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 .
Withdrawn Objections
The objections to the Specification, Drawings and claim 14 of record in the previous Office Action mailed 1/15/2026 have been withdrawn due to Applicant's amendment filed on 4/13/2026.
Election/Restrictions
Newly submitted claims 14-17 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons: The product as claimed in claims 1-13 can be made by another materially different process without the steps of the process claimed in claims 14-17, i.e. stacking and gluing, increasing a temperature of a press machine to a first temperature, synchronously increasing a pressure of the press machine to a pressure level to extrude the semi-finished product, maintaining the pressure level and the first temperature for a first time period, reducing the temperature of the press machine to a second temperature within a second time period, and maintaining the pressure level and the second temperature for a third time period. Additionally, the process as claimed in claims 14-17 can be used to make a materially different product such as a product not requiring a toughness of the aramid fiber cloth layer being higher than a toughness of the carbon fiber cloth layer, and wherein a color of the one or more outer fiber reinforcement layers is dyed or is different from a color of the one or more intermediate structural support layers.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claims 14-17 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Claim Objections
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: The recitation “a composition sheet” in line 3 should be corrected to recite “a composite sheet”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 3 and 19-20 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 3 recites the limitation "the first surface" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 19 and 20 recite the limitation "the section of the watch strap" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ciparro et al. (US 2021/0396495A1) [hereinafter Ciparro].
Regarding claim 1, Ciparro discloses a composite sheet (Figs. 1 and 5A-5C) comprising an exterior-facing surface including one or more outer fiber reinforcement layers (woven fabric layer(s)106), wherein a first outer fiber reinforcement layer of the one or more outer fiber reinforcement layers is an aramid fiber cloth layer (Figs. 1 and 5A-5C, layer 106; paragraph [0024]), and one or more intermediate structural support layers (unidirectional fabric layer(s) 108) away from the exterior-facing surface, wherein the one or more intermediate structural support layers (108) comprise a carbon fiber cloth layer (paragraph [0025]), wherein a toughness of the aramid fiber cloth layer is higher than a toughness of the carbon fiber cloth layer, since the outer fiber reinforcement layer(s) is a bi-directional woven fabric layer whereas the intermediate structural support layer(s) is a unidirectional fabric layer which is substantially identical structure to that of the claimed composite sheet, and wherein a color of the one or more outer fiber reinforcement layers (106) is dyed or is different from a color of the one or more intermediate structural support layers (paragraph [0024]).
Regarding claim 2, Ciparro discloses a second surface of the composite sheet is a second outer fiber reinforcement layer of the one or more outer fiber reinforcement layers (Fig. 1, layer 106 or layer 108).
Regarding claims 3-4, Ciparro discloses the first surface includes two outer fiber reinforcement layers (Figs. 5B-5C, layers 106), wherein each of the two outer reinforcement layers comprise aramid fiber cloth layer (paragraph [0024]).
Regarding claim 5, the toughness of the one or more outer fiber reinforcement layers (106) is higher than two times of the toughness of the one or more intermediate structural support layers (108), since the one or more outer fiber reinforcement layers are bidirectional woven fabric layers which comprise at least one of aramid fiber cloth, an aramid carbon fiber blend or an aramid glass fiber blend and the one or more intermediate structural support layers are unidirectional woven layer which comprise either carbon fiber cloth or carbon glass fiber blend which is substantially identical to the structure of the claimed composite sheet.
Regarding claim 6, Ciparro discloses two adjacent layers of the composite sheet are glued together by a thermoplastic resin coating or a thermosetting resin coating (paragraphs [0028] and [0031]).
Regarding claim 7, Ciparro discloses the aramid fiber cloth layer (106) is a bi-directional woven layer (Fig. 3; paragraph [0024]).
Regarding claim 8, Ciparro discloses a second outer fiber reinforcement layer of the one or more outer fiber reinforcement layers is a unidirectional woven outer fiber reinforcement layer (Figs. 5A-5C, layer 108; paragraph [0025]).
Regarding claim 9, Ciparro discloses the one or more intermediate structural support layers (layers 108) are unidirectional woven intermediate structural support layers (paragraph [0025]).
Regarding claim 10, Ciparro discloses wherein, except for the first outer fiber reinforcement layer, all other layers are stacked in such a way that first weaving directions of each pair of adjacent layers differ by no less than 0o and no greater than 180o (Figs. 1 and 5A-5C).
Regarding claim 11, Ciparro discloses the first weaving directions of each pair of adjacent layers differ by 45o (Figs. 1 and 5A-5C).
Regarding claim 12, Ciparro discloses an isotropic stacking is used on a set of layers that are to be cut (Figs. 1 and 5A-5C).
Regarding claim 13, Ciparro discloses bi-directional woven fabrics (layers 106) are used on a set of layers that are to be cut (Figs. 1 and 5A-5C).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 18 is allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art found, Ciparro et al. (US 2021/0396495A1), fails to teach or reasonably suggest the distinct feature of “two or more watch strap sections, wherein each watch strap section of the two or more watch strap sections comprise a composite sheet” as now recited in claim 18.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, filed 4/13/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection of claims 1-13 as anticipated by Ciparro have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that “the cited portions of Ciparro do not disclose or suggest a composite sheet having the limitations disclosed in amended claim 1”.
This argument is not deemed persuasive. As shown in the 102 rejection above, Ciparro teaches all the features recited in amended claim 1. Accordingly, claim 1 and its associated dependent claims 2-13 are anticipated by Ciparro.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CATHERINE A SIMONE whose telephone number is (571)272-1501. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4pm.
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, Frank Vineis can be reached at 571-270-1547. 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.
CATHERINE A. SIMONE
Examiner
Art Unit 1781
/Catherine A. Simone/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781
Prosecution Insights