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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 1-15 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 recites the limitation “thermal expansion coefficient.” As the thermal expansion coefficient varies with temperature, it is unclear what falls within the scope of this limitation and what does not. Claims 2-11 are rejected because they depend on claim 1.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “thermally balanced.” The specification discloses that the term "thermally balanced" means a substrate that maintains flatness within a temperature range of 25° C. to 70° C., as measured by edge lift test ([0028]). However, it is unclear what edge lift measurements are considered to indicate flatness and what measurements are not. Claims 2-11 are rejected because they depend on claim 1.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “thermal expansion coefficient.” As the thermal expansion coefficient varies with temperature, it is unclear what falls within the scope of this limitation and what does not. Claim 13 is rejected because it depends on claim 12.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “thermally balanced.” The specification discloses that the term "thermally balanced" means a substrate that maintains flatness within a temperature range of 25° C. to 70° C., as measured by edge lift test ([0028]). However, it is unclear what edge lift measurements are considered to indicate flatness and what measurements are not. Claim 13 is rejected because it depends on claim 12.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “thermal expansion coefficient.” As the thermal expansion coefficient varies with temperature, it is unclear what falls within the scope of this limitation and what does not. Claim 15 is rejected because it depends on claim 14.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “thermally balanced.” The specification discloses that the term "thermally balanced" means a substrate that maintains flatness within a temperature range of 25° C. to 70° C., as measured by edge lift test ([0028]). However, it is unclear what edge lift measurements are considered to indicate flatness and what measurements are not. Claim 15 is rejected because it depends on claim 14.
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-9 and 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baker et al. (US 2008/0187739 A1) in view of Francis et al. (US 2018/0154606 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 5-6 and 12, Baker teaches a high strength, light weight composite (a lightweight multilayer substrate) that has: (a) a core (at least one top layer) comprising a thermoset polymer and having a surface and (b) a laminate bonded to at least a portion of the surface of the core, the laminate comprising: (i) at least one layer of fibrous material having a surface, and (ii) at least one layer of thermoset binder (alternatively, at least one top layer) which is bonded to at least a portion of the surface of at least one layer of fibrous material, each thermoset binder layer optionally comprising a low density filler (Abstract).
FIG. 1A shows a composite 10 having a fibrous material layer 12 which has a surface 14 ([0059]). A layer of thermoset binder 16 is bonded to at least a portion of the surface 14 of fibrous material layer 12 ([0059]). Composite 10 also has a core 20, which comprises a thermoset polymer and has a surface 22 ([0059]). The fibrous material of fibrous material layer 12 can be a woven or non-woven material (a nonwoven core) ([0060]). The examiner notes that the composite is made using a mold or a double belt press ([0136] and [0179]). Therefore, the non-woven material is thermally compressed.
The composite also has a modulus of rupture of greater than about 2,000 pounds per square inch, and a coefficient of thermal expansion of from about 2.0x10-7 in/in/° F. to 2.0x10-5 in/in/° F (about 3.6x10-7 m/(m*°C) to 3.6x10-5 m/(m*°C), as calculated by the examiner) ([0127]). Typically, the coefficient of thermal expansion is about 2.0x10-6 in/in/° F (about 3.6x10-6 m/(m*°C)) ([0127]). In a preferred embodiment, a composite comprises expanded volcanic ash, a polyurethane core, and epoxy as the thermoset binder has a specific gravity less than about 0.60 grams per cubic centimeter and a flexural modulus greater than 6000 MPa ([0128]). As calculated by the examiner, this would be equivalent to a specific modulus range of greater than 10,000 MPa/(g/cm3), which falls within the claimed range of greater than 1200 (MPa/(g/cm3)) .
Baker does not explicitly disclose, in one embodiment, wherein the composite has the disclosed properties and comprises the fibrous material in the form of a non-woven material.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have provided, in a composite having the properties disclosed by Baker, either a woven or non-woven material for the fibrous material layer, as these are the two types of materials taught by Baker for use as the fibrous material layer.
Baker does not explicitly disclose wherein the lightweight multilayer substrate is thermally balanced between 25 °C and 70 °C.
However, Francis teaches providing a surfacing film on a front face and a rear reinforcement layer on a rear face on opposite sides of a symmetric central multilayer laminate, wherein the surfacing film and the rear reinforcement layer are structured to provide a panel that has balanced coefficients of thermal expansion on opposite sides of the neutral plane ([0018] and [0021]). In Example 1, warping of a panel when subjected to thermal stresses was determined ([0112]). All panels were cured as 250x270 mm flat panels at 160° C ([0112]). After de-molding, the panel was allowed to cool to room temperature (20° C.) and the panel was placed onto a flat surface to check for distortion ([0112]). To measure the level of distortion, three corners were held against the surface while measuring the distance of the highest corner from the reference flat surface ([0112]). There was no measurable warping of this panel as the height was measured at 0 mm ([0112]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have provided the composite of Baker with a structure that exhibits no measurable warping when subjected to thermal stresses over a temperature range of 20° C to 160° C in order to obtain high performance body panel parts that meet combinations of requirements, such as low weight, high stiffness and resistance to deformation (Francis: [0001], [0003] and [0112]; also see [0012], [0018] and [0021]).
Regarding claims 2 and 13, Francis teaches a reinforcement layer 10 (a nonwoven core) comprised of a rear ply 34 of fiber reinforced resin matrix composite material ([0046] and FIG. 5). The rear ply 34 includes a second fibrous layer 36 of a plurality of continuous fibers in a resin matrix 38 ([0046]). The second fibrous layer 36 may be a non-woven material that is continuous, in particular a unidirectional (UD) material or a multiaxial material, for example layers of aligned tows stitched together to form a biaxial fabric having structural fibers in two directions, typically two orthogonal directions, or any other multiple layer configuration ([0049]). Typically, the continuous fibers of the second fibrous layer 36 are composed of glass fibers, thermoplastic fibers or aramid fibers ([0052]).
Regarding claims 3-4 and 9, Francis teaches that, in some embodiments, a filled resin surfacing film on the front face (at least one bottom layer) may be thermally balanced by both the surfacing film and the rear reinforcement layer (at least one top layer) including continuous fibers, for example a lightweight woven glass fiber layer, in a filled resin film (a reinforcing layer), with equal areal weights of resin and filler in the surfacing film and the rear reinforcement layer ([0020]). Francis also teaches that the surfacing film may comprise resin with particulate filler, for example inorganic filler particles and/or milled carbon fibers and/or milled glass fibers (a reinforcing layer) ([0011]). Francis further teaches wherein a reinforcement layer 10 (at least one top layer) is comprised of a rear ply 34 of fiber reinforced resin matrix composite material ([0046] and FIG. 5). The rear ply 34 includes a second fibrous layer 36 of a plurality of continuous fibers in a resin matrix 38 ([0046]). The second fibrous layer 36 may be a non-woven material that is continuous, in particular a unidirectional (UD) material or a multiaxial material, for example layers of aligned tows stitched together to form a biaxial fabric having structural fibers in two directions, typically two orthogonal directions, or any other multiple layer configuration ([0049]).
Regarding claims 7-8, as applied above, Francis teaches, in Example 1, that all panels were cured as 250x270 mm flat panels at 160° C ([0112]). To measure the level of distortion, three corners were held against the surface while measuring the distance of the highest corner from the reference flat surface ([0112]). There was no measurable warping of this panel as the height was measured at 0 mm ([0112]). The examiner notes that the panels would therefore have an edge lift of less than 0.50%, and less than 0.25%, as claimed.
Regarding claim 14, Baker in view of Francis remains as applied above to claims 1 and 2, teaching a lightweight multilayer substrate as claimed, including a reinforcement layer 10 (a nonwoven core) that may be a non-woven, in particular a unidirectional (UD) material or a multiaxial material, for example layers of aligned tows stitched together to form a biaxial fabric, and that typically includes continuous fibers composed of glass fibers, thermoplastic fibers or aramid fibers (see particularly [0046], [0049] and [0052] of Francis). Francis also teaches a surface film (at least one top layer) ([0018]-[0020]; also [0011]). Francis further teaches that, in one embodiment a panel part and a reinforcement part comprise prepregs, incorporating a resin layer adjacent to or at least partly impregnating the central plies and rear ply ([0076]). Depending on the part complexity, the prepreg layers may be first drape formed, typically using a matched tool set in a double diaphragm vacuum forming process ([0076]). The examiner notes that, as applied to the reinforcement layer, this process would include steps of bonding thermoplastic fibers together to create at least one thermoplastic fiber layer, and compacting (compressing) the at least one thermoplastic fiber layer, as claimed. Francis further teaches that the prepreg layup is then subjected to compression molding to form the molded composite panel ([0076]). Francis teaches that, as shown in FIGS. 1 and 2, in the composite panel 2, a rear reinforcement layer 10, formed from the reinforcement part and the front layer 6, formed from the surface resin film, are integrally molded with the central multilayer portion 8, formed from the panel part, to provide one or more primary structural regions 10 of the composite panel 2 ([0080]). In addition, as applied above to claim 1, Baker teaches the claimed specific modulus and thermal expansion coefficient properties, and Francis teaches thermally balanced composites.
Regarding claim 15, Baker teaches using a double belt press ([0179]-[0180]). Baker teaches that, as is known in the art, a double belt press has an upper belt and a lower belt, each belt being in the form of a closed or continuous loop ([0180]).
Claim(s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baker et al. (US 2008/0187739 A1) in view of Francis et al. (US 2018/0154606 A1), as applied to claims 1 and 3 above, further in view of Roebroeks et al. (US Patent No. 5,547,735).
Regarding claim 10, Baker in view of Francis remains as applied above.
Baker in view of Francis does not explicitly disclose wherein the reinforcing layer is an aluminum film or sheet.
However, Roebroeks teaches a glass fiber reinforced metal-polymer laminate comprising at least two metal sheets and a reinforcing layer between each of the metal sheets (col. 1, lines 42-44). The metal sheets in the laminate may be of a metal selected from the following group: aluminum alloys, steel, titanium alloys, copper alloys and magnesium alloys (col. 1, lines 45-47). Preferably, at least one of the metal sheets comprises an aluminum-copper alloy of the AA2000 series or an aluminum-zinc alloy of the AA 7000 series (col. 1, lines 47-50).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have included a metal sheet comprising an aluminum alloy in the composites of Baker in view of Francis as a matter of conventional use in aircraft flooring and firewall applications and/or because aluminum sheets can be used to provide composites with superior impact resistance in combination with other properties that are desirable for applications such as aircraft flooring and firewall liners (Abstract, col. 17-20, col. 1 lines 29-33, and col. 5 lines 58-64).
Regarding claim 11, Roebroeks teaches wherein a reinforcing layer has a matrix of thermosetting epoxy resin, preferably a metal adhesive (col. 3, lines 56-57).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 2015/0152650 A1 teaches a polymeric composite that may exhibit at least two of flexural modulus of greater than 700 MPa, a notched impact strength of at least 300 J/m, a tensile elongation of at least 4%, and a coefficient of thermal expansion of less than 70 μm/m/K ([0045]). The polymeric composite exhibits a specific gravity of about 0.5 to 1.6 g/cm3 ([0045]).
US 2018/0244879 A1 teaches evaluation of warpage of a fiber-reinforced resin, wherein a sample rated "good" was considered as passing the evaluation ([0220]). For a “good” rating, the average of distances between the corners of the fiber-reinforced resin and a surface plate is 2 mm or less (small warpage) ([0221]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kevin Worrell whose telephone number is (571)270-7728. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.
/Kevin Worrell/Examiner, Art Unit 1789
/MARLA D MCCONNELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1789