DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-5 have been presented for examination.
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 .
Priority
Applicant's claim for the benefit of prior-filed application is acknowledged under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) to a 371 of PCT/CN/2022/087683, filed 19 April 2022. Examiner notes that the Applicants do not recite their claim priority in the specification. Appropriate corrections are required.
Drawings
The drawings received on 01 March 2023 are accepted.
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 1-5 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.
The term “normal temperature” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “normal temperature” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Paragraph [0056] of the specification discloses “(4) Perform a uniaxial tensile test of the GINA gasket 3 at an ambient temperature of 23°C and a tensile speed of 500 mm/min, that is, the GINA gasket 3 after seawater aging is taken out, cooled with liquid nitrogen, and prepared into a dumbbell-shaped test piece based on GB/T528-2009, the test piece is coated with a lubricant, and the tensile test is performed by using a universal testing machine at a normal temperature of 23°C at a speed of 500 mm/min; and determine a stress-strain relation curve of the GINA gasket.” The applicant mentions “a normal temperature of 23°C”, which is not a sufficient definition of “normal temperature”, but rather, the 23°C is defined as the normal temperature in the scope of that embodiment, not the term for the whole application.
The term “dumbbell-shaped” in claims 4 and 5 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “dumbbell shaped” is not sufficiently defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. While the claim provides a specified total length, thickness and initial test length, these dimensions only define the outer boundaries of the component and do not provide an objective measurement for the proportions or contours that constitute a “dumbbell” shape. Appropriate correction is required. All claims dependent upon a rejected base claim are rejected by virtue of their dependency.
Claim 2 contains the trademark/trade name Origin in section (6.4). Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe a nonlinear least square method based on the stress-strain relation curve of the full aging cycle to identify parameters of formula (6) and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 101 because the claimed invention is directed to judicial exception (i.e. abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1: Claims 1-2 are directed to a method, which is a process, which is a statutory category of invention. Therefore, claims 1-2 are directed to patent eligible categories of invention.
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 1 recites the abstract idea of constructing a time-varying constitutive model of seawater-aged GINA gasket for an immersed tube tunnel, constituting an abstract idea based on Mathematical Concepts including mathematical formulas or equations as well as calculations or alternatively Mental Processes based on concepts performed in the human mind, or with the aid of pencil and paper. The limitation “selecting GINA gasket test pieces” covers mental processes including determining gasket samples that will be used for testing. Additionally, the limitation “determining a contact stress σ of the aged GINA gasket and an initial contact stress σ0 of the GINA gasket based on the stress relaxation curves in step (1), and determining an aging coefficient k of the GINA gasket based on k=σ/σ0; and determining, based on P=σ–σ0, an aging performance change value P of rubber used for the GINA gasket” covers mathematical concepts including determining variable parameters, a contact stress and initial contact stress, for a mathematical equation and applying those variables to perform the mathematical equation. Alternatively, the limitation covers mental process including determining variable parameters through the use of equations that can be performed with the use of a pencil and paper. Additionally, the limitation “obtaining a curve of ln(P) changing with a time t at normal temperature based on a time-temperature superposition principle, to obtain an equation P=exp(f(t)), wherein f(t) is a function of the aging performance change value P changing with the time t; and determining P=(1-k)σ0 based on a correlation between the aging coefficient k of the GINA gasket and the aging performance change value P of the rubber used for the GINA gasket, that is, a normal temperature aging coefficient kNormal=l-exp(f(t))/σ0 of the GINA gasket is obtained” covers mathematical concepts including obtaining a mathematical output, the curve of ln(P), through performing a mathematical equation, determining variable parameters for a mathematical equation and applying those variables to perform the mathematical equation. Alternatively, the limitation covers mental process including obtaining the curve of ln(P) and determining variable parameters through performing mathematical equations that can be performed with the use of a pencil and paper. Additionally, the limitation “modifying the stress-strain relation curve in step (4) by using the normal temperature aging coefficient kNormal of the GINA gasket, to obtain a stress-strain relation curve of a full aging cycle” covers mathematical process including taking the stress-strain relation curve and applying a variable to produce an updated stress-strain relation curve. Alternatively, the limitation covers mental process including taking the stress-strain relation curve and applying a variable and updating the stress-strain relation curve, which can be performed with the use of a pencil and paper. Additionally, the limitation “constructing a constitutive model of stress relaxation and seawater aging of the GINA gasket with reference to a Mooney-Rivlin model based on the stress-strain relation curve of the full aging cycle in step (5): σ = 2(λ2- λ-1)(f(t) + g(t)λ-1), wherein t is an aging time; λ is an elongation ratio of the GINA gasket; f(t) is a function of C10 changing with the time t; g(t) is a function of C01 changing with the time t; and C10 and C01 are Rivlin coefficients of the Mooney-Rivlin model, with values determined by the stress-strain relation curve of the full aging cycle.” covers mathematical concepts including calculating parameters for a mathematical formula (the Mooney-Rivlin model) based on data points derived from a graphical output. Alternatively, this limitation covers mental process including calculating parameters for a mathematical formula based on data points derived from a graphical output, which can be performed with the use of a pencil and paper.
Dependent claim 2 further narrows the abstract ideas, identified in the independent claim.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The limitations of “performing an accelerated seawater aging test of each GINA gasket test piece at different temperatures under a designed compression amount, to obtain stress relaxation curves at different aging temperatures;” and “performing a uniaxial tensile test of the GINA gasket at an ambient temperature of 23 °C and a tensile speed of 500 mm/min, and determining a stress-strain relation curve of the GINA gasket” in claim 1 are mere instructions to implement an abstract idea using a computer in its ordinary capacity, or merely uses the computer as a tool to perform the identified abstract idea. See MPEP (2106.05(f)) Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a mental process) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. (MPEP 2106.05(f)(2). The limitations of “performing an accelerated seawater aging test of each GINA gasket test piece at different temperatures under a designed compression amount, to obtain stress relaxation curves at different aging temperatures;” and “performing a uniaxial tensile test of the GINA gasket at an ambient temperature of 23 °C and a tensile speed of 500 mm/min, and determining a stress-strain relation curve of the GINA gasket” in claim 1, alternatively can be viewed as is insignificant extra-solution activity, specifically pertaining to mere data gathering/output, necessary to perform the abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(g)) and is not sufficient to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. This is akin to selecting information, based on types of information and availability of information in material characterization and mechanical testing technological field, for collection, analysis, and display, which has been identified as extra solution activity. This is akin to selecting information, based on types of information and availability of information in material characterization and mechanical testing technological field, for collection, analysis, and display, which has been identified as extra solution activity. Therefore, the judicial exception is not integrated into practical application.
Step 2B: Claim 1 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The limitations of “performing an accelerated seawater aging test of each GINA gasket test piece at different temperatures under a designed compression amount, to obtain stress relaxation curves at different aging temperatures;” and “performing a uniaxial tensile test of the GINA gasket at an ambient temperature of 23 °C and a tensile speed of 500 mm/min, and determining a stress-strain relation curve of the GINA gasket” in claim 1 are mere instructions to implement an abstract idea using a computer in its ordinary capacity, or merely uses the computer as a tool to perform the identified abstract idea. See MPEP (2106.05(f)) Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a mental process) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. (MPEP 2106.05(f)(2). The limitations of “performing an accelerated seawater aging test of each GINA gasket test piece at different temperatures under a designed compression amount, to obtain stress relaxation curves at different aging temperatures;” and “performing a uniaxial tensile test of the GINA gasket at an ambient temperature of 23 °C and a tensile speed of 500 mm/min, and determining a stress-strain relation curve of the GINA gasket” in claim 1, alternatively can be viewed as is insignificant extra-solution activity, specifically pertaining to mere data gathering/output, necessary to perform the abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(g)) and is not sufficient to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. This is akin to selecting information, based on types of information and availability of information in material characterization and mechanical testing technological field, for collection, analysis, and display, which has been identified as extra solution activity. Therefore, the claim as a whole does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements, when considered alone or in combination, do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As stated in Section I.B. of the December 16, 2014 101 Examination Guidelines, “[t]o be patent-eligible, a claim that is directed to a judicial exception must include additional features to ensure that the claim describes a process or product that applies the exception in a meaningful way, such that it is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.”
The dependent claims include the same abstract ideas recited as recited in the independent claims, and merely incorporate additional details that narrow the abstract ideas and fail to add significantly more to the claims.
Dependent claim 2 is directed to further defining the construction of the time-varying constitutive model including determining a result from a test, using that result to determine and calculate parameters, and performing mathematical equations, which further narrows the abstract idea identified in the independent claim, which is directed to “Mental Processes” or alternatively “Mathematical Concepts.”
Accordingly, claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. an abstract idea) without anything significantly more.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-5 would be allowable pending resolving all intervening issues such as the 101 and 112 rejections above.
PNG
media_image1.png
754
630
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 1 recites:
The closest prior art of record includes:
CHEN Yuanpeng, WANG Zhiyuan, SUN Baojiang, CHEN Ye, ZHENG Kaibo. The Optimization of Rubber Sealing Materials for Key Equipment in Polar Drilling[J]. Petroleum Drilling Techniques, 2020, 48(1): 54-60. DOI: 10.11911/syztjs.2019111 which discloses the analysis of a rubber super-elastic constitutive model at low temperature and the optimization of rubber sealing materials for future polar drilling.
Hao Jin, Qingrong Tian, Zheng Li, Aging test and performance prediction of rubber in mortar medium, Journal of Cleaner Production, Volume 331, 2022, 129981, ISSN 0959-6526, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129981 which discloses the analysis of the performance of rubber based on accelerated aging tests of rubber conducted in a mortar medium.
Chengjie Li, Yuqiao Ding, Zheng Yang, Zun Yuan, Lin Ye, Compressive stress-thermo oxidative ageing behaviour and mechanism of EPDM rubber gaskets for sealing resilience assessment, Polymer Testing, Volume 84, 2020, 106366, ISSN 0142-9418, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2020.106366 which discloses the analysis of EPDM rubber gaskets subjected to compressive stress-thermo oxidative ageing at different temperatures and compressive stress levels
Yankai Liu, Qingsong Zhang, Rentai Liu, Mengjun Chen, Chunyu Zhang, Xiuhao Li, Weihao Li, Hongbo Wang, Compressive stress-hydrothermal aging behavior and constitutive model of shield tunnel EPDM rubber material, Construction and Building Materials, Volume 320, 2022, 126298, ISSN 0950-0618, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.126298 which discloses the impact the attenuation of the shield tunnel's waterproof performance caused from the damage and aging of the ethylene-propylene-diene monomer (EPDM) rubber material.
Sheng Li, Shuaicheng Guo, Yiming Yao, Zuquan Jin, Caijun Shi, Deju Zhu, The effects of aging in seawater and SWSSC and strain rate on the tensile performance of GFRP/BFRP composites: A critical review, Construction and Building Materials, Volume 282, 2021, 122534, ISSN 0950-0618, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.122534 which discloses the long term dynamic tensile properties of fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) composites in seawater and SWSSC environments.
Chenghua Shi, Chengyong Cao, Mingfeng Lei, Limin Peng, Jiajia Shen, Time-dependent performance and constitutive model of EPDM rubber gasket used for tunnel segment joints, Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Volume 50, 2015, Pages 490-498, ISSN 0886-7798, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2015.09.004 which discloses the use of a time-dependent constitutive model of an EPDM rubber gasket to analyze the time-dependent parameters of EPDM and determine the attenuation rule of its mechanical properties.
Zhao, G., Ma, Y., Li, Y. et al. Development of a modified Mooney-Rivlin constitutive model for rubber to investigate the effects of aging and marine corrosion on seismic isolated bearings. Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib. 16, 815–826 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-017-0417-6 which discloses the development of a modified Mooney-Rivlin constitutive model to predict the performance of rubber isolation bearings under aging and marine corrosion.
However, the closest prior art of record does not explicitly teach of render obvious the limitations above, particularly in combination with the other limitations within the claims. The dependent claims are allowable for at least the same reasons as their respective independent claims.
Conclusion
All Claims are rejected.
The prior art made record of and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
CHEN Yuanpeng, WANG Zhiyuan, SUN Baojiang, CHEN Ye, ZHENG Kaibo. The Optimization of Rubber Sealing Materials for Key Equipment in Polar Drilling[J]. Petroleum Drilling Techniques, 2020, 48(1): 54-60. DOI: 10.11911/syztjs.2019111
Hao Jin, Qingrong Tian, Zheng Li, Aging test and performance prediction of rubber in mortar medium, Journal of Cleaner Production, Volume 331, 2022, 129981, ISSN 0959-6526, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129981
Chengjie Li, Yuqiao Ding, Zheng Yang, Zun Yuan, Lin Ye, Compressive stress-thermo oxidative ageing behaviour and mechanism of EPDM rubber gaskets for sealing resilience assessment, Polymer Testing, Volume 84, 2020, 106366, ISSN 0142-9418, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2020.106366
Yankai Liu, Qingsong Zhang, Rentai Liu, Mengjun Chen, Chunyu Zhang, Xiuhao Li, Weihao Li, Hongbo Wang, Compressive stress-hydrothermal aging behavior and constitutive model of shield tunnel EPDM rubber material, Construction and Building Materials, Volume 320, 2022, 126298, ISSN 0950-0618, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.126298
Sheng Li, Shuaicheng Guo, Yiming Yao, Zuquan Jin, Caijun Shi, Deju Zhu, The effects of aging in seawater and SWSSC and strain rate on the tensile performance of GFRP/BFRP composites: A critical review, Construction and Building Materials, Volume 282, 2021, 122534, ISSN 0950-0618, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.122534
Chenghua Shi, Chengyong Cao, Mingfeng Lei, Limin Peng, Jiajia Shen, Time-dependent performance and constitutive model of EPDM rubber gasket used for tunnel segment joints, Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Volume 50, 2015, Pages 490-498, ISSN 0886-7798, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2015.09.004
Zhao, G., Ma, Y., Li, Y. et al. Development of a modified Mooney-Rivlin constitutive model for rubber to investigate the effects of aging and marine corrosion on seismic isolated bearings. Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib. 16, 815–826 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-017-0417-6
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Scott T. Tran whose telephone number is (571) 272-8533. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 8:00-4:00.
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://uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Renee Chavez, can be reached at (571) 270-1104. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300. Informal or draft communication, please label PROPOSED or DRAFT, can be additionally sent to the Examiner’s fax phone number (571) 272-8533.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published a 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
STT
/SCOTT THANH BINH TRAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2186
/RENEE D CHAVEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2186
Prosecution Insights