles are form-fitted with accuracy within the tile frame unit but Della Peppa does not specify positioning and bonding with sub-millimeter accuracy.
Pilz discloses a tile setting machine that allows positioning and bonding of a tile with precise positioning (17th paragraph).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to position and bond the tiles of Della Pepa with precision and accuracy as suggested by Pilz in order to provide a clean appearance to the set tiles.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the before the effective filing date of the invention, to contrive any number of desirable ranges for the accuracy/tolerance limitation disclosed by Applicant, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Further, 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). Refer to MPEP § 2144.05. There is no evidence that the claimed accuracy/tolerance of sub-millimeter accuracy provides a criticality that would not be achievable and expected with a reasonable amount of experimentation.
Regarding claims 2-3 and 11-12:
As shown in Figs. 1 and 9, unit/segment 1 and unit/segment 21 include two sides having a column/vertical wall that partially encloses each unit/segment. The units/segments may be combined as shown in Figs. 2a-2b and 12 into a single unit that holds a plurality of tiles within the interior space formed by the single unit. As such, the examiner finds that Della Pepa implicitly discloses wherein the tile frame unit comprises four segments that join together, each segment forming one side of the tile frame unit with adjacent segments that joint together, through mechanical connectors (25 and 26), to form the tile frame unit.
Regarding claims 4 and 13:
Della Pepa discloses wherein the column (8) comprises two pieces (each unit comprising a plurality of segments 1 and 21, when the segments are combined, the column is discontinuous on each respective side) each of which is factory-affixed to a side by snapping into a dedicated groove (7).
Regarding claims 5 and 14:
Della Pepa discloses wherein the two pieces are manufactured as grout replacement pieces from thermoplastic polyurethane (para. 0068 and 0074).
Regarding claims 8 and 16:
Della Pepa discloses at least two cross support bars configured to provide structural reinforcement (21a, refer to Figs. 9 and 13).
Regarding claim 9:
Della Peppa discloses a sound dampening pad (36 in Figs. 11 and 13 and 12 in Fig. 2b) positioned within a void on the underside of the tile frame unit.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 is allowable.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
It is noted that neither Della Pepa nor Wang explicitly address “sub-millimeter accuracy”. However, the tile frame unit of each provides a space for snug, accurate placement of a tile. Though not stated explicitly by Della Pepa or Wang, inaccuracy of this fit would result in a device not working as intended. As such, both the tile and the tile frame unit require meeting tolerances to insure the tile and the tile frame unit are neither too large or too small resulting in a loose tile or a tile too large for placement within the tile frame unit. Regardless, the prior art rejections herein introduce a secondary teaching of a tile placing machine that yields accuracy in tile placement.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRENT W HERRING whose telephone number is (571)270-3661. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30a-6:00p MT.
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.
/BRENT W HERRING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633