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/Restriction
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-10 and 10-16) and in the reply filed on 12/16/2025 is acknowledged.
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 1-10 and 14 -16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 line 6 recites “each thermoplastic polymer yarn” which is vague and indefinite as it is unclear whether applicant intend to claim (i) all of the earlier said “plurality of thermoplastic yarns” or some of the “plurality of thermoplastic yarns”. The specification appears to state that the plurality of thermoplastic yarns can be either made of same or different material. For the purpose of examination, the Examiner considers that applicant “each thermoplastic polymer yarn” applicant intend to claim all of the “plurality of thermoplastic yarns” (as in claim 1 line 3). Similar correction is required throughout the claims.
Claim 7 line 1 recites “wherein the thermoplastic polymer yarns” which is vague and indefinite as it is unclear whether for each instance of “the thermoplastic yarns” applicant intend to refer to all of the “plurality of thermoplastic yarns” or some of “the plurality of thermoplastic yarns” (as recited in claim 1, line 3). For the purpose of Examination, the Examiner considers that Applicant is referring to all of the “plurality of thermoplastic yarns”.
Claim 9 line 1 recites “the reinforcing fibre tows” which is vague and indefinite as it is unclear whether for each instance of “the reinforcing fibre tows” whether the applicant intend to refer to all of the “plurality of reinforcing fibre tows” or some of “the plurality of reinforcing fibre tows” (as recited in claim 1, line 3). For the purpose of examination, the Examiner considers that Applicant is referring to all of the “plurality of reinforcing fibre tows”.
Claim 14 appears to pertain to a process of manufacturing woven fabric, however, is silent to specific process of forming the woven fabric, rather states what features the product will have “the woven fabric comprises no less than 1.0 wt% and/or no greater than 5.5 wt% thermoplastic polymer yarn”. Applicant is urged to properly define the process of manufacturing with specific steps of achieving the product features as claimed. Similarly, claim 15 defines a composite component and refers to method claims, and similarly needs to be amended.
Furthermore, claim 14 also recites “each thermoplastic polymer yarn” in line 4. It is vague and indefinite whether for each instance of “each thermoplastic polymer yarn” whether the Applicant intends to claim (i) all of the “plurality of thermoplastic polymer yarn” or (ii) some of the “plurality of thermoplastic polymer yarn”.
Claim 16 lines 2-3 recites “the thermoplastic polymer yarns” “the reinforcing fibre tows”. Claim as written is vague and indefinite as it is unclear whether for each instance of “the thermoplastic yarns” whether the applicant is referring to all or some of the “plurality of thermoplastic yarns” (as defined earlier in claim 14, line 3). Similarly, as it is unclear whether for each instance of “the reinforcing fibre tows” whether the applicant is referring to all or some of the “plurality of reinforcing fibre tows” (as defined earlier in claim 14, line 3).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 6-9, and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Homma et al. (US 7,361,618 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Homma et al. teach a manufacturing method (see col 3 lines 17 to col 14 lines 63; Figs. 1-4) comprising: providing
a woven fabric comprising a plurality of reinforcing fibre tows and a plurality of thermoplastic polymer yarns woven together (see col 3 lines 17 – to col 4 lines 26, col 4 lines 61 to col 5 lines 3, col 6 lines 48 to col 12 lines 47; Figs 1-4 items 1 and 2 warp yarns and weft yarns which are tows that is processed into yarns, and 3-4 are thermoplastic polymer yarns); and molding the woven fabric in a heated mold to form a preform for a composite component (see col 14 lines 14 lines 42-47), wherein: (a) each thermoplastic polymer yarn has a linear density no less than 110 dtex and/or no greater than 330 dtex (see col 6 lines 52, 250 denier which is 278 dtex); and/or (b) the woven fabric comprises no less than 1.0 wt. % and/or no greater than 8.0 wt. % thermoplastic polymer yarn (see col 11 lines 4-19).
As for claim 6, Homma et al. further teach wherein each thermoplastic polymer yarn comprises a polyamide (see claim 11 and 13 discloses using polyamide for auxiliary yarns).
As for claim 7, Homma et al. further teach wherein the thermoplastic polymer yarns are evenly distributed throughout the woven fabric and/or one or more of the plurality of thermoplastic polymer yarns is:(a) woven into the fabric parallel to a reinforcing fibre tow; (b) woven into the fabric within a reinforcing fibre tow; or (c) twisted into and/or around a reinforcing fibre tow (see Fig. 1; col 1 lines 1 to col 4 lines 54, col 5 lines 30 col 8 lines 67).
As for claim 8, Homma et al. further teach wherein providing the woven fabric comprises weaving the plurality of reinforcing fibre tows and the plurality of thermoplastic polymer yarns together (see col 3 lines 50 -67, col 5 lines 1-20). It is noted that optional claim language “optionally wherein the method comprises weaving the plurality of thermoplastic polymer yarns in a weft direction” is not required as part of the claim.
As for claim 9, Homma et al. further teach wherein the reinforcing fiber twos are carbon fiber tows (see Figs 1, item 1 – 2; see col 5 lines 40-50).
As for claim 14, Homma et al. teach a method of manufacturing a woven fabric for use in the manufacture of a composite component (see col 3 lines 17 – to col 4 lines 26, col 4 lines 61 to col 5 lines 3, col 6 lines 48 to col 12 lines 47; Figs 1-4 items 1 and 2 warp yarns and weft yarns, and 3-4 are thermoplastic polymer yarns) , the method comprising weaving a plurality of reinforcing fibre tows and a plurality of thermoplastic polymer yarns together (Fig 1 -4 item 1 and 2 carbon fiber warn yarns and weft yarns, and 3-4 as the thermoplastic polymer yarns), wherein:(a) each thermoplastic polymer yarn has a linear density no less than 110 dtex and/or no greater than 330 dtex (see col 6 lines 52 and onward discloses having 250 denier which is 278 dtex); (b) the woven fabric comprises no less than 1.0 wt. % and/or no greater than 5.5 wt. % thermoplastic polymer yarn (see col. 11 lines 4-19).
As for claim 15, Homma et al. further teach comprising:(a) weaving the plurality of reinforcing fibre tows and the plurality of thermoplastic polymer yarns together (i) into a 2D structure to thereby form a 2D woven fabric (Figs. 1-4; col 3 lines 17 to col 4 lines 26, col 4 lines 61 to col 5 line 3, col 6 line 48 to col 10 line 36, and col 12 line 47 to col 14 lines 26) or (ii) into a 3D structure to thereby form a 3D woven fabric; (b) weaving one or more of the thermoplastic yarns into the fabric in a weft direction;(c) distributing the thermoplastic yarns evenly throughout the fabric; (d) weaving one or more of the thermoplastic yarns into the fabric parallel to a reinforcing fibre tow; (e) weaving one or more of the thermoplastic yarns woven into the fabric within a reinforcing fibre tow; and/or (f) twisted weaving one or more of the thermoplastic yarns into and/or around a reinforcing fibre tow (Figs 1-4; col 3 lines 17 to col 4 lines 26, col 4 lines 61 to col 5 line 3, col 6 line 48 to col 10 line 36, and col 12 line 47 to col 14 lines 26).
As for claim 16, Homma et al. further teach wherein:(a) the thermoplastic polymer yarns comprise a polyamide; and/or (b) the reinforcing fibre tows are carbon fibre tows.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2-5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Homma et al. (US 7,361,618 B2) in view Graf (US 2016/0059498 A1) and/or Riehl et al. (US 2016/0243772 A1).
As for claim 2 - 5, Homma provides suggestion for having woven fabric in which the plurality of reinforcing fiber tows and the plurality of thermoplastic polymer yarns are woven as also provided above
(also see col 8 lines 50 to col. 9 lines 65), however, fails to teach stacking two or more layers of 2D woven fabric on top of one another to form a stack and molding the stack in the heated mold to form the preform for composite component; wherein the woven fabric is a 3D fabric as and the mold is a 3D shaped mold, and the preform is a 3D shaped preform; and maintaining heating the woven fabric to a temperature from 50-250 degrees Celsius and optionally cooling the preform to no greater than 50 degree Celsius prior to removal from the mold.
In the same field of endeavor, pertaining to shaping preform and using the preform to form a composite structure, Graf teaches multi-stage production of 3D preform (17) made of two layers (A,B) and/or partial preforms (9) during the production of fiber-reinforced shaped parts (19), comprising at least one draping device (3) and a transport device (21) for the layered structures (A, B, . . . ) and/or partial preforms (9), wherein the draping device (3) comprises at least one draping mold (18) for the fiber structures (3) and draping stamps (5), which can be moved towards the draping mold (18) in order to reshape and/or secure the layered structures (A, B, . . . ) and/or the partial preforms (9) according to the contour of the draping mold (18) (see Fig, 1 item 3 draping device [mold] where preform is shaped to form an article (see abstract; [0044]-[0047]).
Additionally, in the same field of endeavor, pertaining to shaping preform, Riehl et al. teach placing preform in a heated mold to a curing temperature for a predetermined period of time to provide a cured preform, the preform comprised of non-pre-impregnated material, a 3D shaped dry-shaped preform which is formed by braiding or weaving, or the preform comprises a two-dimensional stack of tackified fabric ([0011]-[0020], [0029]-[0035]), heating the mold to an infusion temperature and injecting an infusion liquid to infuse the preform (see [0017], [0038]-[0040]) and shaping to form a component. Therefore, both Graf and Riehl provides suggestion for forming 3D preform or using 2D stacks as claimed.
However, both Riehl et al. Graf failed to explicitly teach wherein the woven fabric is heated at a temperature from 50 – 250 oC and optionally cooled the preform no greater than 50 oC prior to removal from the mold. It is noted that this step is used in the instant application to produce a preform rather than forming a component. Graf discloses optimizing draping mold temperature during preform forming step which involves both heating and cooling as claimed (see [0024] states the draping mold can be substantially at room temperature and/or actively cooled. Here, it must be provided accordingly that the layered structure or a fiber mat blank can be introduced in a heated state into the draping mold and is subsequently cooled by the draping mold and/or the draping stamp, so that the binder cures. In particular, it is possible to provide that the layered structure and/or the preforms are preheated to or above the melting temperature of the applied binder and introduced in the hot state into the draping mold. In this context, it is can be preferable to provide that the layered structure or a fiber mat blank can be inserted with a movable transport tray with or without a conveyor belt into the draping mold.; also see Graf [0046]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing of the instant application was made to have modified Graf with having optimized heating/cooling temperatures, based on the material in the draping mold, for the benefit of efficiently shaping a preform into 3D preform thereby achieving desired strength (i.e. bending stiffness; see [0003]-[0004]).
Regarding claim 10, Homma et al. teach all the limitations to the claim invention as discussed including process of making preform as provided above (see [col 13 lines 50-67), however, fails to teach introducing matrix into the preform to form a composite component or part thereof.
In the same field of endeavor, pertaining to shaping preform, Graf and Riehl et al. teach placing a preform in a heated mold to a curing temperature for a predetermined period of time to provide a cured preform, the preform comprised of non-pre-impregnated material, a 3D shaped dry-shaped preform which is formed by braiding or weaving, or the preform comprises a two-dimensional stack of tackified fabric (Riel [0011]-[0020], [0029]-[0035]; Graf Fig 1; [0044]-[0046]), heating the mold to an infusion temperature and injecting an infusion liquid to infuse the preform (see Riel [0017], [0038]-[0040]; Graf Fig 1, [0044]-[0046]) and shaping to form a component.
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art at the timed of the Applicant’s invention was effectively filed to combine the step of shaping woven fabric as taught by Homma et al. and use the heated mold with resin transfer method as taught by either one of Graf or Riehl et al., for the purpose of manufacturing a molded part/component with improved quality/strength.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 2005/0146076 A1 – multi-layered composite having improved energy absorbing properties comprising: (a) a pair of resin-impregnated, fabric layers including high strength fibers; (b) a core layer for absorbing energy directed to said composite by externally applied forces, said core layer comprising polymeric fibers having greater toughness than said high strength fibers, disposed in a roving, yarn, tow, knitted, woven or non-woven fabric, scrim or combination thereof, said core layer laminated between said pair of resin-impregnated glass fabric layers, under heat, pressure, or both, to form an integral composite.
US 2021/0237316 A1 - fiber preform for use in a composite material molding process is provided that includes a fiber bundle containing reinforcing fibers. The fiber bundle arranged in parallel switchbacks forming a first layer of the fiber preform.
US 2020/0385898 A1 – Fabrics woven by spread two yarns consisting of polymer matrix composite and method for producing the same.
US 2019/0292720 A1 - A yarn or fiber tow is composed of multiple fibers that are aggregated together, with or without a twist and with or without a binder. A fabric is composed of multiple yarns or fiber tows that are combined together with weaving (woven fabric) or without weaving (e.g., nonwoven fabric) and with or without a binder.
US 2023/0192562 A1 - the polymer yarn 106 may be woven through a 2-D ply (or preform) or through a 3-D ply (or preform). FIG. 4 depicts the use of a polymer yarn 106 that is woven through a 3-D preform 100 comprising warp tows 102 and fill tows 104. The polymer yarn 106 is woven through the thickness of the plurality of plies that form the 3-D preform. This reference discloses plurality of tows with yarns woven together.
US 2018/0363175 A1 – discloses 3D woven preform (400) having braided yarns with an off-axis fiber rather that a flat tape. The top and bottom thirds 420 and 430 are woven with multi-directional braided yarns in the warp direction and standard uniaxial tows in the weft direction. This illustrates that hybrid preforms can be woven mixing standard and multiaxial tows to meet performance requirements. The braided yarn is a multi-directional tow rather than just off-axis fiber. It provides on- and off-axis reinforcement.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAHIDA SULTANA whose telephone number is (571)270-1925. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday (8:30 AM -5:00 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, Galen Hauth can be reached at 571-270-5516. 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.
NAHIDA SULTANA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1743
/NAHIDA SULTANA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1743