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 .
Notice to Applicant
Claims 1-4 and 6-21 have been examined in this application. This communication is a final rejection in response to the “Amendments to the claims” and “Remarks” filed 7/10/2025.
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 1-4, 6-21 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being obvious over US Patent Number 8,973,871 to Marcoe in view of US Patent Application Number 2017/0298581 by Lewit.
Regarding claim 1, Marcoe discloses an apparatus, comprising:
One or more panels including
An outer face sheet (comprising outer facesheet 72 and dense pack 80) forming an outer exterior surface of the one or more panels (see annotated Figure 2B below), the outer face sheet comprising a plurality of first composite materials, the plurality of first composite materials comprising a first stack of plies (column 6, lines 36-63 disclose “each has a facesheet composite ply layup 76 substantially comprised of bias oriented plies 86…and 10% unidirectional plies 85 with unidirectional fibers oriented at zero degrees or about zero degrees”);
An inner face sheet (inner facesheet 74) forming an inner exterior surface of the one or more panels (see annotated Figure 2B below), the inner face sheet comprising a plurality of second composite materials (comprising 76 and 86), the plurality of second composite materials comprising a second stack of plies (Column 13, lines 18-23 disclose “As discussed in detail above and shown in FIG. 2B, in one embodiment, each facesheet 70 has a facesheet composite ply layup 76 substantially comprised of bias oriented plies 86, and preferably bias oriented plies 86 with fibers oriented at plus or minus forty-five degrees”, and Figure 2B shows the lines of plies 86 being oriented at this plus or minus forty-five degrees. Lines 32-38 goes on to state “Most preferably, the facesheet composite ply layup 76 may comprise…10% unidirectional plies 85 with unidirectional fibers oriented at zero degrees (0º) or about zero degrees (0º)”. The plies oriented at zero degrees would be parallel to the direction of the skin and therefore would comprise a stack of plies in the facesheet);
A plurality of foam pieces (core portion 66, column 6, lines 21-23 disclose “the core portion 66 may also comprise a foam core, a foam core with fiber reinforcement, a closed cell foam”) disposed between the outer face sheet and the inner face sheet (see Figure 2B);
An interface region comprising an outer face sheet interior surface in face sharing contact with an inner face sheet interior surface (Interface first regions in annotated Figure 2B below shows the outer face sheet interior surface being in face sharing contact with the inner face sheet interior surface), wherein the interface region is comprised of the plurality of first composite materials and the plurality of second composite materials (column 7, line 55 to column 8, line 9 disclose the composite materials for the integrated sandwich panels, which includes the facesheets and the dense packs), wherein the interface region extends between a side of a first piece of the foam pieces and a side of a second piece of the foam pieces (Figure 3D shows dense pack 80 extending from the right side of the left core portion 66 to the left side of right core portion 66), wherein, in the regions, the outer face sheet is in face sharing contact with the inner face sheet (interface first regions in annotated Figure 2B below), and wherein, in second regions, the foam pieces are positioned between and separate the outer face sheet form the inner face sheet (see interface second regions below);
Wherein the first stack of plies is thicker than the second stack of plies (annotated Figure 2B below shows the stack of plies forming the outer facesheet is thicker than the stack of plies forming the inner facesheet)
A plurality of recesses formed between the outer face sheet and the inner face sheet (the spaces for core portion 66 between spar caps 108 in Figures 2B and 3B comprise a plurality of recesses, and annotated Figure 2B shows the spaces for core portion 66 being formed between the third stack of plies), each of the recesses seating and locating one of the foam pieces (see Figures 2B and 3B), and the foam pieces reduce warping of the panels (this is a material property of the foam pieces).
PNG
media_image1.png
487
795
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Marcoe does not disclose each of the foam pieces comprising a base disposed adjacent the second stack of plies having a length L1 and a top disposed adjacent the first stack of plies, the top having a length L2 shorter than length L1. However, this limitation is taught by Lewit. Lewit discloses a composite structural panel 50 with foam inserts 400 with a base having a length L1 longer than a top having a length L2 (see Figure 4). Lewit suggests that “The cross-sectional shape of the composite preforms may be, in one embodiment, trapezoidal as shown and disclosed in the figures off the drawings but it is understood that it is within the scope of the invention that any other cross-sectional shapes such as square, rectangular, triangular, polygon, or any other cross-sectional shape may comprise composite preforms of the invention (paragraph 16). It would thus be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Marcoe using the teachings from Lewit to use a trapezoidal foam insert instead of a rectangular one as a substitution of known shapes of foam fillers for structural panels.
Regarding claim 2 (dependent on claim 6), Marcoe does not disclose the foam pieces having a first thickness T1, each of the one or more panels having a second thickness T2, the outer face sheet has a third thickness T3, the inner face sheet has a fourth thickness T4, and 5*T4 < T3 < 10*T4. However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the different portions and layers of the panel of whatever thickness was necessary to provide the desired material properties of the panel as a whole, 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 3 (dependent on claim 6), Marcoe does not disclose each of the foam pieces having a first thickness, a first length, a surface area, a shape, and a spacing tailored for a stiffness and structural efficiency of a wing on a supersonic aircraft or an aircraft capable of seating 150 passengers or less. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to optimize the shape and property of the materials to fit the intended use for the panel, 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).
Regarding claim 4 (dependent on claim 3), Marcoe discloses the plurality of first composite materials including a plurality of first plies having a first stacking sequence, the plurality of second composite materials including a plurality of second plies having a second stacking sequence (see the stacking sequences in Figure 2B), and the first stacking sequence and the second stacking sequence are tailored for the stiffness and the structural efficiency (since the materials as a whole contribute to the stiffness and structural efficiency of the panel, the stacking sequences as shown in Figure 2B are tailored for the resulting stiffness and the structural efficiency.
Regarding claim 6 (dependent on claim 1), Marcoe discloses each of the foam pieces further comprising a first sidewall and a second sidewall (see Figure 2B).
Lewit does not disclose the first sidewall and the second sidewall are inclined at a first angle with respect to the top in a range of 90-130 degrees, and the first sidewall and the second sidewall are inclined at a second angle with respect to the base in a range of 50-90. However, having disclosed the sidewalls being inclined with respect to the top of the foam 260 at an angle greater than 90 degrees and with respect to the base at an angle less than 90 degrees (see Figure 5), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the angle of the sidewalls of whatever angle was necessary to provide the desired material properties, 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).
Regarding claim 7 (dependent on claim 1), Marcoe discloses the inner face sheet is in physical contact with the outer face sheet in the first regions between the foam pieces (Figure 2B shows outer facesheet 72 and its underlying layers being in physical contact with inner facesheet 74 and its underlying layers), and the plurality of first composite materials, the plurality of second composite materials, or the plurality of first composite materials and the plurality of second composite materials have a higher stiffness in the first regions as compared to in the second regions above or below the foam pieces (column 8, lines 23-26 disclose “Each integrated sandwich panel 62 preferably has an increased panel stiffness ratio due to hard, axially stiff dense packs 80 being fully stabilized by the integrated sandwich panel 62 and the spar webs 112”).
Regarding claim 8 (dependent on claim 1), Marcoe discloses the inner face sheet, the outer face sheet, and the foam pieces are co-cured and the foam pieces comprise a material that does not degrade at a temperature of at least 350 degrees Fahrenheit. Column 7, 62-65 disclose “The raw materials may be made into components of the box structure 12 by laying them up and/or laminating them onto a tool surface, and then applying heat and pressure to cure the resin and harden the laminate”, and column 7, line 66 to column 8, line 6 list a variety of materials that do not degree at a temperature of at least 350 degrees Fahrenheit.
Regarding claim 9 (dependent on claim 1), Marcoe does not disclose the foam pieces having a density in a range of 3-15 pounds per cubic feet and a first thickness T1 in a range of 0.5” < T1 < 2.5”. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to choose a foam piece with the necessary density to form the desired properties of the panel, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. See also Ballas Liquidating Co. v. Allied industries of Kansas, Inc. (DC Kans) 205 USPQ 331. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the foam pieces of whatever thickness was necessary to provide the desired panel properties, 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.
Regarding claim 10 (dependent on claim 1), Marcoe discloses a wing box (wing box structure 12), the wing box including:
The panels comprising a first panel and a second panel (top and bottom panels 62 in Figures 3A-3E);
A first spar chord attached to the first panel;
A second spar chord attached to the second panel (114); and
A first spar connecting the first spar chord and the first spar chord (spar 40).
Regarding claim 11 (dependent on claim 1), Marcoe discloses a wing (wing structure 13) comprising the apparatus of claim 1, comprising:
The panels comprising a first panel and a second panel (top and bottom panels 62 in Figures 3A-3E);
A base skin including the first panel (top panel 62);
A wing box (wing box structure 12) including:
A forward spar section including:
A first spar chord attached to the first panel at a first position (top web attachment 114a),
A second spar chord attached to the second panel at a second position (bottom web attachment 114a), and
A first spar connecting the first spar chord and the second spar chord (spar 40a);
An aft spar section including:
A third spar chord attached to the first panel at a third position (top web attachment 114b);
A fourth spar chord attached to the second panel at a fourth position (bottom web attachment 114b); and
A second spar connecting the third spar chord and the fourth spar chord (spar 40b); and
Wherein
The first spar and the second spar each extend along a length of an interior of the wing between a root end of the wing and a tip end of the wing (see Figure 1B); and
The first spar and the second spar each intersect with a plurality of ribs directly attached to the base skin and the top skin (see ribs 54 in Figure 1B); and
Each of the ribs are located within the wing box at a plurality of different locations along the length of the wing (see Figure 1B).
Regarding claim 12 (dependent on claim 11), Marcoe discloses the inner face sheet is in physical contact with the outer face sheet in the first regions between the foam pieces (Figure 2B shows outer facesheet 72 and its underlying layers being in physical contact with inner facesheet 74 and its underlying layers).
Marcoe does not disclose in the first regions, the plurality of first composite materials including a higher number of first fiber tows having a first orientation comprising a zero direction along a direction of a length of the ribs, as compared to in the second regions, so as to provide higher stiffness in the first regions as compared to in the second regions above or below the foam pieces, and in the first regions, the plurality of second composite materials comprise a higher number of second fiber tows having a second orientation comprising the zero direction along the direction of the length of the ribs, as compared to in the second regions, so as to provide the higher stiffness. However, column 6, line 37 to column 7, line 3 discuss a variety of ply orientations, including zero degrees, to configure the facesheets provide the desired loadpaths. It would thus have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to choose the desired places to use fibers of different orientations in order to produce the desired loadpaths across the panel, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claims 13 (dependent on claim 11) and 14 (dependent on claim 11), Marcoe does not explicitly disclose a supersonic business jet or a regional aircraft comprising the wing of claim 11. However, having disclosed the use of the panel in an aircraft (see Figure 1A), it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Marcoe to use the panel on known types of aircraft such as supersonic business jets or regional aircrafts.
Regarding claim 15, Marcoe discloses a method of making one or more panels, comprising:
Laying one or more first composite materials comprising a first stack of plies comprising a plurality of first fiber tows (bias oriented plies 86) disposed in a first tape (composite ply layup 76) to form an outer face sheet (comprised of outer facesheets 72 and dense pack 80), wherein the outer face sheet forms an outer exterior surface of the one or more panels (see annotated Figure 2B above);
Laying a plurality of foam pieces on the first composite materials, wherein each foam piece comprises two sides (core portion 66, column 6, lines 20-23 disclose the core portions may comprise a foam core);
Laying one or more second composite materials on the foam pieces and on the first composite materials (the spaces for core portion 66 between spar caps 108 in Figures 2B and 3B comprise a plurality of recesses) to form an inner face sheet (inner facesheet 74), wherein the inner face sheet forms an inner exterior surface of the one or more panels (see annotated Figure 2B above), wherein the second composite materials include a second stack of plies comprising a plurality of second fiber tows (bias oriented plies 86 and unidirectional plies 85) disposed in a second tape (composite ply layup 76), wherein the laying of the one or more second composite materials forms an interface region (dense pack 80) comprising an outer face sheet interior surface in face sharing contact with an inner face sheet interior surface, wherein, in first regions, the outer face sheet is in face sharing contact with the inner face sheet (see interface first regions in Figure 2B above), and wherein, in second regions, the foam pieces are positioned between and separate the outer face sheet from the inner face sheet (see interface second regions in annotated Figure 2B above), wherein the interface region extends between a side of a first piece of the foam pieces and a side of a second piece of the foam pieces (Figure 3D shows dense pack 80 extending from the right side of the left core portion 66 to the left side of right core portion 66), wherein the laying of the one or more second composite materials forms a structure including the first or more first composite materials, the one or more second composite materials, and the foam pieces (see Figure 2B), wherein the first tape and the second tape are pre-impregnated with a resin prior to the laying or comprise preforms with the resin infused after the laying (column 7, lines 59-62 disclose “the fibers may be formed into tapes, filaments, and/or fabric sheets that may be pre-impregnated with uncured resin”), thereby forming a panel having the inner face sheet (74), the outer face sheet comprising a plurality of recesses having the foam pieces therein (outer facesheet 72, see annotated Figure 2B above), wherein the first stack of plies is thicker than the second stack of plies (see annotated Figure 2B above); and
Curing the structure combined with the resin at a pressure and temperature (column 7, lines 64-65 disclose “applying heat and pressure to cure the resin and harden the laminate”), so as to form the structure into the one or more panels having an aerodynamic surface (wing structure 13), wherein the foam pieces prevent or reduce warping, buckling or collapse of the structure and the aerodynamic surface under pressure (this is a material property of the foam pieces).
Marcoe does not disclose each of the foam pieces comprising a base disposed adjacent the second stack of plies having a length L1 and a top disposed adjacent the first stack of plies, the top having a length L2 shorter than length L1. However, this limitation is taught by Lewit. Lewit discloses a composite structural panel 50 with foam inserts 400 with a base having a length L1 longer than a top having a length L2 (see Figure 4). Lewit suggests that “The cross-sectional shape of the composite preforms may be, in one embodiment, trapezoidal as shown and disclosed in the figures off the drawings but it is understood that it is within the scope of the invention that any other cross-sectional shapes such as square, rectangular, triangular, polygon, or any other cross-sectional shape may comprise composite preforms of the invention (paragraph 16). It would thus be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Marcoe using the teachings from Lewit to use a trapezoidal foam insert instead of a rectangular one as a substitution of known shapes of foam fillers for structural panels.
Marcoe does not disclose curing the structure in an autoclave. However, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to use an autoclave as a well-known type of machine for curing composites. Furthermore, Marcoe does not explicitly disclose curing at a temperature of at least 300 degrees Fahrenheit. However, having disclosed applying heat and pressure to cure the resin and harden the laminate, it have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use whatever temperature was necessary to ensure that the composites are cured, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claim 16 (dependent on claim 15), Marcoe discloses the one or more first composite materials, the one or more second composite materials, and the foam pieces are co-bonded and co-cured. Column 7, 62-65 disclose “The raw materials may be made into components of the box structure 12 by laying them up and/or laminating them onto a tool surface, and then applying heat and pressure to cure the resin and harden the laminate”.
Regarding claim 17 (dependent on claim 15), Marcoe does not explicitly disclose locally controlling a stiffness of the one or more panels by varying a first orientation of the first fiber tows in the first tape and a second orientation of the second fiber tows in the second tape across a length of the one or more panels, so as to form the first regions having a higher stiffness than the second regions, wherein the first regions are between the second regions. However, column 6, line 37 to column 7, line 3 discuss a variety of ply orientations, including zero degrees, to configure the facesheets provide the desired loadpaths. It would thus have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to choose the desired places to use fibers of different orientations in order to produce the desired loadpaths across the panel, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claim 18 (dependent on claim 17), Marcoe does not explicitly disclose the first regions having a length between the foam pieces tailored to prevent breakage of the one or more panels and allow flexure of the one or more panels in a wing on an aircraft. However, the examiner takes official notice that designing materials to prevent breakage and allow for known movements such as flex in a wing are notoriously well-known in the art, and that it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Marcoe to tailor the foam pieces to prevent breakage and allow flexure of the panel in order to avoid component failure in normal flight operations of the aircraft.
Regarding claim 19 (dependent on claim 18), Marcoe does not disclose locally tailoring the stiffness taking into account an amount of the foam pieces in the one or more panels, wherein the amount of the foam pieces is tailored to obtain a predetermined weight of the wing. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to optimize the stiffness and amount of foam pieces to achieve the stiffness and weight desired for the aircraft, 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).
Regarding claim 20 (dependent on claim 15), Marcoe discloses forming a wing (wing structure 13) comprising the panels comprising a first panel and a second panel (top and bottom panels 62 in Figures 3A-3E), including:
Forming a base skin including the first panel (bottom panel 62);
Forming a top skin including the second panel (top panel 62);
Forming a wing box (wing box structure 12) including:
A forward spar section including:
A first spar chord attached to the first panel at a first position (top web attachment 114a),
A second spar chord attached to the second panel at a second position (bottom web attachment 114a), and
A first spar connecting the first spar chord and the second spar chord (spar 40a);
An aft spar section including:
A third spar chord attached to the first panel at a third position (top web attachment 114b);
A fourth spar chord attached to the second panel at a fourth position (bottom web attachment 114b); and
A second spar connecting the third spar chord and the fourth spar chord (spar 40b); and
Wherein
The first spar and the second spar each extend along a length of an interior of the wing between a root end of the wing and a tip end of the wing (see Figure 1B); and
Disposing a plurality of fibs (ribs 54) wherein the first spar and the second spar each intersect with the plurality of ribs directly attached to the base skin and the top skin and wherein each of the ribs are located within the wing box at a plurality of different locations along the length of the wing (see Figure 1B).
Regarding claim 21, Marcoe discloses a panel, formed by:
Laying one or more first composite materials comprising a plurality of first fiber tows (bias oriented plies 86) disposed in a first tape (composite ply layup 76) to form an outer face sheet (comprised of outer facesheets 72and dense pack 80), wherein the outer face sheet forms an outer exterior surface of the one or more panels (see annotated Figure 2B above);
Laying a plurality of foam pieces on the first composite materials, wherein each foam piece comprises two sides (core portion 66, column 6, lines 20-23 disclose the core portions may comprise a foam core);
Laying one or more second composite materials on the foam pieces and on the first composite materials (the spaces for core portion 66 between spar caps 108 in Figures 2B and 3B comprise a plurality of recesses) to form an inner face sheet (inner facesheet 74), wherein the inner face sheet forms an inner exterior surface of the one or more panels (see annotated Figure 2B above), wherein the second composite materials include a second stack of plies comprising a plurality of second fiber tows (bias oriented plies 86 and unidirectional plies 85) disposed in a second tape (composite ply layup 76), wherein the laying of the one or more second composite materials forms an interface region comprising an outer face sheet interior surface in face sharing contact with an inner face sheet interior surface, wherein, in first regions, the outer face sheet is in face sharing contact with the inner face sheet (see interface first regions in annotated Figure 2B above), and wherein, in second regions, the foam pieces are positioned between and separate the outer face sheet from the inner face sheet (see interface second regions in annotated Figure 2B above), wherein the interface region extends between a side of a first piece of the foam pieces and a side of a second piece of the foam pieces (Figure 3D shows dense pack 80 extending from the right side of the left core portion 66 to the left side of right core portion 66), wherein the laying of the one or more second composite materials forms a structure including the first or more first composite materials, the one or more second composite materials, and the foam pieces (see Figure 2B), wherein the first tape and the second tape are pre-impregnated with a resin prior to the laying or comprise preforms with the resin infused after the laying (column 7, lines 59-62 disclose “the fibers may be formed into tapes, filaments, and/or fabric sheets that may be pre-impregnated with uncured resin”), thereby forming a panel having the inner face sheet (74), the outer face sheet comprising a plurality of recesses having the foam pieces therein (outer facesheet 72, see annotated Figure 2B above), wherein the first stack of plies is thicker than the second stack of plies (see annotated Figure 2B above); and
Curing the structure combined with the resin at a pressure and temperature (column 7, lines 64-65 disclose “applying heat and pressure to cure the resin and harden the laminate”), so as to form the structure into the panel having an aerodynamic surface (wing structure 13), wherein the foam pieces prevent or reduce warping, buckling or collapse of the structure and the aerodynamic surface under pressure (this is a material property of the foam pieces).
Marcoe does not disclose each of the foam pieces comprising a base disposed adjacent the second stack of plies having a length L1 and a top disposed adjacent the first stack of plies, the top having a length L2 shorter than length L1. However, this limitation is taught by Lewit. Lewit discloses a composite structural panel 50 with foam inserts 400 with a base having a length L1 longer than a top having a length L2 (see Figure 4). Lewit suggests that “The cross-sectional shape of the composite preforms may be, in one embodiment, trapezoidal as shown and disclosed in the figures off the drawings but it is understood that it is within the scope of the invention that any other cross-sectional shapes such as square, rectangular, triangular, polygon, or any other cross-sectional shape may comprise composite preforms of the invention (paragraph 16). It would thus be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Marcoe using the teachings from Lewit to use a trapezoidal foam insert instead of a rectangular one as a substitution of known shapes of foam fillers for structural panels.
Marcoe does not disclose curing the structure in an autoclave. However, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to use an autoclave as a well-known type of machine for curing composites. Furthermore, Marcoe does not explicitly disclose curing at a temperature of at least 300 degrees Fahrenheit. However, having disclosed applying heat and pressure to cure the resin and harden the laminate, it have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use whatever temperature was necessary to ensure that the composites are cured, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/10/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the argument that the two facesheet composite ply layups of 76 are completely separated by the dense packs 80 and core portions 66, applicant’s own invention comprises a plurality of plies that have been stacked and cured together, as shown in Figure 2E, separated by a first stack 258 and a second stack 264. Column 7, lines 17-19 of Marcoe disclose “each integrated sandwich panel 62 further comprises dense packs 80 adjacent to the one or more core portions 66 and joined to, preferably by bonding, and integrated with the facesheets 70”. The panel of Marcoe therefore similarly comprises a plurality of plies that have been stacked and cured together, as shown in Figure 2B, and outer facesheet 72 and dense pack 80 together reads on the claimed outer face sheet, as shown in annotated Figure 2B above. Furthermore, regarding the argument that the two face sheets 76 are comprised of different materials and are different structures from dense pack 80, because the two facesheet composite ply layups 76 are comprised of bias oriented plies 86 and dense pack 80 is comprised of dense pack composite play layup 82, column 6, lines 36-63 disclose a variety of ply compositions which incorporate both bias oriented plies and unidirectional fibers oriented at zero degrees. Furthermore, Figure 2B clearly shows that bias oriented plies 86 are also incorporated into dense pack 80, and column 7, lines 20-44 disclose a variety of ply compositions for composite ply layup 82 that comprises both bias oriented plies and unidirectional fibers oriented at zero degrees. The examiner also never claimed that core portions 66 are made of the same materials as the face sheets or the core portions, as the core portions are comprised of foam.
Regarding the argument that Marcoe does not disclose second composite materials in face sharing contact with the inner face sheet comprised of first composite materials, as discussed above since the dense pack 80 is considered to be part of the face sheet as claimed, the outer face sheet is in contact with the inner face sheet in the interface first regions in annotated Figure 2B above. Second, since the outer face sheet, dense pack, and inner face sheet are all disclosed to be made up of a variety of different materials (different types of plies, different types of composite materials, resin, etc), the contact in the interface first regions comprises contact between contact between the outer face sheet comprised of first composite materials (among many) and the inner face sheet comprised of second composite materials. Furthermore, as discussed in the previous office action, nowhere in the applicant’s claim or specification does it disclose that the first composite materials and the second composite materials have to be different materials. Furthermore, even if the claim did specify that the materials are different, and the specification supported such a claim limitation, applicant’s specification merely lists a variety of example materials on page 9 of the specification, with no details as to which materials are used for which face sheet or how they the different materials are chosen. Marcoe similarly lists a variety of example materials in column 7, line 55 to column 8, line 9, many of which overlap with the applicant’s disclosed materials. Since no further details are given as to which materials are used or how they are chosen, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
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 MICHAEL H WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-6554. The examiner can normally be reached 10-6:30.
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, Josh Michener can be reached on 571-272-1467. 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.
MICHAEL H. WANG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3642
/MICHAEL H WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642