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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/09/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant amendment filed 03/09/2026 has been entered and is currently under consideration. Claims 1-6 remain pending in the application.
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(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsukamoto et al. (JP6719231 of record with reference made to examiner provided machine translation) hereinafter Tsukamoto in view of Kitada et al. (JP2011240364 of record with reference made to examiner provided machine translation) hereinafter Kitada, Ye et al. (US2003/0155333) hereinafter Ye, and Okada (US2015/0001195).
Regarding claim 6, Tsukamoto teaches:
A composite material processing method for applying processing to a composite material to manufacture an aircraft component, the composite material having fibers and a resin compounded therein ([0001-0002]), the composite material processing method comprising:
by an irradiation unit, irradiating a front face of the composite material with a laser beam (Fig 1: laser light source unit 1, CFRP 20);
by an ejection unit, ejecting a gas to an area at or near an irradiation point that is a point irradiated with the laser beam by the irradiation unit (Fig 1: gas nozzle 8a); and
the ejection unit is arranged on a front face side of the composite material about the irradiation point in a plan view of the composite material (Fig 1),
an angle between a direction in which the ejection unit ejects the gas and the front face of the composite material is greater than 0 degrees and less than 90 degrees (Fig 1).
Tsukamoto does not teach by a first ejection unit and a second ejection unit arranged above the first ejection unit, ejecting a gas to an area at or near an irradiation point that is a point irradiated with the laser beam by the irradiation unit; and
the first ejection unit and the second ejection unit are arranged in the same quadrant on a front face side of the composite material about the irradiation point in a plan view of the composite material,
a first angle between a direction in which the first ejection unit ejects the gas and the front face of the composite material differs from a second angle between a direction in which the second ejection unit ejects the gas and the front face of the composite material, and
the first angle and the second angle are greater than 0 degrees and less than 90 degrees.
In the same field of endeavor regarding laser processing, Kitada teaches:
by a first ejection unit and a second ejection unit arranged above the first ejection unit, ejecting a gas to an area at or near an irradiation point that is a point irradiated with the laser beam by the irradiation unit (Fig 6: annular gap 216, injection flow channel 217, arrow F1, arrow F2, laser oscillator 309; [0066]); and
the first ejection unit and the second ejection unit are arranged in the same quadrant on a front face side of the composite material about the irradiation point in a plan view of the composite material (Fig 6),
a first angle between a direction in which the first ejection unit ejects the gas and the front face of the composite material differs from a second angle between a direction in which the second ejection unit ejects the gas and the front face of the composite material (Fig 6), and
the first angle and the second angle are greater than 0 degrees and less than 90 degrees (Fig 6) for the motivation of supplying both dry air and cooling gas to the workpiece ([0066]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the ejection unit as taught by Tsukamoto with the ejection units as taught by Kitada in order to supply both dry air and cooling gas to the workpiece.
Tsukamoto in view of Kitada does not teach moving the irradiation point in a plate thickness direction of the composite material every time a predetermined number of times of scans with the laser beam are performed.
In the same field of endeavor regarding laser processing, Ye teaches moving an irradiation point in a plate thickness direction of a material every time a predetermined number of times of scans with a laser beam are performed for the motivation of refocusing the beam on the next layer ([0029]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method as taught by Tsukamoto in view of Kitada with the scanning and lowering of the irradiation point as taught by Ye in order to refocus the beam on the next layer.
Tsukamoto in view of Kitada and Ye does not teach moving an ejection target point of the gas in the first ejection unit and the second ejection unit to follow the moving irradiation point.
In the same field of endeavor regarding laser processing, Okada teaches using a nozzle position adjusting unit to move an ejection target point of a gas in an ejection unit to follow a moving irradiation point for the motivation of blowing a cutting gas to the site of the target object to be processed as the laser scans ([0009]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method as taught by Tsukamoto in view of Kitada and Ye with the nozzle position adjusting unit as taught by Okada in order to blow a cutting gas to the site of the target object to be processed as the laser scans.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 03/09/2026 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.
For at least the above reasons, the application is not in condition for allowance.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER A WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-5361. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8 am-4 pm EST.
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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached on 571-270-7001. 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.
/ALEXANDER A WANG/ Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/ALISON L HINDENLANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1741