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 I -- claims 1-8 and 11-15 in the reply filed on August 2, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 9-10 and 16-20 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 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 6 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 6 recites the limitation "the surface" in the last paragraph. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, because there is uncertainty as to which antecedent is meant – whether the antecedent basis is “a surface of a side along the upper sheet of fabric” or “a surface of a side along the lower sheet of fabric” as recited in claim 6 2nd paragraph. Claim 7 is rejected through dependency on claim 6
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the second direction" in the last paragraph. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the second direction" in the last paragraph. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the second direction" in the last paragraph. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the second direction" in the last paragraph. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the second direction" in the last paragraph. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For the purposes of compact prosecution, the examiner interprets the term “the surface” as referring to both the upper surface and the lower surface. Additionally, the examiner interprets the term “the second direction” in the above claims to have an antecedent basis as recited in claim 6: “gluing points of the local gluing are distributed at intervals along a second direction” and “wherein the first direction and the second direction are two directions perpendicular to each other along the surface.”
Claim 8 recites “a plurality of the annular regions” in the first line of the last paragraph. It is unclear if this recitation refers to the same plurality of annular regions from claim 2 or a different plurality from claim 8.
Claim 11 recites “a plurality of the annular regions” in the first line of the last paragraph. It is unclear if this recitation refers to the same plurality of annular regions from claim 2 or a different plurality from claim 11.
Claim 12 recites “a plurality of the annular regions” in the first line of the last paragraph. It is unclear if this recitation refers to the same plurality of annular regions from claim 2 or a different plurality from claim 12.
Claim 13 recites “a plurality of the annular regions” in the first line of the last paragraph. It is unclear if this recitation refers to the same plurality of annular regions from claim 2 or a different plurality from claim 13.
Claim 14 recites “a plurality of the annular regions” in the first line of the last paragraph. It is unclear if this recitation refers to the same plurality of annular regions from claim 2 or a different plurality from claim 14.
Claim 15 recites “a plurality of the annular regions” in the first line of the last paragraph. It is unclear if this recitation refers to the same plurality of annular regions from claim 2 or a different plurality from claim 15.
For the purposes of compact prosecution, the examiner will consider that the antecedent recited phrase from claim 2: “so as top form a plurality of annular regions” is the antecedent basis for the above claims.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-8 and 11-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Candrian-Bell (US 2018/0119320 A1) in view of Fisher (US 3,829,353).
Regarding Claim 1, Candrian-Bell discloses a rib-manufacturing process (Fig. 1 paragraph [0028] lengthwise ridges – 130) comprising steps of:
weaving according to a preset size to form an annular region and an enclosed region (Fig. 1 abs, paragraphs [0026] [0028] weaving techniques to form completely-enclosed pockets that can be inflated, lengthwise pockets – 130. See figures below for preset size), wherein the enclosed region is formed as weaving points on both sides of the annular region (Fig. 1 paragraph [0027] warp threads – 110 and weft threads – 120 in a simple pattern to form the selvage – an edge that resists fraying or unraveling) Compare Fig. 1 Candrian-Bell to Fig. 1 – instant invention below:
PNG
media_image1.png
902
1074
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
714
1146
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However, Candrian-Bell does not disclose a process step of forming a gluing region along both sides of a surface of the annular region nor a process step of cutting at the enclosed region after the gluing is complete to form a closed-loop rib.
Fisher teaches a method of making an inflatable assembly (abs Col.1: ll. 10-23) with structural members with two-ply fabric where one ply is connected to the other play at spaced interwoven connections (Fig. 3 Col. 2 ll. 57-58 primary ply – 23 and secondary ply – 27) with a gluing region formed along both sides of a surface of the annular region (Fig. 2 Col. 2 ll. 36-44 upper structural sheet member – 13 overlapping a lower structural sheet member – 14) and performing a local gluing on both sides of the surface of the annular region respectively (Fig. 3 Col. 2 ll. 57-60 outer surfaces – 32 and 33 of the primary ply – 23 and secondary ply – 27 , respectively, are coated with a layer of sealing material – 34) ; and
cutting at the enclosed region after the gluing is completed, so as to form a closed-loop rib (Figs. 3, 4, Col. 2, ll. 65-72 Col. 3 ll. 3-11 to provide the bulkhead member – 37, the secondary ply- 27 is cut in the longitudinal direction at a position shown by dot-dash line A – A to provide narrow flap – 38 with secondary ply – 27 which is severed on the other side of the connection – 28 forming a wide flap – 39 which forming; narrow flap – 38 and wide flap – 39 are folded together and a suitable adhesive applied to sealing layer – 34 along abutting surface – 40 of narrow and wide flap to be adhered together to form a high strength interwoven joint).
.
PNG
media_image3.png
907
1497
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
752
474
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the disclosure of Candrian-Bell with the teachings of Fisher whereby a rib manufacturing process comprising a step of weaving according to a preset size forming an annular region and an enclosed region with weaving points on both sides of the annular region, as disclosed by Candrian-Bell, would also include a gluing region formed along both sides of the annular region surface with local gluing on both side of this surface of the annular region with cutting at the enclosed region after the gluing is completed, as taught by Fisher, thus forming a closed-loop rib.
One with ordinary skill in the art would utilize this configuration because it provides a strong bond therebetween the connections as shown above, and forms reinforced structural bulkheads (ribs) for an inflatable assembly (Col. 4 ll. 15-17 in claim 1).
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Candrian-Bell and Fisher disclose all the limitations of claim 1 and Candrian-Bell further discloses that the step of weaving according to the preset size to form the annular region and the enclosed region further comprises:
obtaining a plurality of weaving points by weaving, according to a size of the closed-loop rib, correspondingly along a first direction, so as to form a plurality of annular regions and enclosed regions arranged at intervals in sequence (See Fig. 1 above paragraph [0028] pockets – 130 are formed and at points between these locations, half of the warp and half of the weft threads are woven together to form the upper surface and the other half of the warp and weft threads are woven together to form the lower surface).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Candrian-Bell and Fisher disclose all the limitations of claim 2 and Candrian-Bell further discloses that the interval widths of a plurality of the enclosed regions along the first direction are the same (Fig. 1 where the interval widths of a plurality of enclosed regions appear the same and paragraph [0031] pockets of arbitrary shape and orientation can be formed by changing the weaving pattern along both directions where it would be obvious to include a same interval width alternative – choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success MPEP § 2143 I. E).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Candrian-Bell and Fisher disclose all the limitations of claim 3 and Candrian-Bell further discloses that each of the annular regions comprises an upper sheet of fabric and a lower sheet of fabric, two ends of the upper sheet of fabric along the first direction and two ends of the lower sheet of fabric along the first direction are taken as weaving points, so as to extend the weaving and form the enclosed regions (Fig. 1 paragraph [0028] two separate layers of fabric with selective weaving together subsets of warp and weft threads at the selvage and pinched portions of the fabric all warp and weft threads are woven together – 140, 150); and
it would be obvious from Fig. 1 of Candrian-Bell (see Fig. 1 above) that a sum of breadth sizes of the upper sheet of fabric and the lower sheet of fabric of the annular region of Candrian-Bell is equal to a cross-sectional perimeter of the closed-loop rib, as formed by the combination of Candrian-Bell and Fisher after the cutting step.
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Candrian-Bell and Fisher disclose all the limitations of claim 4 and Candrian-Bell further discloses that the step of obtaining a plurality of the weaving points by weaving correspondingly along the first direction further comprises:
obtaining weaving points with different distances by weaving, based on a plurality of size requirements of the closed-loop rib, correspondingly along the first direction, such that widths of a plurality of the annular regions along the first direction are different (Fig. 5 paragraph [0031] pockets of arbitrary shape and orientation can be formed by changing the weaving pattern along both directions. See banana-shaped pocket – 510)
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Candrian-Bell and Fisher disclose all the limitations of claim 4 and Fisher further discloses that the step of performing the local gluing on both sides of the surface of the annular region respectively further comprises:
performing a local gluing on a surface of a side along the upper sheet of fabric away from the lower sheet of fabric and a surface of a side along the lower sheet of fabric away from the upper sheet of fabric simultaneously (Fig. 2 Col. 3 ll. 12-17 where bulkhead member – 37 are formed by adhering the ends of the side flaps – 39 of overlapping sheet members 13, 14, 15, and 16 at splices – 42 are adhered together with a suitable adhesive, which is inherently a simultaneous process)
wherein gluing points of the local gluing are distributed at intervals along a second direction, and gluing points on the upper sheet of fabric and the lower sheet of fabric are arranged symmetrically (Figs 2, 5 Col. 4 ll. 17-43 ll. 48-67 where chambers are formed as multitubular assemblies or as a symmetrical arrangement with upper and lower structural sheet members with coated nylon fabric where the second direction are indicated by the cut narrow flaps – 38 and wide flaps – 39 adhering together to from the structural sheet members at the critical joint at the splice – 42 )
wherein the first direction and the second direction are two directions perpendicular to each other along the surface (Figs 3, 4, 5 where the Figs 3 and 4 indicate the first direction is across the figures indicating the weaving joints, Fig. 3 (Col. 2 ll. 46-56 warp cords – 18, 19 weft cords – 26 spaced – apart positions extending transversely of the fabric – 17) while the second direction is perpendicular and into the figures as the adhesive joint splice (Figs 2, 5 Col.3 ll.51-54 structural sheet members adhered together ).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Candrian-Bell and Fisher disclose all the limitations of claim 6 and Fisher further discloses that the local gluing comprises local point gluing or local flow casting (Col. 3 ll. 51-54 with critical joint at the splice – 42 between the wide flaps – 39).
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Candrian-Bell and Fisher disclose all the limitations of claim 6 and Fisher further discloses that the step of cutting at the enclosed region further comprises:
cutting, along the second direction of claim 6, a plurality of the annular regions formed by cutting, so as to form the closed-loop rib with a corresponding size (Figs. 4, 5 Col. 4 ll. 48-56 two-ply fabric – 17 is cut to form narrow flaps – 38 and wide flaps – 39 that adhere together to form the structural sheet members - 13, 14, 15 and 16 which are then adhered together with one critical joint at the splice – 42 between side flaps – 39 to form bulkhead member – 37).
But neither Candrian-Bell or Fisher disclose an additional cutting along the first direction, of a plurality of the enclosed regions in sequence after the gluing is completed, so as to form a plurality of the annular regions.
However, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to have made a cutting transversely along the first direction such that a plurality of the enclosed region in sequence after the gluing is complete to form a plurality of the annular regions because this would be a known technique to a known method ready for improvement to yield predictable results (MPEP § 2143 I. D.) This is because the cutting along a first direction would be necessitated to form the final product being manufactured for its intended use such as an escape slide (Fig. 1 Col. 2 ll. 29-45 which has an upper end and a lower end). Therefore, the slide would need to be sized to fit the application/intended use, and this would necessitate a transverse cutting across the plurality of the angular regions as indicated in the figures and would define the length of the slide (Fig. 1).
Regarding Claims 8, 11, 12, 13 and 15 [Note: see 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) rejections above with interpretation by the examiner], the combination of Candrian-Bell and Fisher disclose all the limitations of claims 2, 3, 4, 5 and 7, respectively, and Fisher further discloses that the step of cutting at the enclosed region further comprises:
cutting, along the second direction, a plurality of the annular regions formed by cutting, so as to form the closed-loop rib with a corresponding size (Figs. 4, 5 Col. 4 ll. 48-56 two-ply fabric – 17 is cut to form narrow flaps – 38 and wide flaps – 39 that adhere together to from the structural sheet members - 13, 14, 15 and 16 which are then adhered together with one critical joint at the splice – 42 between side flaps – 39 to form bulkhead members – 37).
But neither Candrian-Bell or Fisher disclose an additional cutting along the first direction, a plurality of the enclosed regions in sequence after the gluing is completed, so as to form a plurality of the annular regions.
However, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to have made a cutting transversely along the first direction such that a plurality of the enclosed region in sequence after the gluing is complete to form a plurality of the annular regions because this would be a known technique to a known method ready for improvement to yield predictable results (MPEP § 2143 I. D.) This is because the cutting along a first direction would be necessitated to form the final product being manufactured for its intended use such as an escape slide (Fig. 1 Col. 2 ll. 29-45 which has an upper end and a lower end). Therefore, the slide would need to be sized to fit the application/intended use, and this would necessitate a transverse cutting across the plurality of the angular regions as indicated in the figures and would define the length of the slide (Fig. 1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WAYNE K. SWIER whose telephone number is (571)272-4598. The examiner can normally be reached M-F generally 8:30 am - 5:30 pm PST.
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 at 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 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.
/WAYNE K. SWIER/ Examiner, Art Unit 1748
/Abbas Rashid/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1748