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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment dated 1/22/2026 has been considered and entered into the record. Independent claim 1 has been amended to now require micrometric powder configured to form an amorphous non-crystalline thermoplastic matrix. Claims 1–10 remain pending, while claims 4–10 are withdrawn from consideration. Claims 1–3 are examined below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 1/22/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1–3 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1–3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pardo (US 2006/0234028 A1) in view of Bhatnagar (US 2017/0297295 A1).
Pardo teaches a process for manufacturing composite sheets, wherein the process involves feeding a textile structure on a moving substrate that takes the textile structure through a double belt system 36, 37 having a hot 38 and cold section 39. Pardo abstract, ¶¶ 39, 83 Fig. 2. Dry powder coating devices 28, 31 apply thermoplastic powder particles to both surfaces of the textile structure, wherein the powder is configured to form an amorphous non-crystalline thermoplastic matrix. Id. ¶¶ 33, 39, 82, 91 Fig. 2. The textile structure is moved into the hot section 38, wherein heat and pressure is applied to the thermoplastic powder to melt the powder to form an amorphous thermoplastic matrix that interpenetrates the textile structure to obtain the composite sheet. Id. ¶¶ 39–43, Fig. 2. The textile structure is then moved to the cold section 39, where the structure is cooled and rolled into a form of a roll. Id. ¶¶ 83–84, Fig. 2.
Pardo fails to teach that the thermoplastic powder is micrometric in size.
Bhatnagar teaches a process of forming defect-free fibrous composite materials comprising a stack of fibrous plies coated with a dry, micro-particulate binder. Bhatnagar abstract, ¶¶ 58–60.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have looked to Bhatnagar for guidance as to a suitable powder binder size in order to successfully practice the invention of Pardo.
Claim 2 is rejected as the powder is heated to a temperature in the range of 200–220oC and compressed at a pressure of 15 N/cm2. Id. ¶¶ 40, 93, Fig. 2. Claim 3 is rejected as the cooling process takes place at a temperature below the solidification point of the lowest-melting-point material in the composite. Id. ¶ 44.
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 MATTHEW D MATZEK whose telephone number is (571)272-5732. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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, Jennifer Boyd can be reached at 571.272.7783. 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.
/MATTHEW D MATZEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights