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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/18/2026 have been fully considered but they are not entirely persuasive.
Applicant argues that Parthasarathy does not teach the amended limitations to claims 1, 17, and 53 regarding the deformable membrane displacing downward under the workpiece and also upward around the workpiece in response to engagement from the non-compliant stamping surface. Examiner agrees that Parthasarathy only describes downward displacement and not upward. However, after further search, Yamabe is cited which describes displacement in both an upward direction and downward direction around a laminate workpiece in response to the engagement of a mandrel. The dependent claims also remain rejected.
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 11-14 and 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.
Regarding claim 11, the claim recites “a first stamping tool…defining the first non-complaint stamping surface” however claim 1 previously recites “a first non-compliant stamping surface of a first non-compliant stamping tool.” It is not clear if “a first stamping tool” in claim 11 is the same or a different tool as the “first non-compliant stamping surface” in claim 1. This will be interpreted to mean either the same or a different component as in claim 1. Claims 12-14 and 16 are rejected as being dependent from claim 11.
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:
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 11-14, 16-17, 22-23, and 53-55 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parthasarathy (US 2017/0341310, made of record on the IDs dated 9/9/2024) modified by Yamabe (JP2007253441A, see English translation provided.)
Regarding claim 1, Parthasarathy meets the claimed, A compliant stamping tool for stamp forming a workpiece, (Parthasarathy [0027] describes a stamping tool) the compliant stamping tool comprising: a support structure having a thickness along a stamping axis (Parthasarathy [0029] describes a housing 106, see Figure 1 showing the thickness in the stamping direction along path 136 ) and comprising a support wall spaced from the stamping axis, (Parthasarathy [0029] and Figure 1 show sidewall 120 spaced from the path 136) the support wall defining a chamber with an opening; (Parthasarathy [0029]-[0039] show the sidewall 120 defines an interior space 122 with an opening 128) a fluid disposed within the chamber; (Parthasarathy [0031] describes a pressurized fluid 115 such as compressed gas in the interior space 122) and a deformable membrane secured to the support wall, (Parthasarathy [0030] describes a membrane 108 which is coupled at the top part of the sidewall 120, see [0036] describing the membrane being flexible) covering the opening and sealing the fluid within the chamber (Parthasarathy [0032] and [0048] the membrane 108 seals the opening 128 so that the housing is air tight which meets the broadest reasonable interpretation of “a deformable membrane…covering the opening and sealing the fluid within the chamber” and [0032] additionally describes that openings 134 are also omitted meaning that the fluid is generally sealed in the housing even beyond the deformable membrane creating the seal) the deformable membrane defining a compliant stamping surface configured to oppose a first non-compliant stamping surface of a first-noncompliant stamping tool (Parthasarathy [0038] describes membrane 108 opposes a stamping tool 104,) wherein an inner surface of the support wall defines peripheral limits of the chamber and the opening (Parthasarathy Figure 1 shows the inner sides of the sidewall 120 defines the interior space 122 and opening 128) and wherein the fluid is configured to displace in response to engagement of the first non-compliant stamping surface and the compliant stamping surface with the workpiece (Parthasarathy [0038] describes the pressurized fluid movement in response to the tool 104, see also Figure 2) and wherein the deformable membrane is configured to displace downward under the workpiece (Parthasarathy Figure 2 shows the membrane 108 deforming downward under the workpiece).
Parthasarathy does not describe the membrane displacing upward and does not meet the claimed, and upward around the workpiece in response to engagement of the first non- compliant stamping surface and the compliant stamping surface with the workpiece.
Analogous in the field of shaping composite components, Yamabe also describes using a pressurized vessel and membrane to shape a workpiece around a mandrel and meets the claimed, and wherein the deformable membrane is configured to displace downward under the workpiece and upward around the workpiece in response to engagement of the first non- compliant stamping surface and the compliant stamping surface with the workpiece (Yamabe [0038] and Figure 3 describes a mandrel 5 pressing a laminated body 1 against an inflatable bag 3. The bag 3 begins to deform around the laminated body, including both upwards (away from the mandrel) and downwards (towards the mandrel) around the laminated body.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to substitute the membrane of Parthasarathy with the bag of Yamabe which is configured to displace both upward and downward around the laminate body in order to form shapes such as a C-shaped cross section, see Yamabe [0040].
PNG
media_image1.png
531
734
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Additionally, or alternatively with respect to claim 1, the embodiment described in Parthasarathy Figure 11 and [0059]-[0062] also meets the claim and does not describe any perforated plates, A compliant stamping tool for stamp forming a workpiece, the compliant stamping tool comprising: a support structure having a thickness along a stamping axis (Parthasarathy Figure 11 shows a base beneath the housing 606) and comprising a support wall spaced from the stamping axis, (Parthasarathy Figure 11 shows the walls of the housing 106) the support wall defining a chamber (Parthasarathy [0059], housing 106 and interior space 612) with an opening; (Parthasarathy [0059], opening 614) a fluid disposed within the chamber; (Parthasarathy [0060], forming media 604) and a deformable membrane secured to the support wall, covering the opening and sealing the fluid within the chamber, (Parthasarathy [0059] membrane 610, see Figure 11 showing it covering the opening and extending across the housing to each of the sidewalls) the deformable membrane defining a compliant stamping surface configured to oppose different non-compliant stamping surfaces of opposing stamping tools; (Parthasarathy [0061] describes the membrane 610 forming around the tool 608) wherein an inner surface of the support wall defines peripheral limits of the chamber and the opening (see Parthasarathy Figure 11 showing the sidewalls of the housing 106 limit the housing) and wherein the fluid is configured to displace in response to engagement of a first non- compliant stamping surface of the different non-compliant stamping surfaces and the compliant stamping surface with the workpiece (Parthasarathy [0061] describe how the membrane 610 enters the interior space through the opening 614, the forming media 604 is inherently displaced by this movement) and wherein the deformable membrane is configured to displace downward under the workpiece (Parthasarathy Figure 2 shows the membrane 108 deforming downward under the workpiece).
Regarding claim 2, Parthasarathy meets the claimed, The compliant stamping tool of Claim 1 wherein the support wall of the support structure defines a depth for the chamber along the stamping axis (Parthasarathy Figure 1 shows the sidewall 120 defines the depth of the interior space 122 along the direction of path 136.)
Regarding claim 4, Parthasarathy meets the claimed, The compliant stamping tool of Claim 1 wherein the compliant stamping surface defined by the deformable membrane extends outward from the stamping axis (Parthasarathy Figure 1 shows the membrane extends outwards from the path 136.)
Regarding claim 5, Parthasarathy meets the claimed, The compliant stamping tool of Claim 1 wherein the fluid comprises at least one of rubber particles, silicone rubber particles, urethane rubber particles, natural rubber particles, styrene-butadiene rubber particles, a colloidal suspension, a paste, a gas, dry air, an inert gas, a nitrogen gas, a liquid, a water-based liquid, a mineral-based oil, a synthetic- -2-based oil, a particulate liquid, solid particles, metal particles, plastic particles and mineral particles (Parthasarathy [0031] describes the pressurized fluid 115 is a compressed gas.)
Regarding claim 6, Parthasarathy meets the claimed, The compliant stamping tool of Claim 1 wherein the deformable membrane comprises at least one of a rubber material, a thermoplastic elastomer material, a thermoplastic composite material, a thermoset composite material, a reinforced polyimide, a fiber reinforced elastomeric material, a fiberglass material, a silicone material, a particulate filler, reinforcement fibers, metal fibers, short fibers, chopped fibers and a rubber matrix material (Parthasarathy [0037] describes membrane 108 is rubber or silicone.)
Regarding claim 11, Parthasarathy meets the claimed, A system for stamp forming a workpiece, the system comprising: the compliant stamping tool of Claim 1; (Parthasarathy describes the tool of claim 1) and a first stamping tool having a thickness along the stamping axis and defining a first non-compliant stamping surface (Parthasarathy [0029] and Figure 1 show the tool 104 having a thickness along path 136. The tool 104 is non-compliant and does not change shape when pressed, see Figure 2.)
Regarding claim 12, Parthasarathy meets the claimed, The system of Claim 11 wherein the first non-compliant stamping surface extends outward from the stamping axis (Parthasarathy Figure 1 shows the tool 104 extends outward from the path 136.)
Regarding claim 13, Parthasarathy meets the claimed, The system of Claim 11 wherein the deformable membrane of the compliant stamping tool is configured to conform to the first non-compliant stamping surface (Parthasarathy [0040]describe the membrane 108 forms to the geometry of the tool 104).
Regarding claim 14, Parthasarathy meets the claimed, The system of Claim 11, further comprising: a second stamping tool having a thickness along the stamping axis and defining a second non-compliant stamping surface, the second non-compliant stamping surface being different from the first non-compliant stamping surface, wherein the compliant stamping surface of the deformable membrane is configured to oppose the second non-compliant stamping surface of the second stamping tool (Parthasarathy [0033] describes many tools 104 that can be used and [0049] describes how two tools can be used, see also Figure 4.)
Regarding claim 16, Parthasarathy meets the claimed, The system of Claim 14 wherein the deformable membrane of the compliant stamping tool is configured to conform to the second non-compliant stamping surface and the fluid is configured to displace in response to engagement of the second non-compliant stamping surface and the compliant stamping surface with the workpiece (Parthasarathy [0051] describes the membrane 310 deforms in response to the tools 304.)
Regarding claim 17, Parthasarathy meets the claimed, A system for stamp forming a workpiece, the system comprising: a first non-compliant stamping tool having a thickness along a stamping axis and defining a first non-compliant stamping surface extending from the stamping axis; (Parthasarathy [0029] and Figure 1 show a tool 104 having a thickness along path 136 and extending outward from path 136. The tool 104 is non-compliant and does not change shape when pressed, see Figure 2) and a compliant stamping tool having a thickness along the stamping axis, (Parthasarathy [0030] describes a membrane 108, Figure 1 shows the membrane extends outwards from the path 136) the compliant stamping tool comprising: a support structure having a thickness along the stamping axis (Parthasarathy [0029] describes a housing 106, see Figure 1 showing the thickness in the stamping direction along path 136) and comprising a support wall spaced from the stamping axis, the support wall defining a chamber with an opening; (Parthasarathy [0029]-[0039] show the sidewall 120 defines an interior space 122 with an opening 128) a fluid disposed within the chamber; (Parthasarathy [0031] describes a pressurized fluid 115 such as compressed gas in the interior space 122) and a deformable membrane secured to the support wall, (Parthasarathy [0030] describes a membrane 108 which is coupled at the top part of the sidewall 120) covering the opening and sealing the fluid within the chamber, (Parthasarathy [0032] and [0048] describe the membrane 108 seals the opening 128 so that the housing is air tight which meets the broadest reasonable interpretation of “a deformable membrane…covering the opening and sealing the fluid within the chamber” and [0032] additionally describes that openings 134 are also omitted meaning that the fluid is generally sealed in the housing even beyond the deformable membrane creating the seal) the deformable membrane defining a compliant stamping surface opposing the first non-compliant stamping surface (Parthasarathy [0038] describes membrane 108 opposes a stamping tool 104) wherein an inner surface of the support wall defines peripheral limits of the chamber and the opening (Parthasarathy Figure 1 shows the inner sides of the sidewall 120 defines the interior space 122 and opening 128) and wherein the fluid is configured to displace in response to engagement of the first non-compliant stamping surface and the compliant stamping surface with the workpiece (Parthasarathy [0038] describes the pressurized fluid movement in response to the tool 104, see also Figure 2) and wherein the deformable membrane is configured to displace downward under the workpiece (Parthasarathy Figure 2 shows the membrane 108 deforming downward under the workpiece).
Parthasarathy does not describe the membrane displacing upward and does not meet the claimed, and upward around the workpiece in response to engagement of the first non- compliant stamping surface and the compliant stamping surface with the workpiece.
Analogous in the field of shaping composite components, Yamabe also describes using a pressurized vessel and membrane to shape a workpiece around a mandrel and meets the claimed, and wherein the deformable membrane is configured to displace downward under the workpiece and upward around the workpiece in response to engagement of the first non- compliant stamping surface and the compliant stamping surface with the workpiece (Yamabe [0038] and Figure 3 describes a mandrel 5 pressing a laminated body 1 against an inflatable bag 3. The bag 3 begins to deform around the laminated body, including both upwards (away from the mandrel) and downwards (towards the mandrel) around the laminated body.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to substitute the membrane of Parthasarathy with the bag of Yamabe which is configured to displace both upward and downward around the laminate body in order to form shapes such as a C-shaped cross section, see Yamabe [0040].
Regarding claim 22, Parthasarathy meets the claimed, The system of Claim 17 wherein the fluid comprises at least one of rubber particles, silicone rubber particles, urethane rubber particles, natural rubber particles, styrene-butadiene rubber particles, a colloidal suspension, a paste, a gas, dry air, an inert gas, a nitrogen gas, a liquid, a water-based liquid, a mineral-based oil, a synthetic-based oil, a particulate liquid, solid particles, metal particles, plastic particles and mineral particles (Parthasarathy [0031] describes the pressurized fluid 115 is a compressed gas.)
Regarding claim 23, Parthasarathy meets the claimed, The system of Claim 17 wherein the deformable membrane comprises at least one of a rubber material, a thermoplastic elastomer material, a thermoplastic composite material, a thermoset composite material, a reinforced polyimide, a fiber reinforced elastomeric material, a fiberglass material, a silicone material, a particulate filler, reinforcement fibers, metal fibers, short fibers, chopped fibers and a rubber matrix material (Parthasarathy [0037] describes membrane 108 is rubber or silicone.)
Regarding claim 53, Parthasarathy meets the claimed, A system for stamp forming a workpiece, (Parthasarathy [0027] describes a stamping system 100) the system comprising: a first non-compliant stamping tool having a thickness along a stamping axis and defining a first non-compliant stamping surface extending from the stamping axis; (Parthasarathy [0029] and Figure 1 show the tool 104 having a thickness along path 136. The tool 104 is non-compliant and does not change shape when pressed, see Figure 2) and a compliant stamping tool having a thickness along the stamping axis, the compliant stamping tool comprising: a support structure having a thickness along the stamping axis (Parthasarathy [0029] describes a housing 106, see Figure 1 showing the thickness in the stamping direction along path 136 ) and comprising a support wall spaced from the stamping axis, (Parthasarathy [0029] and Figure 1 show sidewall 120 spaced from the path 136) the support wall defining a chamber with an opening; (Parthasarathy [0029]-[0039] show the sidewall 120 defines an interior space 122 with an opening 128) a fluid disposed within the chamber; (Parthasarathy [0031] describes a pressurized fluid 115 such as compressed gas in the interior space 122) and a deformable membrane secured to the support wall, (Parthasarathy [0030] describes a membrane 108 which is coupled at the top part of the sidewall 120, see [0036] describing the membrane being flexible) covering the opening and sealing the fluid within the chamber, (Parthasarathy [0032] the membrane 108 seals the opening 128 ) the deformable membrane defining a compliant stamping surface opposing the first non-compliant stamping surface; (Parthasarathy [0038] describes membrane 108 opposes a stamping tool 104, [0033] describes many different tools 104) wherein the deformable membrane of the compliant stamping tool is configured to conform to the first non-compliant stamping surface (Parthasarathy [0040]describe the membrane 108 forms to the geometry of the tool 104) and the fluid is configured to displace in response to engagement of the first non-compliant stamping surface and the compliant stamping surface with the workpiece (Parthasarathy [0038] describes the pressurized fluid movement in response to the tool 104, see also Figure 2) and wherein the deformable membrane is configured to displace downward under the workpiece (Parthasarathy Figure 2 shows the membrane 108 deforming downward under the workpiece).
Parthasarathy does not describe the membrane displacing upward and does not meet the claimed, and upward around the workpiece in response to engagement of the first non- compliant stamping surface and the compliant stamping surface with the workpiece.
Analogous in the field of shaping composite components, Yamabe also describes using a pressurized vessel and membrane to shape a workpiece around a mandrel and meets the claimed, and wherein the deformable membrane is configured to displace downward under the workpiece and upward around the workpiece in response to engagement of the first non- compliant stamping surface and the compliant stamping surface with the workpiece (Yamabe [0038] and Figure 3 describes a mandrel 5 pressing a laminated body 1 against an inflatable bag 3. The bag 3 begins to deform around the laminated body, including both upwards (away from the mandrel) and downwards (towards the mandrel) around the laminated body.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to substitute the membrane of Parthasarathy with the bag of Yamabe which is configured to displace both upward and downward around the laminate body in order to form shapes such as a C-shaped cross section, see Yamabe [0040].
Regarding claim 54, Parthasarathy meets the claimed, The compliant stamping tool of Claim 1 wherein the compliant stamping tool is reconfigurable for subsequent use with other non-compliant stamping tools for different part geometries than the first non-compliant stamping tool. (Parthasarathy [0033] and [0036] describes many different tools 104 and that the membrane 108 can accommodate many different tool geometries, [0037] describes the membrane may be reused.)
Regarding claim 55, Parthasarathy meets the claimed, The system of Claim 17 wherein the system is reconfigurable for subsequent use of the compliant stamping tool with other non-compliant stamping tools for different part geometries than the first non-compliant stamping tool (Parthasarathy [0033] and [0036] describes many different tools 104 and that the membrane 108 can accommodate many different tool geometries, [0037] describes the membrane may be reused.)
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parthasarathy modified by Yamabe and in further view of Pourboghrat (US 20160129495, made of record on the IDS filed 9/9/2024.)
Regarding claim 8, Parthasarathy meets the claimed, The compliant stamping tool of Claim 1 wherein the workpiece comprises a thermoplastic composite material with reinforcement fibers (Parthasarathy [0037] describes the stacked material workpiece has reinforcing fibers such as carbon fiber.)
Parthasarathy does not specify that the fibers are embedded in a thermoplastic matrix material.
Analogous in the field of stamp presses, Pourboghrat describes a similar stamping apparatus as Parthasarathy including a cavity having a pressurized fluid and meets the claimed, embedded in a thermoplastic matrix material (Pourboghrat [0076] describes the blank substrate 310 is made from a thermoplastic polymer matrix and a reinforcement material such as fibers.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to substitute the workpiece of Parthasarathy with the workpiece containing fibers in a thermoplastic matrix as described in Pourboghrat in order to allow the workpiece to cure in the desired shape, see Pourboghrat [0046]. Additionally, Examiner notes that claim limitations directed to the material being worked upon by a structure, such as the workpiece being stamped, do not impart patentability to the claims, see MPEP §2115. Therefore, the workpiece being made out of thermoplastic material and reinforcing fibers does not impart patentably distinct limitations onto the claim.
Regarding claim 9, Parthasarathy [0030] describes the membrane being coupled to the wall but does not specify hardware is used and does not meet the claimed, The compliant stamping tool of Claim 1, further comprising: a mounting hardware securing the deformable membrane to a support surface of the support wall in conjunction with the deformable membrane covering the opening of the chamber and sealing the fluid within the chamber.
Pourboghrat also describes a seal 168 for sealing the fluid within the cavity 146 and meets the claimed, The compliant stamping tool of Claim 1, further comprising: a mounting hardware securing the deformable membrane to a support surface of the support wall in conjunction with the deformable membrane covering the opening of the chamber and sealing the fluid within the chamber (Pourboghrat [0061] describes a tongue and groove system that couples the seals 168.)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to combine the coupling described in Pourboghrat with the tongue and groove fastener described in Pourboghrat in order to seal the cavity and allow the fluid to be pressurized, see Pourboghrat [0061].
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 VICTORIA BARTLETT whose telephone number is (571)272-4953. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am-5:00 pm EST.
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, Sam Zhao can be reached on 571-270-5343. 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.
/V.B./Examiner, Art Unit 1744
/XIAO S ZHAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights