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 .
Specification
The following guidelines illustrate the preferred layout for the specification of a utility application. These guidelines are suggested for the applicant’s use.
Arrangement of the Specification
As provided in 37 CFR 1.77(b), the specification of a utility application should include the following sections in order. Each of the lettered items should appear in upper case, without underlining or bold type, as a section heading. If no text follows the section heading, the phrase “Not Applicable” should follow the section heading:
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT.
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM.
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION.
(1) Field of the Invention.
(2) Description of Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98.
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S).
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS (commencing on a separate sheet).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE (commencing on a separate sheet).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING. (See MPEP § 2422.03 and 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825). A “Sequence Listing” is required on paper if the application discloses a nucleotide or amino acid sequence as defined in 37 CFR 1.821(a) and if the required “Sequence Listing” is not submitted as an electronic document either on read-only optical disc or as a text file via the patent electronic system.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the disclosure is missing section headings, such as BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-8 are objected to because of the following informalities: in claim 1, line 3, “is” should be deleted for proper idiomatic language. Claims 2-8 are objected to as being dependent upon an objected 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.
Claims 4 and 10-14 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 4 recites “(step 34)”, “(step 36)” and “(step 32)” which is unclear. What are these steps? Are they positive limitations? The Examiner suggests deleting the recitations.
Claim 10 recites “from fiber material” which lacks antecedent basis clarity. Does the “fiber material” refer to the previously recited fiber material or to a new one? The Examiner suggest the following amendments: “from the fiber material”.
Claim 12 recites “a binder material” which lacks antecedent basis clarity. Does the “a binder material” refer to the previously recited binder material or to a new one? The Examiner suggest the following amendments: “[[a]] the binder material”.
Claims not listed above are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected claim.
For further examination purposes, the scope of the claims are read in light of the suggested Examiner amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312).
Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) teaches a method for producing a molded (shaped) body from a fiber material (abstract; figs. 1-10; [0018]-[0021], [0025], [0034], [0064], [0069], [0081], [0099], [0101], [0121]-[0136]), the method comprising:
providing a textile structure with a binder material produced from the fiber material using a textile technology (a supply device 2 for supplying(providing) a woven fabric [0025]; a woven fabric is a textile structure produced using a textile technology, namely weaving); a binder material is added to the textile structure [0081]);
shaping the textile structure (by forming device 13); and
fixing the shaped textile structure in a predetermined three-dimensional form by an activation of the binder material (by a curing device [0081], [0099]),
wherein the activation of the binder material is carried out iteratively ([0099], the binder is activated inside the forming device 13; as shown in fig. 1, the activation is carried out iteratively because the activation occurs at the forming device 13 before the next upstream section of the textile structure 1 is shaped/formed in the forming device 13);
(Claim 3) wherein the shaping of the textile structure and the activation of the binder material overlap in time ([0099], the binder is activated inside the forming device 13; and thus shaping and activation overlap in time); and
(Claim 6) wherein the textile structure is produced by means of a weaving technology ([0025], woven fabrics; woven fabrics are made by weaving).
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.
Claim(s) 2 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) in view of Provost et al. (US 2017/0175308).
Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) disclose the method substantially as claimed, as mentioned above, except for the limitations of claims 2 and 4.
Provost et al. (US 2017/0175308) discloses a method for producing a molded body from a fiber material, the method comprising providing/supplying a textile structure to a shaping means 13 for shaping the textile structure, the textile structure produced from the fiber material using a loom 11 (fig. 2; [0018], [0051], loom supplies woven preform (woven fabric)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify the supply device of Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) with a loom, as disclosed by Provost et al. (US 2017/0175308), because such a modification is known in the art and would enable the supply device to produce the supplied textile structure. As shown in fig. 1 of Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312), in view of such combination (where the supply device 2 is a loom),:
(Claim 2) the activation of the binder material (in the forming device 13, as mentioned above) would be carried out in-process during production of the textile structure in the loom (supply device 2); and
(Claim 4) the shaping of the textile structure (in the forming device 13) and the activation of the binder material (in the forming device 13, as mentioned above) would be carried out in synchronization with the production of the textile structure in the loom (supply device 2).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) in view of Siagam et al. (US 2015/0175308).
Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) disclose the method substantially as claimed, as mentioned above, except for the limitations of claim 5.
Siagam et al. (US 2015/0175308) a method for producing a molded body from a fiber material (abstract; [0009]-[0010], the method comprising shaping a textile structure ([0010], woven product (woven fabric)) by using an industrial robot (figs. 1-11 show an industrial robot; [0068]-[0078]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify the method of Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) by shaping the textile structure using an industrial robot, as disclosed by Siagam et al. (US 2015/0175308), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for shaping the textile structure known to be operable in the art.
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) in view of Buckley (US 2007/0241478).
Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) disclose the method substantially as claimed, as mentioned above, except for the limitations of claims 7-8.
Buckley (US 2007/0241478) discloses a method for producing a molded body from a fiber material ([0070], woven fabric), wherein activation of a binder material is accomplished by electromagnetic radiation or by electric current ([0006]-[0008], [0012], [0037]-[0040]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify the activation of the binder material of Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) to be accomplished by electromagnetic radiation or by electric current, as disclosed by Buckley (US 2007/0241478), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for activating the binder material known to be operable in the art.
Claim(s) 9-10, 12 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) in view of Provost et al. (US 2017/0175308).
Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) disclose a device for producing a molded body from a fiber material (abstract; figs. 1-10; [0018]-[0021], [0025], [0034], [0064], [0069], [0081], [0099], [0101], [0121]-[0136]), the device comprising:
an assembly unit for supplying a textile structure that is provided with a binder material from the fiber material (a supply device 2 for supplying a textile structure (a woven fabric [0025]); and an injection or impregnating device for providing a binder material to the textile structure [0081]); and
a fixing unit for geometrical fixing of the textile structure emerging from the assembly unit (forming device 13 and curing device).
However, Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) does not disclose the assembly unit producing the textile structure.
Provost et al. (US 2017/0175308) discloses a device for producing a molded body from a fiber material, the device comprising an assembly unit for producing a textile structure which is supplied to a shaping means 13 for shaping the textile structure, the assembly unit including a loom 11 for producing the textile structure produced from the fiber material (fig. 2; [0018], [0051], loom supplies woven preform (woven fabric)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify the assembly unit of Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) with a loom, as disclosed by Provost et al. (US 2017/0175308), because such a modification is known in the art and would enable the assembly unit to produce the textile structure to be supplied.
Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) further discloses the device:
(Claim 10) wherein the fixing unit includes a shaping unit 13 for spatial forming of the textile structure from fiber material (figs. 1-2); and
(Claim 12) wherein the fixing unit includes an activation unit (curing device) for activating a binder material contained in the textile structure [0081].
As to claim 15, Provost et al. (US 2017/0175308) further discloses the assembly unit including a weaving machine (loom 11).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) in view of Provost et al. (US 2017/0175308) as applied to claims 9-10, 12 and 15 above, and further in view of Siagam et al. (US 2015/0175308).
Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) and Provost et al. (US 2017/0175308) do not disclose the limitations of claim 11.
Siagam et al. (US 2015/0175308) a device for producing a molded body from a fiber material (abstract; [0009]-[0010], the device comprising a fixing unit for geometrical fixing of a textile structure produced from the fiber material ([0010], woven product (woven fabric)), the fixing unit including a shaping unit for spatial forming of the textile structure by using at least one industrial robot (figs. 1-11 show industrial robots; [0068]-[0078]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to further modify the shaping unit of Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) with at least one industrial robot, as disclosed by Siagam et al. (US 2015/0175308), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for the shaping unit known to be operable in the art for shaping a textile structure.
Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) in view of Provost et al. (US 2017/0175308) as applied to claims 9-10, 12 and 15 above, and further in view of Buckley (US 2007/0241478).
Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) and Provost et al. (US 2017/0175308) do not disclose the limitations of claims 13-14.
Buckley (US 2007/0241478) discloses a device for producing a molded body from a fiber material ([0070], woven fabric), wherein an activation unit for activating a binder material includes an electromagnetic radiation source or an electric current source ([0006]-[0008], [0012], [0037]-[0040]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to further modify the activation unit of Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) to include an electromagnetic radiation source or an electric current source, as disclosed by Buckley (US 2007/0241478), because such modifications are known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for activating the binder material known to be operable in the art.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) in view of Provost et al. (US 2017/0175308) as applied to claims 9-10, 12 and 15 above, and further in view of Moessinger (US 4,392,515).
Schulte et al. (US 2022/0234312) and Provost et al. (US 2017/0175308) do not disclose the limitations of claim 16.
Moessinger (US 4,392,515) discloses a weaving machine for producing a woven fabric, wherein the weaving machine is a single phase weaving machine (col. 2, lines 16-34, single phase weaving loom).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to further modify the weaving machine (loom) to be a single phase weaving machine (single phase weaving loom), as disclosed by Moessinger (US 4,392,515), because such a modification is known in the weaving machine art and would provide an alternative configuration for the weaving machine known to be operable in the art for producing a woven fabric.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH S LEYSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5061. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4:30pm.
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, Sam Xiao Zhao can be reached at 5712705343. 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.
/J.S.L/Examiner, Art Unit 1744
/XIAO S ZHAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights