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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 08 May 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 22 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Claim 22 depends on claim 21, which further depends on claim 1. Claim 1 states the first composite is wrapped at a 55 degree angle relative to a longitudinal direction of the pipe; claim 21 states the second composite is perpendicular, or 90 degrees, to the first composite; thus the second composite must be either 35 degrees or 145 degrees to the longitudinal direction of the pipe, and it is not possible for the second composite to be 45˚ to 65˚ relative a longitudinal direction of the pipe. The specification does not describe a way to construct such a wrap, as it is physically impossible.
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.
Claims 1,4,7,11, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lazzara (US 20110079311 A1), hereafter known as Lazzara, in view of Performance Composites’s webpage “Filament Winding, Carbon Fibre Angles in Composite Tubes”, hereafter known as Performance Composites, in further view of Consentino (US 20130209764 A1), hereafter known as Consentino.
Regarding claim 1, Lazzara discloses a system (fig 1, assembly 10, Lazzara), comprising:
A pipe (fig 1, pipes 12 and 14. Lazzara)
a first composite wrap (fig 6, the portion of wrap member 28 that starts at end 38 and extends to end 40, Lazzara), comprising:
a fabric (paragraph 0037, fig 9, the wrap 54 is a fabric of woven fiberglass cloth, that carries a resin that is activated by contact with water, Lazzara) that supports a matrix comprising a plurality of first and a plurality of second fibers (not disclosed),
wrapped around a portion of the pipe (fig 6, the first composite wrap is wrapped around pipes 12 and 14 from end 38 extending to end 40, Lazzara),
wherein the first composite is wrapped at an angle of 55° relative to a longitudinal direction of the pipe (not disclosed);
and a second composite wrap (fig 6, the portion of wrap member 28 that starts at end 40 and extends to end 38 on top of the first composite wrap, Lazzara)
comprising a fabric (paragraph 0037, fig 9, the wrap 54 is a fabric of woven fiberglass cloth, that carries a resin that is activated by contact with water, Lazzara) that supports a matrix comprising a plurality of third fibers and a plurality of fourth fibers (not disclosed)
wrapped atop the first composite wrap (fig 6, and 7, second composite wrap is wrapped on top of first composite wrap from end 40 to end 38, Lazzara).
Lazzara does not disclose wherein the first composite is wrapped at an angle of 55° relative to a longitudinal direction of the pipe. However, Performance Composites teaches wrapping tubes at an angle of 55 degrees to the longitudinal direction of the tube (webpage description, Intermediate Angles section, Performance Composites). Performance Composites is a webpage that describes the angle of fiber orientations in wound composite tubes, a field closely related to Lazzara and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of file to have incorporated the teachings of Performance Composites into Lazzara and wrap the first and second composites at an angle of 55° to the longitudinal direction of the tube in their direction of wrapping. The 55 degree angle results in the best resistance to internal pressure (Intermediate Angles section, Performance Composites).
Lazzara in view of Performance Composites does not disclose:
The first composite wrap supporting a matrix comprising a plurality of first and a plurality of second fibers, the second composite wrap supporting a matrix comprising a plurality of third and a plurality of fourth fibers,
the plurality of first fibers and the plurality of second fibers arranged parallel to one another in alternating fashion,
the first fibers comprising an inner space comprising a matrix former, the second fibers comprising an inner space comprising a hardening agent,
the plurality of third fibers and the plurality of fourth fibers arranged parallel to one another in alternating fashion,
the third fibers comprising an inner space comprising a matrix former, the fourth fibers comprising an inner space comprising a hardening agent,
the matrix former and hardening agent being configured to form a solid matrix upon contact, and the third and fourth fibers oriented at an angle from 50 to 130 degrees relative to the first and second fibers.
However, Consentino teaches a matrix comprising a plurality of first fibers and a plurality of second fibers (figures 5 and 6, paragraph 0039, self-healing ply 6 has matrix 15, comprising plurality of fibers 8 and 9, Consentino), wherein: the plurality of first fibers and the plurality of second fibers are arranged parallel to one another and in an alternating fashion (fig 5, para 0037, fibers 8 and 9 are illustrated to be parallel, going in and out of the page, while in practice the orientation can vary, Consentino); the first fibers comprise an inner space comprising a matrix former (paragraph 0039, instances of fiber 8 consists of hollow glass fiber 10 filled with resin 11, which is a matrix former, Consentino); the second fibers comprise an inner space comprising a hardening agent (paragraph 0039, instances of fiber 9 consists of hollow glass fiber 12 filled with hardener catalyst 13, Consentino); and the matrix former and hardening agent are configured to form a solid matrix upon contact (paragraph 0044, when the fibers break and the two components mix, they solidify, Consentino).
Consentino describes a layered composite material formed of plies of fibers, several of which having self-healing properties that can control the spread of a crack, a relevant field to Lazzara and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time of filing to have incorporated the teachings of Consentino into Lazzara in view of Performance Composites and provide the self-healing matrix layer of Consentino to the outer layer of each of the first and second composite wraps of Lazzara in view of Performance Composites. In other words, modify the wrap of Lazzara to have a layer of the self-sealing fibers of Consentino on top of the structural fibers of Lazzara so that during wrapping the layers form an alternating laminated structure. The self-healing layer of Consentino stops the propagation of cracks in a layered composite structure (fig 10, paragraphs 51, 52, Consentino), which will prevent potential cracks in the hardened wrap from propagating deep enough to cause failure. After the modification, since the second wrap layer of Lazzara in view of Consentino is structurally identical to the first layer, the third and fourth fibers of the second layer are the same as first and second fibers of the first layer, and thus have the same claimed properties, such as the plurality of third fibers and the plurality of the fourth fibers being arranged parallel to one another and in an alternating fashion, and the third fibers comprise an inner space comprising the matrix former; and the fourth fibers comprise an inner space comprising the hardening agent.
Lazzara in view of Performance Composites and Consentino discloses the third and fourth fibers oriented at an angle from 50 to 130 degrees relative to the first and second fibers ( fig 6, Lazzara, the second wrap layer 28 is wrapped crisscrossing (at opposing angles to) the first layer underneath, both of which are at a 55 degree angle relative to the longitudinal direction of the pipe 12 when modified by Performance Composites, thus the third and fourth fibers are at an angle of 55+55=110 degrees to the first and second fibers.)
Additionally, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to change the orientation of the third and fourth fibers relative to the first and second, since applicant has not disclosed that an angle between 50 and 130 is critical to the function of the invention, giving a large range of 2 to 178 degrees in the specification, thus it appears that the invention would perform equally as well with fiber angles larger or smaller than the claimed range.
Regarding claim 4, Lazzara in view of Performance Composites and Consentino discloses the article of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein a thickness of the matrix of the first composite wrap is from 1 µm to 10 µm. However, considering the thickness of the matrix 15 as shown in fig 5 of Consentino to be slightly less than twice the diameter of one of the self-healing fibers 8 or 9 (fig 5, Consentino), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have made the thickness of the matrix to be within the claimed range. The specification places no criticality on the thickness of the matrix layer, and such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 7, Lazzara in view of Performance Composites and Consentino discloses the article of claim 1, wherein the matrix former comprises a member selected from the group consisting of epoxy, vinylester, and polyurethane (paragraph 0039, fiber 8 consists of hollow fiber 10 filled with Araldite resin, which is an epoxy, Consentino).
Regarding claim 11, Lazzara in view of Performance Composites and Consentino discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the pipe is a component of a system selected from the group consisting of an oil and gas production system, and oil and gas processing system, an oil and gas storage system, and a power plant (paragraph 0025, pipeline can be an oil pipe, Lazzara).
Claims 12,15,16,18,23,26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lazzara in view of Consentino, in further view of Ma (CN 112431992 A), hereafter known as Ma, or alternatively in further view of Performance Composites.
Regarding claim 12, Lazzara discloses a method, comprising:
applying a first composite wrap on a restored section of a pipe (fig 6, applying wrap 28 onto pipe, wrapping from end 38 to end 40, forming the first composite wrap, Lazzara)
applying a second composite wrap atop the first composite wrap (fig 6, applying wrap 28, wrapping from end 40 to end 38 over the first composite wrap, forming the second composite wrap, Lazzara),
wherein: the first composite wrap comprises: a fabric (paragraph 0037, fig 9, the wrap 54 is a fabric of woven fiberglass cloth, that carries a resin that is activated by contact with water, Lazzara) that supports a matrix comprising a plurality of first and a plurality of second fibers (not disclosed),
the second composite wrap comprises a fabric(paragraph 0037, fig 9, the wrap 54 is a fabric of woven fiberglass cloth, that carries a resin that is activated by contact with water, Lazzara) that supports a matrix comprising a plurality of third fibers and a plurality of fourth fibers (not disclosed)
Lazzara does not disclose:
The first composite wrap supporting a matrix comprising a plurality of first and a plurality of second fibers, the second composite wrap supporting a matrix comprising a plurality of third and a plurality of fourth fibers,
the plurality of first fibers and the plurality of second fibers arranged parallel to one another in alternating fashion,
the first fibers comprising an inner space comprising a matrix former, the second fibers comprising an inner space comprising a hardening agent,
the plurality of third fibers and the plurality of fourth fibers arranged parallel to one another in alternating fashion,
the third fibers comprising an inner space comprising a matrix former, the fourth fibers comprising an inner space comprising a hardening agent,
the matrix former and hardening agent being configured to form a solid matrix upon contact, and the third and fourth fibers oriented at an angle from 50 to 130 degrees relative to the first and second fibers.
However, Consentino teaches a matrix comprising a plurality of first fibers and a plurality of second fibers (figures 5 and 6, paragraph 0039, self-healing ply 6 has matrix 15, comprising plurality of fibers 8 and 9, Consentino), wherein: the plurality of first fibers and the plurality of second fibers are arranged parallel to one another and in an alternating fashion (fig 5, para 0037, fibers 8 and 9 are illustrated to be parallel, going in and out of the page, while in practice the orientation can vary, Consentino) ; the first fibers comprise an inner space comprising a matrix former (paragraph 0039, instances of fiber 8 consists of hollow glass fiber 10 filled with resin 11, which is a matrix former, Consentino); the second fibers comprise an inner space comprising a hardening agent (paragraph 0039, instances of fiber 9 consists of hollow glass fiber 12 filled with hardener catalyst 13, Consentino); and the matrix former and hardening agent are configured to form a solid matrix upon contact (paragraph 0044, when the fibers break and the two components mix, they solidify, Consentino).
Consentino describes a layered composite material formed of plies of fibers, several of which having self-healing properties that can control the spread of a crack, a relevant field to Lazzara and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time of filing to have incorporated the teachings of Consentino into Lazzara in view of Performance Composites and provide the self-healing matrix layer of Consentino to the outer layer of each of the first and second composite wraps of Lazzara in view of Performance Composites. In other words, modify the wrap of Lazzara to have a layer of the self-sealing fibers of Consentino on top of the structural fibers of Lazzara so that during wrapping the layers form an alternating laminated structure. The self-healing layer of Consentino stops the propagation of cracks in a layered composite structure (fig 10, paragraphs 51, 52, Consentino), which will prevent potential cracks in the hardened wrap 28 of Lazzara from propagating deep enough to cause failure. After the modification, since the second wrap layer of Lazzara in view of Consentino is structurally identical to the first layer, the third and fourth fibers of the second layer are the same as first and second fibers of the first layer, and thus have the same claimed properties, such as the plurality of third fibers and the plurality of the fourth fibers are arranged parallel to one another and in an alternating fashion, and the third fibers comprise an inner space comprising the matrix former; and the fourth fibers comprise an inner space comprising the hardening agent.
Lazzara in view of Consentino does not disclose the third and fourth fibers oriented at an angle from 50 to 130 degrees relative to the first and second fibers, although the fibers of the first and second composite wraps are at opposing angles to each other.
However, Ma teaches two layers of wraps that are aligned +45 and -45 degrees from the axis of the pipe, thus 90 degrees to each other (page 7, paragraph 1, fig 3, layers 3 and 4 are adjacent and ±45 degrees to the pipe axis, Ma). Ma describes a multi-layer pipe repair wrap for pipes, a field related to Lazzara, Consentino, and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time of file to have incorporated the teachings of Ma into Lazzara in view of Consentino and orient the first composite wrap of Lazzara in view of Consentino (and thus the first and second fibers) to be 45 degrees to the axis of the pipe and the second composite wrap (and thus the third and fourth fibers) to be negative 45 degrees to the axis of the pipe, and thus 90 degrees to each other. The range of angles increases the repair’s performance (page 5, last paragraph, Ma). Additionally, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to change the orientation of the third and fourth fibers relative to the first and second, since applicant has not disclosed that an angle between 50 and 130 is critical to the function of the invention, giving a large range of 2 to 178 degrees in the specification, thus it appears that the invention would perform equally as well with fiber angles larger or smaller than the claimed range.
Alternatively, Performance Composites teaches wrapping tubes at an angle of 55 degrees to the longitudinal direction of the tube (webpage description, Intermediate Angles section, Performance Composites). Performance Composites is a webpage that describes the angle of fiber orientations in wound composite tubes, a field closely related to Lazzara and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of file to have incorporated the teachings of Performance Composites into Lazzara in view of Consentino and wrap the first and second composites at an angle of 55° to the longitudinal direction of the tube in their direction of wrapping. The 55 degree angle results in the best resistance to internal pressure (Intermediate Angles section, Performance Composites). After the modification, since the second wrap layer is of Lazzara is wrapped crisscrossing (at opposing angles to) the first layer underneath, and both of which are at a 55 degree angle relative to the longitudinal direction of the pipe 12 when modified by Performance Composites, the third and fourth fibers are thus at an angle of 55+55=110 degrees to the first and second fibers.
Regarding claim 15, Lazzara in view of Consentino and Ma or alternatively Lazzara in view of Consentino and Performance Composites discloses the system of claim 12, wherein the first composite is wrapped at an angle of 45˚ to 65 ˚ relative a longitudinal direction of the pipe. (the first composite wrap of Lazzara in view of Consentino is modified by Ma to be +45 degrees to the pipe axis, alternatively it is modified by Performance Composites to be +55 degrees to the pipe axis.) Additionally, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to change the orientation of the first composite wrap to suit the application, since applicant has not disclosed that an angle between 45 and 65 is critical to the function of the invention, giving a large range of 1 to 89 degrees in the specification, thus it appears that the invention would perform equally as well with first composite wrap angles larger or smaller than the claimed range.
Regarding claim 16, Lazzara in view of Consentino and Ma or alternatively Lazzara in view of Consentino and Performance Composites discloses the method of claim 12, further comprising: rupturing at least a portion of the plurality of first and second fibers (paragraph 0044, upon impact, the fibers break, Consentino), releasing at least a portion of the matrix former and hardening agent within the ruptured first and second fibers (paragraph 0044, the adhesive and catalyst flows out of the broken fibers, Consentino); and reacting the matrix former and the hardening agent to form a solid matrix within a crack in the matrix (paragraph 0046, the adhesive and catalyst solidify and fill the space within the crack, Consentino).
Regarding claim 18, Lazzara in view of Consentino and Ma or alternatively Lazzara in view of Consentino and Performance Composites discloses the method of claim 12, further comprising, after applying the first composite wrap on the restored section of a metal pipe:
applying a shrink wrap to the restored section (fig 7, paragraph 0038, elastic compression wrap 56 is applied after the composite wrap is installed, wrap 56 shrinks under elastic forces to maintain full contact and achieve smooth finish, Lazzara);
perforating the shrink wrap (fig 8, paragraph 0054, elastic compression wrap 56 is perforated, Lazzara);
allowing the matrix to cure (paragraph 0038, elastic wrap 56 keeps composite wrap compressed while it is curing, Lazzara);
and removing the shrink wrap (paragraph 0054, elastic wrap 56 is removed, Lazzara).
Regarding claim 23, Lazzara in view of Consentino and Ma or alternatively Lazzara in view of Consentino and Performance Composites discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the second composite is wrapped at an angle of 45˚ to 65 ˚ relative a longitudinal direction of the pipe (the second composite wrap of Lazzara in view of Consentino is modified by Ma to be -45 degrees to the pipe axis, or alternatively is modified by Performance Composites to be -55 degrees to the pipe axis.) Additionally, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to change the orientation of the first composite wrap to suit the application, since applicant has not disclosed that an angle between 45 and 65 is critical to the function of the invention, giving a large range of 1 to 89 degrees in the specification, thus it appears that the invention would perform equally as well with first composite wrap angles larger or smaller than the claimed range.
Regarding claim 26, Lazzara in view of Consentino and Ma or alternatively Lazzara in view of Consentino and Performance Composites discloses the system of claim 12, wherein the second composite is wrapped at an angle of 45˚ to 65 ˚ relative a longitudinal direction of the pipe (the second composite wrap of Lazzara in view of Consentino is modified by Ma to be -45 degrees to the pipe axis, or alternatively modified by Performance Composites to be 55 degrees to the pipe axis.) Additionally, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to change the orientation of the first composite wrap to suit the application, since applicant has not disclosed that an angle between 45 and 65 is critical to the function of the invention, giving a large range of 1 to 89 degrees in the specification, thus it appears that the invention would perform equally as well with first composite wrap angles larger or smaller than the claimed range.
Claims 24 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lazzara in view of Consentino, in further view of Ma.
Regarding claim 24, Lazzara in view of Consentino and Ma discloses the system of claim 12, wherein the third and fourth fibers are oriented perpendicular relative to the first and second fibers. (page 7, paragraph 1, fig 3, layers 3 and 4 are adjacent and ±45 degrees to the pipe axis, thus 90 degrees and perpendicular to each other. The fibers are oriented the same direction as the wrapped layers and are so also perpendicular to each other, Ma).
Regarding claim 25, Lazzara in view of Consentino and Ma discloses the system of claim 24, wherein the second composite is wrapped at an angle of 45˚ to 65 ˚ relative a longitudinal direction of the pipe (the second composite wrap of Lazzara in view of Consentino is modified by Ma to be -45 degrees to the pipe axis.) Additionally, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to change the orientation of the first composite wrap to suit the application, since applicant has not disclosed that an angle between 45 and 65 is critical to the function of the invention, giving a large range of 1 to 89 degrees in the specification, thus it appears that the invention would perform equally as well with first composite wrap angles larger or smaller than the claimed range.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lazzara in view of Consentino, in further view of Performance Composites.
Regarding claim 27, Lazzara in view of Consentino and Performance Composites discloses the method of claim 12, wherein the first composite wrap is applied at an angle of 55 degrees relative to a longitudinal direction of the pipe (webpage description, Intermediate Angles section, the wrapping angle is 55 degrees, Performance Composites).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lazzara in view of Performance Composites and Consentino, in further view of Ma.
Regarding claim 21, Lazzara in view of Performance Composites and Consentino disclosed discloses the system of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the third and fourth fibers are oriented perpendicular relative to the first and second fibers.
However, Ma teaches two layers of wraps that have fibers perpendicular to each other (page 7, paragraph 1, fig 3, layers 3 and 4 are adjacent and ±45 degrees to the pipe axis, thus perpendicular to each other, Ma). Ma describes a multi-layer pipe repair wrap for pipes, a field related to Lazzara, Consentino, Performance Composites, and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time of file to have incorporated the teachings of Ma into Lazzara in view of Performance Composites and Consentino and orient the second composite wrap of Lazzara in view of Performance Composites and Consentino (and thus the third and fourth fibers) to be perpendicular to the fist composite wrap (the first and second fibers). The range of angles increases the repair’s performance (5, last paragraph, Ma). Additionally, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to change the orientation of the third and fourth fibers relative to the first and second, since applicant has not disclosed that an angle between 50 and 130 is critical to the function of the invention, giving a large range of 2 to 178 degrees in the specification, thus it appears that the invention would perform equally as well with fiber angles larger or smaller than the claimed range.
Claims 5,6,8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lazzara in view of Performance Composites and Consentino, in further view of Dry (EP 1907202 B1).
Regarding claim 5, Lazzara in view of Performance Composites and Consentino discloses the system of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein at least one of the following holds: the first and second fibers have a maximum cross-sectional dimension of 5 µm to 1000 µm; and the first and second fibers have a wall thickness of from 1 µm to 5 µm. The dimensions of the fibers were not specified in Consentino.
However, Dry discloses the first and second fibers having maximum cross-sectional dimension of 5 µm to 1000 µm (paragraph 0088, repair conduits can have diameters between 100-1200 micrometers, although they can be any size, Dry. Paragraph 0203 and 0204, the hollow fibers can be 20-120 micrometers. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976)). Dry describes a composite with self-healing properties that can be shaped into any shape, including a wrap or tape (paragraph 01118, Dry), a field closely related to Lazzara, Performance Composites ,Consentino, and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time of file to have incorporated the teachings of Dry into Lazzara in view of Performance Composites and Consentino and make the diameters of fibers 8 and 9 of Consentino to be within the range of Dry. This range of fiber sizes allows a variety of different fiber materials to be used (paragraph 0203 and 0204, Dry), and allow the wrap to accommodate pipes of different diameters, since thinner fibers are more flexible than larger fibers, while larger fibers can hold more repairing adhesive or hardener.
Regarding claim 6, Lazzara in view of Performance Composites and Consentino discloses the system of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the first and second fibers comprise a member selected from the group consisting of polyester, polyurethane, polyvinylacetate, polysulphone (PSF), polyethersulphone (PES), polyacrylonitrile (PAN), polyvinyl alcohol, and/or polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF). The fibers of Consentino are made of glass. However, Dry discloses the hollow fibers comprising of polyester (paragraph 0203, hollow tubes or fibers can be made of polyester, Dry). As stated before, Dry describes a composite with self-healing properties that can be shaped into any shape, including a wrap or tape (paragraph 0118, Dry), a field closely related to Lazzara, Performance Composites , Consentino, and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time of file to have incorporated the teachings of Dry into Lazzara in view of Performance Composites and Consentino and make the fibers 8 and 9 of Consentino out of polyester. Tubes of polyester are well known in the art for their low cost to produce compared to glass tubes, reducing the cost of the wrap.
Regarding claim 8, Lazzara in view of Performance Composites and Consentino discloses the system of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the hardening agent comprises a member selected from the group consisting of a polymercaptan, a polyamide, an amidoamine, an aliphatic amine, a cycloaliphatic amine, an aromatic amine, and a phenalkamine. However, Dry discloses a hardening agent of aromatic amine (paragraph 100, the initiator for the epoxy can be an amine, paragraph 0197 states aromatic amines can be used, Dry). As stated before, Dry describes a composite with self-healing properties that can be shaped into any shape, including a wrap or tape (paragraph 01118, Dry), a field closely related to Lazzara, Performance Composites , Consentino. and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time of file to have incorporated the teachings of Dry into Lazzara in view of Performance Composites and Consentino and use an aromatic amine and the curing agent for the epoxy of Consentino. Epoxy cured with aromatic amine can offer high temperature resistance and chemical resistance, which would benefit the wrap.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lazzara in view of Consentino and Ma, or alternatively Lazzara in view of Consentino and Performance Composites, in further view of Loctite’s product demonstration video “Pipe Composite Repair System”, hereafter referred to as Loctite.
Regarding claim 17, Lazzara in view of Consentino and Ma or alternatively Lazzara in view of Consentino and Performance Composites discloses the method of claim 12, further comprising, prior to applying the first composite wrap on the restored section of a metal pipe: cleaning a defect section of the metal pipe (paragraph 0041, Lazzara).
Lazzara in view of Consentino and Ma does not disclose disposing a filler material into the defect section to convert the defect section to a restored section, nor discloses disposing an adhesive primer onto the restored section. However, Loctite teaches disposing a filler material into the defect section to convert the defect section to a restored section (time 00:36-00:45, defect is filled, Loctite) and disposing an adhesive primer onto the restored section (time 00:51-00:57, primer resin is applied to the restored pipe, Loctite). Loctite describes a method of pipe repair using a fiber-reinforced composite wrap, a field closely related to Lazzara, Consentino, Ma, Performance Composites, and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time of file to have incorporated the teachings of Loctite into Lazzara in view of Consentino and Ma or alternatively Lazzara in view of Consentino and Performance Composites and include the step of filling in the defect section and disposing an adhesive primer onto the filled in section. Filling in the defect section restores material that was lost, improving the effectiveness of the repair, and the primer resin allows the wraps to better bond to the pipe surface.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lazzara in view of Consentino and Ma, or alternatively Lazzara in view of Consentino and Performance Composites in further view of Lazzara (US 20160214781 A1), hereafter referred to as Lazzara2016.
Regarding claim 19, Lazzara in view of Consentino and Ma or alternatively Lazzara in view of Consentino and Performance Composites discloses the method of claim 12, wherein prior to applying the first composite wrap, disposing the first and second fibers on the fabric (paragraph 0020 Consentino, the containers, which are the hollow fibers according to paragraph 0022 Consentino, may be wound directly onto the uncured ply of the composite material prior to lamination, therefore the first and second fibers of Consentino are disposed on the fabric of Lazzara prior to applying the wrap.)
Lazzara in view of Consentino and Ma or alternatively Lazzara in view of Consentino and Performance Composites does not disclose prior to applying the first composite wrap, forming the first composite wrap, comprising: applying a first portion of the matrix on the fabric and applying a second portion of the matrix on the fabric and the first and second fibers.
However, Lazzara2016 teaches forming a composite wrap by applying a first and second portion of the matrix on the fabric (paragraph 0045, composite fabric carrier 102a can pass through as bath to impregnate the composite with resin, a first and second portion of the resin matrix is applied to the front and back of the composite, Lazzara2016). Lazzara2016 describes a method to manufacture fiber reinforced composite wraps, a field closely related to Lazzara, Consentino, Ma, Performance Composites, and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time of file to have incorporated the teachings of Lazzara2016 into Lazzara in view of Consentino and Ma or alternatively Lazzara in view of Consentino and Performance Composites and use the manufacturing method of Lazzara 2016 to make the wraps. Since the first and second fibers of Consentino are wound onto the fabric of Lazzara, the matrix will also be applied to the fibers. Making a wrap using a known manufacturing method will lower costs of production as well as improve product reliability.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Rich (US 5894864 A) discloses a double wrapped composite pipe repair system
Lazzara (US 20150204476 A1) discloses a pipe wrap repair system with fibers in different angles each other.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAOTIAN LU whose telephone number is (571)272-0444. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am-5:00 pm CST.
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 supervisors can be reached at: Kenneth Rinehart (571) 272-4881 and Craig Schneider (571) 272-3607. 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.
/H.L./ Examiner, Art Unit 3753
/DAVID R DEAL/Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights