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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 3/9/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 3/9/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The arguments are drawn to the amendments to claim 1, and will be discussed in the 35 U.S.C. 103 Rejections section.
The previous claim objection is withdrawn, as it has been corrected by amendment.
The amendments to claims 1, 4 & 23 are acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 & 4 are objected to because of the following informalities: grammatical and typographical error.
In claim 1, line 11, it is suggested to amend to “the embedded nonwoven veil; and”.
In claim 4, line 3, “the nonwoven carbon veil” lacks antecedent basis; however, the lines 1-2 element that was removed by amendment would have provided sufficient antecedent basis for “the nonwoven carbon veil”. This strikethrough appears to have occurred in error.
For the sake of compact prosecution, claim 3 will be examined with the amended element from lines 1-2 being restored to the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 5 is 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.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "a fibrous laminate" in lines 5-6. It is unclear if this is the same fibrous laminate as in claim 1, or a different fibrous laminate. Claim 5 further recites "the fibrous laminate" in line 6 of claim 5. It is unclear which of the previously recited fibrous laminates are being referenced.
For the sake of compact prosecution, "a fibrous laminate" in claim 5 will be examined as being the same fibrous laminate cited in claim 1.
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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3-6, 10, 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blackburn (US20150375461A1), in view of Mortimer (US20180361682A1) and Jones (US20180043637A1). Claim elements are presented in italics.
1. A method for forming a partially impregnated prepreg tape for use in an automated placement process, said method comprising: bonding a nonwoven veil to a layer of unidirectional fiber tows to form a fibrous laminate;
With respect to claim 1, the prior art of Blackburn teaches a method for forming a partially impregnated prepreg tape (Fig. 2) for use in an automated placement process [0009], said method comprising: bonding a nonwoven veil (Fig. 2) to a layer of unidirectional fiber tows (Fig. 2) to form a fibrous laminate [0011, 0022];
bringing a layer of curable resin containing polymeric particles into contact with the fibrous laminate such that the resin is in direct contact with the nonwoven veil; pressing the layer of curable resin into the fibrous laminate while applying heat and pressure so that the nonwoven veil is embedded in the layer of curable resin and the unidirectional fiber tows are partly surrounded by the curable resin, thereby forming a partially impregnated prepreg having a continuous resin surface only on one side; wherein the polymeric particles in the curable resin are filtered out by the nonwoven veil after pressinq and are located only on one side of the embedded nonwoven veil;
Blackburn teaches bringing a curable resin binders into contact with portions of the fibrous laminate such that the resin is in direct contact with the nonwoven veil (Fig. 2, first and second binder sections penetrating and connecting veil and fibers; [0032, 0049-0051]); pressing the dispersed binding resin into the fibrous laminate while applying heat and pressure so that the nonwoven veil is partially embedded in the dispersion of curable resin binders and the unidirectional fiber tows are partly surrounded by the curable resin, thereby forming a partially impregnated prepreg (Fig. 2; [0009]).
Blackburn is silent on applying the curable resin to the fibrous laminate as a layer, and pressing the layer of curable resin into the fibrous laminate while applying heat and pressure so that the nonwoven veil is embedded in the layer of curable resin; forming a having a continuous resin surface only on one side.
However, the similar prior art of Mortimer teaches applying a layer of curable resin to the fibrous laminate comprising a thermoplastic veil (Fig. 1, item 24) and unidirectional fibers (Fig. 1, item 22; [0034, 0077]), and pressing the layer of curable resin into the fibrous laminate while applying heat and pressure so that the nonwoven veil is embedded in the layer of curable resin; forming a partially impregnated prepreg having a continuous resin surface only on one side [0077-0079].
It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to use the known technique of applying a layer of curable resin to the fibrous laminate and pressing while applying heat and pressure, taught by Mortimer, to improve the similar method of making binder-impregnated stacked fiber layers, taught by Blackburn, in the same way; resulting in a partially impregnated prepreg suitable for auto-tape laying [0023] having a continuous resin layer surface only on one side.
One of ordinary skill in the art would prima facie obviously find this advantageous in many applications because the applied tape of Blackburn, in view of Mortimer, would stay in place after application without the need for additional resin/adhesive.
Blackburn, in view of Mortimer, is silent on bringing a layer of curable resin containing polymeric particles into contact with the fibrous laminate wherein the polymeric particles in the curable resin are filtered out by the nonwoven veil after pressing and are located only on one side of the embedded nonwoven veil.
However, the prior art of Jones teaches a vacuum resin transfer method [0066] for a surface resin comprising filler particles which can be polymeric [0055], wherein a portion resin is drawn into one or more unidirectional fiber layers [0056] while a portion of particles are filtered from entering into the fiber layer [0066, 0071]. Jones teaches the filler particles can be selected to advantageously impart further strength, toughness, and stiffness [0055].
It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to apply the known technique of adding particles to the resin, wherein will particles can be filtered out of the resin when the resin is partially impregnated into unidirectional fibers, taught by Jones, to improve the method of Blackburn, in view of Mortimer, by concentrating the particles via filtration at the interface of the fiber layer to improve overall strength, toughness, and/or stiffness of the manufactured article.
slitting the partially impregnated prepreg into narrow-width, continuous prepreg tapes.
Blackburn teaches slitting the partially impregnated prepreg into narrow-width, continuous prepreg tapes [0022-0023].
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the nonwoven veil is comprised of randomly oriented carbon fibers or thermoplastic fibers.
With respect to claim 3, Blackburn teaches the nonwoven veil is comprised of randomly oriented carbon fibers or thermoplastic fibers that may be randomly oriented [0014].
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the nonwoven veil is comprised of randomly oriented carbon fibers, and wherein the nonwoven carbon veil is bonded to the layer of unidirectional fiber tows by: (i) applying a first binder to at least one of the nonwoven veil and the layer of unidirectional fiber tows, and (ii) bonding the nonwoven veil to the layer of unidirectional fiber tows to form a fibrous laminate.
With respect to claim 4, Blackburn teaches the nonwoven veil is comprised of randomly oriented carbon fibers [0021], and wherein the nonwoven veil is bonded to the layer of unidirectional fiber tows by: (i) applying a first binder to at least one of the nonwoven veil and the layer of unidirectional fiber tows, and (ii) bonding the nonwoven veil to the layer of unidirectional fiber tows to form a fibrous laminate [0021].
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the nonwoven veil is comprised of randomly oriented carbon fibers, and wherein the nonwoven veil is bonded to the layer of unidirectional fiber tows by: (i) applying a first binder to at least one of the nonwoven veil and the layer of unidirectional fiber tows, (ii) bonding the nonwoven veil to the layer of unidirectional fiber tows to form the fibrous laminate, (iii) applying a second binder in liquid form to the fibrous laminate, and (iv) drying the binder-treated fibrous laminate.
With respect to claim 5, Blackburn teaches the nonwoven veil is comprised of randomly oriented carbon fibers [0022], and wherein the nonwoven veil is bonded to the layer of unidirectional fiber tows by: (i) applying a first binder to at least one of the nonwoven veil and the layer of unidirectional fiber tows, (ii) bonding the nonwoven veil to the layer of unidirectional fiber tows to form the fibrous laminate, (iii) applying a second binder in liquid form to the fibrous laminate, and (iv) drying the binder-treated fibrous laminate [0022].
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the nonwoven veils are comprised of randomly oriented thermoplastic fibers, and the fibrous laminate is formed by applying heat and pressure to the nonwoven veils so that the veils adhere to the layer of unidirectional fiber tows.
With respect to claim 6, Blackburn teaches the non-woven veils are comprised of randomly oriented thermoplastic fibers, and the fibrous laminate is formed by applying heat and pressure to the nonwoven veils so that the veils adhere to the layer of unidirectional fiber tows [0009, 0021]. This provides an advantage of over laying dry fiber materials [0007, 0009].
10. The method according to claim 1, wherein the fiber tows are comprised of continuous carbon fibers.
With respect to claim 10, Blackburn teaches the unidirectional tows [0009] can be carbon fiber [0098].
Blackburn is silent on the length of the unidirectional tows of fibers.
However, Blackburn teaches the tows are spread to form high-strength unidirectional fibers which are later slit to form tapes wound onto spools [0023].
From these teachings, it would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to try continuous fibers, as they would optimally have the highest strength at the same fiber loading, and continuous fibers would be desired when supplied in tows and during spreading of fibers to minimize defects.
21. The method according to claim 1, wherein each of the narrow-width, continuous prepreg tapes has a length that is at least 10 times its width.
With respect to claim 21, Blackburn teaches each of the narrow-width, continuous prepreg tapes has a length that is at least 10 times its width [0020].
22. The method according to claim 1, wherein the layer of curable resin comprises one or more epoxy resin(s) and a curing agent.
With respect to claim 22, Mortimer teaches the layer of curable resin comprises one or more epoxy resin(s) and a curing agent [0104, 0106].
23. The method according to claim 1, wherein the polymeric particles are thermoplastic or elastomeric particles.
With respect to claim 23, Jones teaches the surface layer polymeric filler particles can be thermoplastic particles [0055].
24. The method according to claim 1, wherein the unidirectional fiber tows are unidirectional carbon fiber tows.
With respect to claim 24, Blackburn teaches the unidirectional fiber tows are unidirectional carbon fiber tows [0021].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY C GROSSO whose telephone number is (571)270-1363. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 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, Abbas Rashid can be reached on 571-270-7457. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
GREGORY C. GROSSO
Examiner
Art Unit 1748
/GREGORY C. GROSSO/Examiner, Art Unit 1748
/Abbas Rashid/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1748