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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of group II, claims 40-43 in the reply filed on 08 July 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 23-39 and 44 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Objections
Claim 42 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 42 recites a list of possible layers for the second thermoplastic polymer layer without the word “and” or “or” before the last item in the list. Claim 42 should instead recite “a foamed and fibre-reinforced second thermoplastic polymer layer, or a thermoplastic polymer layer with a honeycomb structure.
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 40-43 are 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 40 recites the phrase “composition c) comprising a thermoplastic elastomer and a monomer or oligomer for crosslinking a), b) and c), obtainable by a process according to claim 23” in lines 6-7. It is unclear what exactly is being referred to as being obtainable by the process. It is unclear if the composition c) is obtainable by the process, the monomer or oligomer is obtainable by the process, or if the entire composite element is obtainable by the process. The instant specification does not provide further guidance. For purposes of examination, claim 40 is interpreted such that the composition c) is obtainable by the process. Example language of this interpretation is “composition c) comprising a thermoplastic elastomer and a monomer or oligomer for crosslinking a), b) and c), wherein the composition c) is obtainable by a process according to claim 23.” Further, to note, as claim 23 is now withdrawn, the limitations of claim 23 pertaining to the process of obtaining the composition c) should be included in claim 40 instead of a reference to claim 23.
Claims 41-43 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, since these claims depend from the claims rejected above and do not remedy the aforementioned deficiencies.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 40 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Richard et al. (GB 1384694 A).
Regarding claim 40, Richard teaches a composite element, the composite element comprising a first thermoplastic polymer layer (first skin layer) and a second thermoplastic polymer layer (second skin layer), wherein a boundary surface of the first thermoplastic polymer layer is chemically crosslinked with a boundary surface of the second thermoplastic polymer layer by means of a composition (partially reacted layer) (Richard, Page 1 Lines 1-20, Page 2 Lines 12-58, and Page 4 Lines 5-81). Richard teaches the composition comprises a thermoplastic elastomer with a functional group (polyurethane) and a monomer with at least two functional groups for crosslinking, wherein the functional groups are equal to each other (see e.g. polyfunctional vinyl monomers) (Richard, Page 1 Lines 11-41, Page 4 Line 66 – Page 5 Line 121, and Page 6 Lines 12-77). The composition reacts to chemically crosslink the first and second layers and therefore the functional groups of the monomer are selected for reactivity with the first and second layers (Richard, Page 1 Lines 1-20, Page 2 Lines 12-58, and Page 4 Lines 5-81). Regarding the limitation of the composite element having improved resistance to delamination, Richard teaches the composite element is a laminate and is readily handable and suitable for further shaping (Richard, Page 1 Line 49 – Page 2 Line 12) and therefore would inherently have at least some resistance to delamination, satisfying the claim limitation.
Claims 40 and 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mai et al. (US 20150037555 A1).
Regarding claim 40, Mai teaches a composite element (composite structure) comprising a first thermoplastic polymer layer (rigid layer – see, e.g., polyamide) and a second thermoplastic polymer layer (rigid layer – see, e.g., polyamide) (Mai, Par. 0011-0015, and 0051-0057). Mai teaches a boundary surface of the first thermoplastic layer is chemically crosslinked with a boundary surface of the second thermoplastic polymer layer, by means of a composition (adhesive film) (Mai, Abstract, Par. 0011-0015, 0022, 0036, and 0051-0057). Mai teaches the composition comprises a thermoplastic elastomer (polyurethane before crosslinking) and a monomer or oligomer (diisocyanate) comprising two functional groups which are the same (isocyanate groups) (Mai, Abstract, Par. 0005-0006, 0022-0031, and 0036). The composition reacts to chemically crosslink and adhere the first and second layers and therefore the functional groups of the monomer are selected for reactivity with the first and second layers (Mai, Abstract, Par. 0005-0006, 0022-0031, and 0036). Regarding the limitation of the composite element having improved resistance to delamination, Mai teaches the composition adheres the layers together and thus would inherently resist delamination to some extent, satisfying the limitation (Mai, Abstract and Par. 0051-0057).
Regarding claim 42, Mai teaches the second thermoplastic polymer layer is a fiber-reinforced second thermoplastic polymer layer (Mai, Par. 0052).
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.
The factual inquiries 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 nonobviousness.
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 41 and 43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mai et al. as applied to claim 40 above, in view of Mahdi et al. (US 20130255880 A1).
Regarding claim 41, Mai teaches all of the elements of the claimed invention as stated above for claim 1. Mai further teaches the first thermoplastic polymer layer can be fiber reinforced (Mai, Par. 0052). Mai further teaches the first thermoplastic polymer layer can include polyamide (Mai, Par. 0052).
Mai is silent regarding the fibers being selected from glass fibers, aramid fibers, carbon fibers, basalt fibers, polyethylene fibers, polyester fibers, polyamide fibers, ceramic fibers, steel fibers, vegetable fibers, or combinations thereof.
Mahdi teaches a composite element comprising a layer of polyurethane and a layer of polyamide, wherein the polyamide is reinforced with fibers such as glass fibers, carbon fibers, or ceramic fibers (Mahdi, Abstract, Par. 0002-0003, 0012-0015, 0050-0051, and 0055-0057).
Mai and Mahdi are analogous art as they both teach composite elements comprising a layer comprising polyurethane and a layer comprising fiber reinforced polyamide. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the first thermoplastic polymer layer of Mai to be a fiber-reinforced polyamide layer, wherein the fibers are glass, carbon, or ceramic fibers. This would allow for a reinforced material (Mahdi, Par. 0057).
Regarding claim 43, modified Mai teaches the fiber reinforced polymer layer is provided in the form of a fiber reinforced polyamide (Mai, Par. 0052; Mahdi, Par. 0057).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS J KESSLER JR whose telephone number is (571)272-3075. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5:30 M-Th.
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, Aaron Austin can be reached at 571-272-8935. 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.
/THOMAS J KESSLER/Examiner, Art Unit 1782