CTNF 18/170,193 CTNF 80917 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. This communication is responsive to application filed on 02/16/2023. Claims 1-20 are presented for examination. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/30/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Double Patenting 08-33 AIA The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg , 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman , 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi , 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum , 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel , 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington , 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA/25, or PTO/AIA/26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto- processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1, 10, and 19 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 9, and 17 of co-pending Application No. 17/726, 080 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as seen below. Instant Application No. 18/170,193 Co-pending Application No. 17/726, 080 1. A computer-implemented method that facilitates determining a life expectancy of a bonded joint, the method comprising: receiving, by a computing system, one or more parameters that specify attributes associated with a bonded joint, wherein the one or more parameters specify a type of bonded joint; selecting, by the computing system and from a model template repository, one or more bonded joint model templates associated with the type of bonded joint; generating, by the computing system, a bonded joint model based on the one or more bonded joint model templates and the one or more parameters, wherein the bonded joint model facilitates performance of finite element analysis (FEA); simulating, by FEA logic of the computing system, application of stress to the bonded joint model, wherein the stress comprises a thermal stress, a mechanical stress, an environmental stress, an operational stress, or a combination thereof; determining, by the FEA logic of the computing system, a change in a size of a defect that results from the application of stress to the bonded joint model; and determining, by the computing system and based on the change in a size of the defect, the life expectancy of the bonded joint. 1. A computer-implemented method that facilitates determining a life expectancy of a bonded joint, the method comprising: receiving, by a computing system, one or more parameters that specify attributes associated with a bonded joint, wherein the one or more parameters specify a type of bonded joint; selecting, by the computing system and from a model template repository, one or more bonded joint model templates associated with the type of bonded joint, wherein the one or more bonded joint model templates are configured to model one or more of: linear and nonlinear behaviors of composite materials of the bonded joint, or linear and nonlinear interface behaviors of metal materials of the bonded joint; generating, by the computing system, a bonded joint model based on the one or more bonded joint model templates and the one or more parameters, wherein the bonded joint model facilitates performance of finite element analysis (FEA); simulating, by FEA logic of the computing system, application of stress to the bonded joint model; determining, by the FEA logic of the computing system, a change in a size of a defect that results from the application of stress to the bonded joint model; determining, by the computing system and based on the change in a size of the defect, the life expectancy of the bonded joint; and providing, by the computing system, a damage analysis report with the life expectancy of the bonded joint. 10. A computing system that facilitates determining a life expectancy of a bonded joint, the computing system comprising: one or more instruction storage devices for storing instruction code; and one or more processors in communication with the one or more instruction storage devices, wherein execution of the instruction code by the one or more processors causes the computing system to perform operations comprising: receiving, by the computing system, one or more parameters that specify attributes associated with a bonded joint, wherein the one or more parameters specify a type of bonded joint; selecting, by the computing system and from a model template repository, one or more bonded joint model templates associated with the type of bonded joint; generating, by the computing system, a bonded joint model based on the one or more bonded joint model templates and the one or more parameters, wherein the bonded joint model facilitates performance of finite element analysis (FEA); simulating, by FEA logic of the computing system, application of stress to the bonded joint model, wherein the stress comprises a thermal stress, a mechanical stress, an environmental stress, an operational stress, or a combination thereof; determining, by the FEA logic of the computing system, a change in a size of a defect that results from the application of stress to the bonded joint model; and determining, by the computing system and based on the change in a size of the defect, the life expectancy of the bonded joint. 9. (Currently Amended) A computing system that facilitates determining a life expectancy of a bonded joint, the computing system comprising: one or more instruction storage devices for storing instruction code; and one or more processors in communication with the one or more instruction storage devices, wherein execution of the instruction code by the one or more processors are configured to: causes the computing system to perform operations comprising: receiving, by the computing system, receive one or more parameters that specify attributes associated with a bonded joint, wherein the one or more parameters specify a type of bonded joint; selecting, by the computing system and select, from a model template repository, one or more bonded joint model templates associated with the type of bonded joint, wherein the one or more bonded joint model templates are configured to model two or more of: linear and nonlinear behaviors of composite materials of the bonded joint, linear and nonlinear interface behaviors of metal materials of the bonded joint, or linear and nonlinear interface behaviors of adhesives materials of the bonded joint; generating, by the computing system, generate a bonded joint model based on the one or more bonded joint model templates and the one or more parameters, wherein the bonded joint model facilitates performance of finite element analysis (FEA); simulate, using FEA logic of the computing system, application of stress to the bonded joint model; determine, using the FEA logic of the computing system, a change in a size of a defect that results from the application of stress to the bonded joint model; determine, based on the change in a size of the defect, the life expectancy of the bonded joint; and provide a damage analysis report to facilitate estimating longevity of the bonded joint associated with the bonded joint model. 19. A non-transitory computer-readable medium that stores instruction code that facilitates determining a life expectancy of a bonded joint, wherein execution of the instruction code by one or more processors of a computing system causes the computing system to perform operations comprising: receiving, by the computing system, one or more parameters that specify attributes associated with a bonded joint, wherein the one or more parameters specify a type of bonded joint; selecting, by the computing system and from a model template repository, one or more bonded joint model templates associated with the type of bonded joint; generating, by the computing system, a bonded joint model based on the one or more bonded joint model templates and the one or more parameters, wherein the bonded joint model facilitates performance of finite element analysis (FEA); simulating, by FEA logic of the computing system, application of stress to the bonded joint model, wherein the stress comprises a thermal stress, a mechanical stress, an environmental stress, an operational stress, or a combination thereof; determining, by the FEA logic of the computing system, a change in a size of a defect that results from the application of stress to the bonded joint model; and determining, by the computing system and based on the change in a size of the defect, the life expectancy of the bonded joint. 17. A non-transitory computer-readable medium that stores instruction code that facilitates determining a life expectancy of a bonded joint, wherein execution of the instruction code by one or more processors of a computing system causes the computing system to perform operations comprising: receiving, by the computing system, receive one or more parameters that specify attributes associated with a bonded joint, wherein the one or more parameters specify a type of bonded joint; select, from a model template repository, one or more bonded joint model templates associated with the type of bonded joint; generate a bonded joint model based on the one or more bonded joint model templates and the one or more parameters, wherein the bonded joint model facilitates performance of finite element analysis (FEA); simulate, using FEA logic of the computing system, application of stress to the bonded joint model; determine, using FEA logic of the computing system, a change in a size of a defect that results from the application of stress to the bonded joint model; determine, based on the change in a size of the defect, the life expectancy of the bonded joint; and provide a damage analysis report to facilitate estimating longevity of the bonded joint associated with the bonded joint model. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-20 are allowable over prior art. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Jahanbin et al (US Publication No. 2018/0340858 A1) discloses monitoring of adhesively bonded joints using guided waves, determines the quality of adhesive bonds between two materials by injecting a high-frequency (e.g., 5 MHz or higher) ultrasonic signal and measuring a characteristic of the ultrasonic waves which propagate through the adhesive, trapped and guided by the interfaces between the bonded materials and the adhesive, prior to an inspection of an actual adhesively bonded structure, that structure is simulated using a finite element model , also propagation of guided ultrasonic waves along the adhesive bondline is simulated to derive interface wave predicted properties, during ultrasonic inspection of the actual structure, interface wave measured properties are derived, the quality of the adhesive bondline is determined by comparing the empirical interface wave measured properties to simulated interface wave predicted properties (Abstract); [0038] Interface wave simulations can be used to detect bonding defects in hybrid structure joints. The velocity of the interface wave and the reflected waves provide information quantifying the simulated damage, e.g., siz e and location, by baselining the wave behavior with respect to the undamaged and undamaged condition of the simulated structure; par [0040] This simulation assumed that the crack nucleates in the interface between the metallic substrate 4 and composite laminate 6 . Both the wave generator 10 and wave sensor 12 were placed on the exposed surface of the composite laminate 6 . Several different crack size s were considered ranging from 2.54 mm to 25.4 mm for a 101-mm bondline. Simulations were also performed for an undamaged (i.e., undamaged) structure to provide the baseline. The travel time of the propagating wave from the wave generator 10 to the wave sensor 12 was recorded. Wahab et al (M.M.A. Wahab, I.A. Ashcroft, A. D. Crocombe, P. A. Smith, “Finite element prediction of fatigue crack propagation lifetime in composite bonded joints”, (Herein referred as Wahab et al) pgs. 213-222, 2003) discloses Abstract, A generalised technique for the prediction of fatigue crack propagation lifetime in bonded structures using finite element analysis is proposed. The method is based on numerical integration of the fatigue crack growth law from an initial to a final crack size. The technique has been applied to carbon fibre composite joints bonded with an epoxy adhesive; pg. 214 left side column, In order to characterize the crack growth behaviour, fracture parameters such as the stress intensity factor ðKÞ and the strain energy release rate (SERR) ðGÞ can be used; pg. 217 right side column, The number of cycles to failure can be obtained by integrating Eq. (1) from an initial crack size ða0Þ to a final crack size ðafÞ; pg. 217 right side column, 218 left side column, The steps shown in Fig. 9 were automated in the FE programme ANSYS.The crack length was defined as a parameter that varied between the initial crack length ða0Þ and final crack length ðafÞ: The final crack length was defined in the FE model as the crack length at which GT (or GI) reached the (static) fracture toughness ðGIcÞ; with a limiting value of half the overlap length ðc=2Þ for the SLJ and the full overlap length ðcÞ for the DLJ. Turk et al (US Publication No. 2005/0022152 A1) discloses par [0024] allow the participants to select an assembly for evaluation and assemble the associated data files representing the physical properties of the parts comprising the assembly from one or more than one parts data lists maintained in a database library. Cognard et al (J. Y. Cognard, P. Davies, L. Sohier, R. Creac’hcadec, “A study of the non-linear behaviour of adhesively-bonded composite assemblies”, pgs. 34-46, 2006) discloses Abstract, presents experimental and numerical results, which describe the non-linear behaviour of an adhesive in a bonded assembly for various loadings…focus on the analysis of the behaviour of the adhesive in thin films; pg. 35 right side column, the optimization of the complete fixture was made using three-dimensional non-linear simulations taking into account the fixing system, with refined meshes in order to be able to analyse the possible edge effects; pg. 36 right side column, Under linear behaviour assumptions, the stress field in the middle plane of the adhesive is presented in Fig. 5. These stress distributions allow us to define the relation between the maximum values of the components of the stress and the components of the load measured experimentally. Sutherland et al (US Patent No. 9, 261, 444 B1) discloses Abstract, testing the strength of a bonded joint between at least two components, wherein the system includes at least one element force energizer that creates an actual mechanical stress in the bonded joint when actuated, wherein the element force energizer is coupled with the at least two components…detects the actual mechanical stress or strain in the bonded joint… recording device that records and/or transmits the detected mechanical stress or strain in the bonded joint. However, none of the cited prior art references of record fully anticipate or render obvious the independent claims in particular limitation of: “selecting, by the computing system and from a model template repository, one or more bonded joint model templates associated with the type of bonded joint; generating, by the computing system, a bonded joint model based on the one or more bonded joint model templates and the one or more parameters, wherein the bonded joint model facilitates performance of finite element analysis (FEA)” as recited in claim 1, “selecting, by the computing system and from a model template repository, one or more bonded joint model templates associated with the type of bonded joint; generating, by the computing system, a bonded joint model based on the one or more bonded joint model templates and the one or more parameters, wherein the bonded joint model facilitates performance of finite element analysis (FEA)” as recited in claim 10, “select, from a model template repository, one or more bonded joint model templates associated with the type of bonded joint; generate a bonded joint model based on the one or more bonded joint model templates and the one or more parameters, wherein the bonded joint model facilitates performance of finite element analysis (FEA)” as recited in claim 19 . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIBROM K GEBRESILASSIE whose telephone number is (571)272-8571. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM-5:30 PM. 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, Rehana Perveen can be reached at 571 272 3676. 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. KIBROM K. GEBRESILASSIE Primary Examiner Art Unit 2189 /KIBROM K GEBRESILASSIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2189 06/15/2026 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 2 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 3 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 4 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 5 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 6 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 7 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 8 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 9 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 10 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 11 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 12 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 13 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 14 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 15 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 16 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 17 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 18 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 19 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 20 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 21 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 22 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 23 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 24 Art Unit: 2189 Application/Control Number: 18/170,193 Page 25 Art Unit: 2189
Prosecution Insights