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 Amendments
Applicant filed a response and amended claims 1-3 and 6, and added claim 21 on 06/02/2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments are primarily drawn to the amended claims. The revised rejection below addresses the amendments.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 8, and 10-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Tsotsis (PG-PUB 2013/0134621) in view of Heald (PG-PUB 2006/0244172).
Regarding claim 1, Tsotsis teaches a method for manufacturing a composite structure (Figure 22) comprising:
heating one or more layers of fibrous material having thermally activatable material above an activation temperature of the thermally activatable material using a heating device installed any location upstream of the forming die [0094]-[0095], [0098];
providing a forming tool comprising a plurality of tool components, wherein the tool components are movable relative to each other to change thickness of the cavity (Figure 6-9, [0066], [0096]-[0098]);
forming, by the forming surfaces of the forming tool, the one or more layers of fibrous material having thermally activatable material into a first fabric subelement, wherein the relative positions of the tool components of the forming tool are adjusted based on a first set of dimensions corresponding to the first fabric subelement (Figures 1, 2, 6-9; [0060]; [0099]);
removing the first fabric subelement from the forming tool (Figures 1, 2, 6-9 and [0063]-[0064], [0067]);
integrating the first fabric subelement into a preform to form a complete element ([0080]-[0084], [0101], [0104]),
wherein the preform includes at least the first fabric subelement and a second fabric subelement (Figure 19, item 218 and [0084]-[0086]);
infusing, within a mold tool, the complete element with resin (Figure 15-16 and [0040], [0086], [0102], [0104]-[0105]); and
curing the complete element infused with resin to form the composite structure [0040], [0103]-[0105].
Tsotsis teaches the system may be configured to form the subelements in a “Z” section, an “L” section, a 'T' section, an “I” section, a “J” section, a blade section, and any one of a variety of other cross-sectional shapes, without limitation (Figures 15-17 and [0041], [0057], [0078]-[0079], [0085]).
Tsotsis does not teach providing a forming tool comprising a plurality of tool components, wherein the tool components are movable relative to each other to change dimensions of the forming tool and relative positions of forming surfaces and forming, wherein the relative positions of the tool components of the forming tool are adjusted based on a first set of dimensions corresponding to the first fabric subelement.
Heald teaches a modular pultrusion die containing removable and replaceable inserts for allowing for a variety of pultruded profiles to be formed more rapidly and substantially less costly than existing non-modular (Abstract and [0028], [0029], [0031]). Heald teaches the use of interchangeable inserts provides a way for a single die unit to produce multiple profiles, thereby reducing the cost of multiple dies, and the specific use of the interchangeable split inserts provides a simple way to remove and replace consolidation and cooling inserts without removing glass from the die, thereby saving hours or even days of down time [0032].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to improve the process of Tsotsis with a modular pultrusion dies as taught by Heald utilizing removable and replaceable inserts for the benefit of providing various pultrusion profiles at reduced costs, such as different shaped stringers as suggested by Tsotsis.
Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the process of Tsotsis with steps of positioning appropriate die inserts coupled to the die assembly of Tsotsis in view of Heald to change dimensions of the forming tool and relative positions of forming surfaces in order to obtain the appropriate pultruded profile for the first fabric subelement and other shaped subelements.
Regarding claim 5, Tsotsis in view of Heald teaches the method the methos as applied to claim 1, cooling the one or more layers formed into the first fabric subelement below the activation temperature to harden the thermally activatable material, wherein a shape of the first fabric subelement is retained by the hardened thermally activatable material (Tsotsis, Figure 1 and 2 and [0040]; Figure 10, item 130 and [0100]).
Regarding claim 8, Tsotsis in view of Heald teaches the method as applied to claim 1, wherein integrating the first fabric subelement into the preform to form the complete element comprises: assembling the first fabric subelement and at least the second fabric subelement into a hat (Tsotsis, Figures 15-17 and [0041], [0050],[0056]).
Regarding claim 10, Tsotsis in view of Heald teaches the method as applied to claim 1, wherein one or more layers of fibrous material includes one or more layers of fabric (Tsotsis, [0046]).
Regarding claim 11, Tsotsis in view of Heald teaches the method as applied to claim 10, wherein the one or more layers of fabric includes carbon fiber (Tsotsis, [0047]).
Regarding claim 12, Tsotsis in view of Heald teaches the method as applied to claim 1, wherein the thermally activatable material comprises: a predetermined percentage of thermoplastic material (Tsotsis, [0042]-[0045], [0082], [0092]).
Regarding claim 13, Tsotsis in view of Heald teaches the method as applied to claim 12, wherein heating one or more layers of fibrous material having thermally activatable material comprises: heating the one or more layers of fibrous material above a tackification temperature of the thermoplastic material (Tsotsis, [0042]-[0044]).
Regarding claim 14, Tsotsis in view of Heald teaches the method as applied to claim 13, wherein the predetermined percentage of thermoplastic material retains a permeability of the one or more layers of fibrous material upon cooling below the tackification temperature of the thermoplastic material as indicated by the formed fabric subelement being subsequently infused with resin (Tsotsis, [0042]-[0044], [0050], [0077]-[0078]).
Claim(s) 2-4, 6, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsotsis (PG-PUB 2013/0134621) in view of Heald (PG-PUB 2006/0244172), as applied to claim 1, in further view of Berionni (PG-PUB 2025/0249644).
Regarding claim 2, Tsotsis in view of Heald teaches the method as applied to claim 1, further comprising:
adjusting relative positions of the tool components based on a second set of profile and, therefore, dimensions corresponding to another fabric subelement during replacement of the first insert with the second insert (Heald, Abstract and [0028], [0029], [0031]-[0032]).
forming, using the forming tool, one or more layers of fibrous material having thermally activatable material heated above the activation temperature into the other fabric subelement (Tsotsis, Figures 1, 2, 6-9; [0060], [0062], [0065], [0067], [0099]); and
removing the other fabric subelement from the forming tool (Tsotsis, Figures 2 and 10 and [0063]-[0064]).
Tsotsis teaches forming a single, unitary final composite article from the preform and additional fibrous material (Figure 19 and [0086]).
Tsotsis in view of Heald does not teach shaping a second fabric subelement, including:
adjusting the relative positions of the tool components of the forming tool based on a second set of dimensions corresponding to the second fabric subelement;
forming, using the forming surfaces of the forming tool, one or more layers of
fibrous material having thermally activatable material heated above the activation
temperature into the second fabric subelement; and
removing the second fabric subelement from the forming tool. wherein the second fabric subelement is integrated with the first fabric subelement into a preform to form a complete element.
Berionni teaches a process of manufacturing a composite assembly of stringers and skin (Figure 1 and [0060]-[0065]), wherein each stringer is adhered to the skin
[0066], and the cross-section of the stringers may be of different shapes
e.g., arc of a circle, semi-circular, rectangular, polygonal, semi-ellipsoidal, semi-oval, etc. [0067].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the stringers in the single unitary final composite article of Tsotsis in view of Heald with stringers of different shapes, a known suitable configuration of stringers for an aircraft fuselage as taught by Berionni.
Given that the plurality of stringers used in the unitary final composite article of Tsotsis in view of Heald and Berionni have different shapes and are integrated together with plurality of layers forming the skin, the process of forming the stringers would require the replacement of different inserts coupled with the modular die in order to produce the various shaped stringers, thereby naturally performing the steps of adjusting the relative positions of the tool components of the forming tool based on a second set of dimensions corresponding to the second fabric subelement; forming, using the forming surfaces of the forming tool, one or more layers of
fibrous material having thermally activatable material heated above the activation
temperature into the second fabric subelement; and removing the second fabric subelement from the forming tool. wherein the second fabric subelement is integrated with the first fabric subelement into a preform to form a complete element as taught by Tsotsis in view of Heald and Berionni.
Regarding claim 3, Tsotsis in view of Heald and Berionni teaches the method as applied to claim 2, further comprising:
adjusting relative positions of the tool components based on a third set of profile and, therefore, dimensions corresponding to the third fabric subelement due replacement of the second insert with the third insert (Heald, Abstract and [0028], [0029], [0031]-[0032]).
forming, using the forming tool, one or more layers of fibrous material having thermally activatable material heated above the activation temperature into the third fabric subelement (Tsotsis, Figures 1, 2, 6-9; [0060], [0062], [0065], [0067], [0099]); and
removing the third fabric subelement from the forming tool (Tsotsis, Figures 2 and 10 and [0063]-[0064]).
Regarding claim 4, Tsotsis in view of Heald and Berionni teaches the method as applied to claim 3, further comprising integrating the first fabric subelement into the preform to form the complete element comprises: integrating the first fabric subelement, the second fabric subelement, and the third fabric subelement into the preform to form the complete element (Berionni, Figure 1 and [0060]-[0065]),
Regarding claim 6, Tsotsis in view of Heald teaches the method as applied to claim 2, further comprising:
removing a first part from the forming tool, wherein the first part is configured to form a first predetermined shape based on the first fabric subelement (Heald, Abstract and [0028], [0029], [0031]); and
adding a second part onto the forming tool, wherein the second part is configured to form a second predetermined shape based on the second fabric subelement (Heald, Abstract and [0028], [0029], [0031]).
Regarding claim 9, Tsotsis in view of Heald and Berionni teaches the method as applied to claim 2, wherein integrating the first fabric subelement into the preform to form the complete element comprises: assembling the first fabric subelement and at least the second fabric subelement into a blade stiffener (Tsotsis, [0080]-[0084], [0101], [0104] and Berionni, [0064]-[0067]).
Claim(s) 7 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsotsis (PG-PUB 2013/0134621) in view of Heald (PG-PUB 2006/0244172), as applied to claim 1, in further view of Balthes (US 7,906,176).
Regarding claim 7 and 15, Tsotsis in view of Heald teaches the method as applied to claim 1, wherein the thermally activatable material in the fibrous material is heated with a heating device (Tsotsis, [0098]). Tsotsis teaches a heating device can be a heating gun or other means such as radiative heating [0098]. Tsotsis teaches a pulling mechanism configured to draw or pultrude the layers of fibrous mechanism [0063], wherein the pulling mechanism may be rollers [0064].
Tsotsis in view of Heald does not teach heating one or more layers of fibrous material comprises: heating the one or more layers of fibrous material using an oven that includes an internal conveyor belt.
Tsotsis in view of Heald does not teach heating one or more layers of fibrous material comprises: heating the one or more layers of fibrous material using an oven.
Balthes teaches transporting composite layers through a pre-heat stage comprising an oven and conveyor belt system (Col 16, ln 21-37 and Figure 23).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the process of Tsotsis by using a heated oven comprising a conveying system as taught by Balthes because the system is a known suitable heating mechanism for preheating and transporting continuous layers for shaping, and the modification would yield the predictable result of providing a pre-heating device and pulling mechanism, both desired by Tsotsis.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsotsis (PG-PUB 2013/0134621) in view of Heald (PG-PUB 2006/0244172), as applied to claim 1, in further view of Johnson (PG-PUB 2018/0319106).
Regarding claim 15, Tsotsis in view of Heald teaches the method as applied to claim 1, wherein the thermally activatable material in the fibrous material is heated with a heating device (Tsotsis [0098]). Tsotsis teaches a heating device can be a heating gun or other means such as radiative heating (Tsotsis, [0098]).
Tsotsis in view of Heald does not teach heating one or more layers of fibrous material comprises heating the one or more layers of fibrous material using an oven.
Johnson teaches a thermoplastic pultrusion system, wherein thermoplastic composite tapes are preheated in a pre-heating mechanism (e.g., tunnel oven) which can be heated to a temperature just below a melt temperature of the thermoplastic resin of the composite tape [0053].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the process of Tsotsis with an oven, a known heating mechanism suitable for preheating, as taught by Johnson, to yield the predictable result of heating a continuously transported fibrous material as desired by Tsotsis.
Claim(s) 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsotsis (PG-PUB 2013/0134621) in view of Heald (PG-PUB 2006/0244172), as applied to claim 1, in further view of Buehler (US 10,131,097).
Regarding claim 16 and 17, Tsotsis in view of Heald teaches the process as applied to claim 1, wherein the preform may be cut to length following the formation of the preform (Tsotsis, [0077]), and after forming the preform, the preform may be further processed in a molding tool (Tsotsis, Figure 15 and [0080]).
Tsotsis in view of Heald does not explicitly teach removing the first fabric subelement from the forming tool comprises: removing the first fabric subelement from the forming tool via a robotic and placing the first fabric subelement in a storage by the robotic arm.
Buehler teaches a production process for continuously forming a complex fiber-composite (Figure 1 and Claim 1), wherein after shaping and cooling the continuous composite, the composite is cut; removed from a tool using a robot arm; and stored into a storage system ready for further processing or use (Col 6, Ln 2-30).
While Tsotsis teaches cutting the continuous preform to length and further processing a plurality of preforms manufactured, Tsotsis does not explicitly teach the intermediate steps needed, prompting one of ordinary skill in the art to look elsewhere. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the process of Tsotsis with the steps of Buehler comprising removing the shaped preform from the tool using a robotic arm and storing the preform, a known suitable technique for removing a product from the production line and preparing the product for further use or processing.
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 HANA C PAGE whose telephone number is (571)272-1578. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:00-5:30.
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, Phillip Tucker can be reached on 5712721095. 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.
/HANA C PAGE/Examiner, Art Unit 1745
/MICHAEL A TOLIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1745
Prosecution Insights