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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on September 26th, 2025, has been entered.
Response to Amendment
In view of the amendment, filed on September 26th, 2025, the following are withdrawn from the previous office action, mailed on May 28th, 2025.
Rejections of claims 1-4, 6-16, 19, 21 and 22 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) are withdrawn in light of the amendments
Rejections of claims 3, 21 and 22 under 35 U.S.C. 103 are withdrawn in light of the amendments
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed September 26th, 2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues none of the cited references disclose a “rigid polyurethane foam”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Burks discloses the polyurethane-forming composition expands into a foam ([0035]) and is cured ([0044]). It is well-known that curing a polyurethane foam hardens the polyurethane foam and gives it rigidity as evidenced by SafelySeal – What is the Curing Time of Polyurethane Foam (NPL 1; Pg. 1, 1st ¶). As such, Burks discloses the claimed limitation.
Applicant argues none of the cited references disclose or teach a panel construction having a thickness in between 1 mm and 30 mm. Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See MPEP 2145 (IV). The rejection of claim 1 is based on a combination of Burks and Wirtz, wherein Wirtz teaches a process for compression molding a polyurethane-forming mixture and reinforcing fiber mat ([0035-0036]) to form sheet of a thickness of 9.8 mm ([0003, 0052]; compression molded sheet has a thickness of 9.8 mm) was known in the art prior to the time of invention.
Applicant argues none of the cited references disclose or teach a pre-impregnated blank comprising no other layer than a fiber mat layer on which a polyurethane film is formed. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Burks discloses in specification paragraphs [0043-0045] forming an impregnated blank by spraying a polyurethane composition onto a reinforcing fiber mat. In this disclosed embodiment, there is no other layer other than the impregnated reinforced fiber mat. While specification paragraphs [0049, 0053] discuss optional layers that may be applied, these layer are ultimately optional and therefore are not required by the formed impregnated reinforcing fiber mat.
Applicant argues none of the cited references disclose or teach an atomized polyurethane resin composition. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Burks discloses in specification paragraphs [0045, 0055] that the polyurethane-forming composition may be sprayed onto the reinforcing fiber mat using commercially available mixing and spraying equipment. Specification paragraph [0043] of the publication of the instant application states the following, “said polyurethane film is prepared from the polyurethane resin composition which is sprayed onto the fiber mat layer. In the present context, the term “polyurethane film” refers to the atomized polyurethane resin composition which, when sprayed onto the fiber mat layer, binds itself to the fiber mat layer and has no thickness of its own. That is, to say, that the polyurethane film does not exists as a separate layer onto the fiber mat layer. Also, the term “atomized” herein refers to the particles or droplets of the polyurethane resin composition obtained from suitable spraying means, such as but not limited to a nozzle or an atomizer”. By applicant’s own admission, the atomized polyurethane resin composition is referring to spraying the polyurethane resin composition. As such, Burks discloses the claimed limitation. Furthermore, as evidenced by Foster (US 2955058 A), spraying systems atomizing polyurethane-forming compositions was well-known in the art prior to the time of invention.
Applicant argues none of the cited references disclose or teach a polyurethane film having no thickness of its own. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Burks discloses in specification paragraphs [0045, 0055] that the polyurethane-forming composition may be sprayed onto the reinforcing fiber mat using commercially available mixing and spraying equipment. Specification paragraph [0043] of the publication of the instant application states the following, “said polyurethane film is prepared from the polyurethane resin composition which is sprayed onto the fiber mat layer. In the present context, the term “polyurethane film” refers to the atomized polyurethane resin composition which, when sprayed onto the fiber mat layer, binds itself to the fiber mat layer and has no thickness of its own. That is, to say, that the polyurethane film does not exists as a separate layer onto the fiber mat layer. Also, the term “atomized” herein refers to the particles or droplets of the polyurethane resin composition obtained from suitable spraying means, such as but not limited to a nozzle or an atomizer”. By applicant’s own admission, the polyurethane film having no thickness of its own is referring to a polyurethane resin composition sprayed onto a fiber mat layer. As such, Burks discloses the claimed limitation.
Applicant argues none of the cited references disclose or teach the polyurethane film does not exist as a separate layer onto a fiber mat layer. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Burks discloses in specification paragraphs [0045, 0055] that the polyurethane-forming composition may be sprayed onto the reinforcing fiber mat using commercially available mixing and spraying equipment. Specification paragraph [0043] of the publication of the instant application states the following, “said polyurethane film is prepared from the polyurethane resin composition which is sprayed onto the fiber mat layer. In the present context, the term “polyurethane film” refers to the atomized polyurethane resin composition which, when sprayed onto the fiber mat layer, binds itself to the fiber mat layer and has no thickness of its own. That is, to say, that the polyurethane film does not exists as a separate layer onto the fiber mat layer. Also, the term “atomized” herein refers to the particles or droplets of the polyurethane resin composition obtained from suitable spraying means, such as but not limited to a nozzle or an atomizer”. By applicant’s own admission, the polyurethane film not existing as a separate layer onto the fiber mat layer is referring to a polyurethane resin composition sprayed onto a fiber mat layer. As such, Burks discloses the claimed limitation.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims necessitate updating the grounds of rejection provided below.
Updated Grounds of Rejection
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1:
Line 20, “a polyurethane film” should say “the polyurethane film”
Line 22, “exists as a separate” should say “exist as a separate”
Should all be corrected for claim language consistency.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The limitations of claim 1, lines 19-23, are interpreted according to specification paragraph [0043] of the publication of the instant application provided below.
“[0043] In another embodiment, the said polyurethane film is prepared from the polyurethane resin composition which is sprayed onto the fiber mat layer. In the present context, the term “polyurethane film” refers to the atomized polyurethane resin composition which, when sprayed onto the fiber mat layer, binds itself to the fiber mat layer and has no thickness of its own. That is, to say, that the polyurethane film does not exists as a separate layer onto the fiber mat layer. Also, the term “atomized” herein refers to the particles or droplets of the polyurethane resin composition obtained from suitable spraying means, such as but not limited to a nozzle or an atomizer.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-2, 4, 6-11, 13-16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burks (US 20120285612 A1), in view of Wirtz et al. (US 20050280173 A1; hereafter Wirtz) and evidenced by Foster (US 2955058 A).
Regarding claim 1, Burks discloses a process for preparing a panel construction, said process comprising steps of:
(S1) spraying a polyurethane resin composition ([0043]; polyurethane-forming composition) onto at least one fiber mat layer ([0045]; spraying polyurethane-forming composition onto mat of reinforcing fibers), wherein said polyurethane resin composition is obtained by reacting:
(a) an isocyanate ([0021]; polyisocyanate), and
(b) a compound reactive towards isocyanate ([0022-0023]; isocyanate-reactive compound), in the presence of an active catalyst ([0021]; catalyst mixture may include an active catalyst as shown in the examples provided in paragraphs [0018-0020] and [0072]);
wherein (a) and (b) are present at an isocyanate index in between 100 to 150 ([0033]; polyisocyanate and isocyanate-reactive components are reacted at an isocyanate index of 100 to 125), and
wherein said polyurethane resin composition forms a polyurethane film on the at least one fiber mat layer ([0045]; sprayed polyurethane-forming composition applied onto mat of reinforcing fibers);
and resulting in a pre-impregnated blank ([0043]; forming impregnated mat), and
(S2) compression molding the pre-impregnated blank ([0059]; the impregnated mat is molded with pressure in between a lower forming tool and an upper forming tool resulting a molded fiber-reinforced polyurethane mat) and resulting in the panel construction,
wherein the polyurethane resin composition is a rigid polyurethane foam ([0035, 0044]; polyurethane foam is cured, resulting in the polyurethane hardening and becoming rigid),
wherein the pre-impregnated blank comprises no other layer than the at least one fiber mat layer on which a polyurethane film is formed ([0043-0045]; forming an impregnated blank by spraying a polyurethane composition onto a reinforcing fiber mat, wherein there is no other layer other than the impregnated reinforced fiber mat),
wherein the polyurethane resin composition is atomized ([0045, 0055]; the polyurethane-forming composition may be sprayed onto the reinforcing fiber mat using commercially available mixing and spraying equipment, wherein as evidenced by Foster (US 2955058 A) spraying systems atomizing polyurethane-forming compositions was well-known in the art),
and wherein the polyurethane film has no thickness of its own ([0045, 0055]; the polyurethane-forming composition may be sprayed onto the reinforcing fiber mat using commercially available mixing and spraying equipment and impregnates and necessarily binds to the fiber mat layer), and does not exist as a separate layer onto the fiber mat layer ([0045, 0055]; the polyurethane-forming composition may be sprayed onto the reinforcing fiber mat using commercially available mixing and spraying equipment and impregnates and necessarily binds to the fiber mat layer).
Burks does not explicitly disclose the fiber mat layer has an area weight in between 300 g/m2 to 1500 g/m2 and the panel construction has a thickness in between 1 mm and 30 mm.
However, Wirtz discloses a process for compression molding a polyurethane-forming mixture and reinforcing fiber mat ([0035-0036]) to form sheet of a thickness of 9.8 mm ([0003, 0052]; compression molded sheet has a thickness of 9.8 mm), wherein the reinforcing fiber mat has an area weight in between 300 g/m2 to 1500 g/m2 ([0052, 0058]; chopped glass fibers in an area weight of 450 g/m2).
Burks and Wirtz are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the field of composite molding with polyurethane foam. Therefore, it would have been obvious to the person in the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Burks with the teachings of Wirtz to provide the fiber mat layer has an area weight in between 300 g/m2 to 1500 g/m2 and the panel construction has a thickness in between 1 mm and 30 mm. The combination would result in the compression molding of panels with a greater variety of thicknesses as desired and a greater density of reinforcements and therefore increase the strength of the molded panels.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to change the size of the compression mold used to make the panel in order to make a panel of the desired dimensions as such a modification would involve only a mere change in size of a component. Scaling up or down of an element which merely requires a change in size is generally considered as being within the ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04 (IV). Doing so would result in the compression molding of panels with a greater variety of thicknesses as desired.
Regarding claim 2, modified Burks discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein Burks further discloses the panel construction is a single-layer system ([0045]; impregnated, reinforced mat comprising mat of reinforcing fibers and applied polyurethane) comprising the at least one fiber mat layer and the polyurethane film.
Regarding claim 4, modified Burks discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein Burks further discloses the process is a spray transfer molding process ([0055, 0059]; process of spraying polyurethane-forming composition onto mat of reinforced fibers and molding with pressure in between a lower forming tool and an upper forming tool).
Regarding claim 6, modified Burks discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein Burks further discloses the fiber mat layer is made of glass fibers ([0067]; fibers are fiberglass).
Regarding claim 7, modified Burks discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein Burks further discloses the isocyanate index is in between 100 to 120 ([0033]; isocyanate index of 100 to 125; In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists, see MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding claim 8, modified Burks discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein Burks further discloses the isocyanate is aromatic isocyanate ([0031]; aromatic polyisocyanate).
Regarding claim 9, modified Burks discloses the process according to claim 8, wherein Burks further discloses the aromatic isocyanate comprises methylene diphenyl diisocyanate ([0031]; diphenylmethanediisocyanate (MDI)) and/or polymeric methylene diphenyl diisocyanate ([0031]; polymeric MDI).
Regarding claim 10, modified Burks discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein Burks further discloses the compound reactive towards isocyanate is a polyol ([0026]; polyol) having an average functionality in between 2.0 to 8.0 ([0029]; functionality of 3.8 to 5.0) and hydroxyl number in between 15 mg KOH/g to 1800 mg KOH/g ([0029]; hydroxyl equivalent weight of from 100 to 170).
Regarding claim 11, modified Burks discloses the process according to claim 10, wherein Burks further discloses the polyol is a polyether polyol ([0023]; polyether polyol).
Regarding claim 13, modified Burks discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein Burks further discloses the polyurethane resin composition further comprises catalysts ([0021]; catalyst mixture), additives ([0036]; colorants), and fillers ([0036]; filler).
Regarding claim 14, modified Burks discloses the process according to claim 13, wherein Burks further discloses the additives are selected from the group consisting of pigments ([0038]; pigment), dyes ([0038]; azo/diazo dyes), surfactants ([0035]; surfactant), flame retardants ([0036]; flame retardants), hindered amine light stabilizers ([0039]; hindered amine UV stabilizer), stabilizers ([0036]; UV stabilizer), blowing agents ([0032-0033]; blowing agent), anti-static agents ([0036]; antistatic agents) and a combination thereof ([0036]; polyurethane-forming composition may include various auxiliary components…).
Regarding claim 15, modified Burks discloses the process according to claim 1, wherein Burks further discloses the panel construction does not contain any adhesive between the at least one fiber mat layer and the polyurethane film ([0050-0053]; adhesive film is optional, therefore not required).
Regarding claim 16, the process according to claim 1 modified Burks provides a panel construction (Burks [0059, 0065]; compression molded fiber-reinforced polyurethane mat).
Regarding claim 19, modified Burks discloses an automotive part comprising the panel construction (Burks [0059, 0065]; compression molded fiber-reinforced polyurethane mat is vehicle headliner) according to claim 16.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burks (US 20120285612 A1), in view of Wirtz et al. (US 20050280173 A1; hereafter Wirtz) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Hayes et al. (US 20080087373 A1; hereafter Hayes).
Regarding claim 12, modified Burks discloses the process according to claim 1.
Modified Burks does not disclose the polyurethane resin composition further comprises a chain extender and/or cross linker having a molecular weight between 49 g/mol to 399 g/mol.
However, Hayes teaches a polyurethane formulation for composite molding ([0013]; polyurethane formulation for fiber reinforce composite pultrusion) comprising a chain extender ([0018, 0021-0022]; chain extenders) and/or cross linker ([0018, 0021-0022]; crosslinkers) having a molecular weight between 49 g/mol to 399 g/mol ([0021]; chain extenders and/or crosslinkers have molecular weights from 60 to less than 250).
Burks and Hayes are all considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the field of composite molding. Therefore, it would have been obvious to the person in the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify modified Burks with the teachings of Hayes to provide the polyurethane resin composition further comprises a chain extender and/or cross linker having a molecular weight between 49 g/mol to 399 g/mol. Doing so would allow the molded articles to have a smoother surface, which prevents defects from arising on the surface (Hayes [0026]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Vipul Malik whose telephone number is (571)272-0976. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Susan Leong can be reached on (571)270-1487. 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.
/V.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1754
/SUSAN D LEONG/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1754