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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: in claim 20, "applying semi- permeable membrane" should be amended such as "applying a semi-permeable membrane" for proper idiomatic language. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 12 and 20 recite “wherein no matrix material is added to the prepreg composite plies after applying the semi-permeable membrane” which is not originally disclosed and thus is new matter.
Claims 12 and 20 recite “wherein no additional matrix material is added to the composite plies after applying the semi-permeable membrane” which is not originally disclosed and thus is new matter.
Claims not listed above are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected claim.
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.
Claim 2-6 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 2 recites “the one or more composite plies” which lacks antecedent basis. The Examiner suggests the following amendments: “the
Claims not listed above are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected claim.
For further examination purposes, the scope of the claims are read in light of the suggested Examiner amendments.
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.
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, 11 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Filsinger
et al. (US 2003/0011094) in view of Bernetich et al. (US 2017/0057182).
Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) discloses a method of fabricating a composite material into a
composite part (figs. 1-3 and 6; [0008]-[0044]), the method comprising:
applying at least one semi-permeable membrane 7 [0021] over a stack of composite plies 1 ([0020], laminate, sheet-like sandwich structure), wherein the semi-permeable membrane 7 comprises a porous plastic material [0027] and has a thickness of approximately 0.002 to 0.008 inches (0.002 to 0.008 inches equals 0.051 to 0.203 mm (rounded up); [0027], thickness of membrane 7 is in range of tenths of a millimeter);
compressing the at least one semi-permeable membrane and the stack of the composite plies together ([0038]-[0040]; after placement of the vacuum film 19, the space therein is evacuated using a vacuum pump which compresses the at least one semi-permeable membrane 7 and the stack 1 of the one or more composite plies together as shown in fig. 1 if vacuum is applied); and
heating the at least one semi-permeable membrane and the stack of the one or more composite
plies to cure the stack of the one or more composite plies into the composite part ([0034], [0041], curing
at 100 to 180 °C (212 to 356 °F) heating temperature).
However, Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) does not disclose the composite plies being prepreg composite plies, OR wherein no matrix material is added to the prepreg composite plies after applying the semi-permeable membrane, OR wherein no additional matrix material is added to the composite plies after applying the semi-permeable membrane.
Bernetich et al. (US 2017/0057182) discloses a method of fabricating a composite material into a composite part (fig. 1; [0037]-[0042]), wherein a stack of composite plies 300 can be a stack of pregreg composite plies OR can be a stack of dry fiber preforms later infused with resin (matrix material) [0040].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify the method of Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) wherein the stack of the composite plies are a stack of prepreg composite plies, because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for the method known to be operable in the art. It would be further obvious in such a modified method that no matrix material would be added to the prepreg composite plies after applying the semi-permeable membrane, OR that no additional matrix material is added to the composite plies after applying the semi-permeable membrane because the matrix material is already added in the prepreg composite plies that are stacked to make the stack.
Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) further discloses the method:
(Claim 11) wherein the step of compressing the at least one semi-permeable membrane and
the stack further comprises vacuum bagging the at least one semi-permeable membrane and the stack
under a vacuum bag or impermeable membrane, wherein the vacuum bag or impermeable membrane,
under vacuum, compresses the stack ([0025], [0038]-[0040]; after placement of the vacuum film (bag) or impermeable membrane 19, the space therein is evacuated using a vacuum pump which compresses the at least one semi-permeable membrane 7 and the stack 1 under the vacuum film (bag) or impermeable membrane 19, as shown in fig. 1 if vacuum is applied); and
(Claim 19) wherein the step of compressing the semi-permeable membrane and the stack of the
plurality of composite plies further comprises sealing the semi-permeable membrane and the stack
under a vacuum bag or impermeable membrane and applying a pressure differential to the vacuum bag
or the impermeable membrane, compressing the plurality of composite plies of the stack together
([0022], [0025], [0038]-[0040]; after placement of the vacuum film (bag) or impermeable membrane 19
and sealing thereof by seal 21, the space therein is evacuated using a vacuum pump which compresses
the at least one semi-permeable membrane 7 and the stack 1 under the vacuum film (bag) or
impermeable membrane 19, as shown in fig. 1 if vacuum is applied).
Claim(s) 2-4, 10, 12-14 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) in view of Bernetich et al. (US 2017/0057182) as applied to claims 1, 11 and 19 above, and further in view of Woolum S 4,936,939).
(Claims 2 and 12) Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) and Bernetich et al. (US 2017/0057182) disclose the method substantially as claimed, as mentioned above, except for the limitations of claims 2-4, 10, 12-14 and 18.
Woolum (US 4,936,939) discloses a method of fabricating a composite material into a composite
part (fig. 1; col. 2, line 25, to col. 6, line 12), the method comprising arranging a plurality of composite
plies pre-impregnated with a ceramic matrix, containing solid ceramic particles in suspension, into a
stack which are then vacuum bagged (col. 2, lines 25-64; the plies are saturated (pre-impregnated) with
a slurry (matrix) including ceramic powder (particles)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to further modify the method wherein the prepreg composite plies include a plurality of composite plies pre-impregnated with a ceramic matrix, containing solid ceramic particles in suspension, into a stack, as disclosed by Woolum 4,936,939), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for the stack. Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) further disclose wherein the semi-permeable membrane includes at least one plastic sheet having a plurality of pores large enough to allow volatile gasses to escape therethrough during curing but equal to or smaller than the matrix material [0021], [0027]. In the combination, the matrix material includes solid ceramic particles or clusters of the solid ceramic particles suspended in the ceramic matrix, and thus the pores would be sized to be equal to or smaller than the solid ceramic particles or clusters of the solid ceramic particles suspended in the ceramic matrix in view of the teachings of Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094).
As to claims 3 and 13, Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) further disclose that the at least one
semi-permeable membrane 7 is made of a plastic material which meets the process conditions [0027].
Woolum (US 4,936,939) discloses the process conditions including pressures of from about 25 PSI to
about 200 PSI, preferably 50 to 100 PSI (col. 5, lines 50-55). Thus, it would be further obvious that the
plurality of pores of the at least one semi- permeable membrane would be sufficiently rigid to not
collapse under vacuum pressure up to approximately 100 PSI in view of these teachings.
As to claims 10 and 18, Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) further disclose that the at least one
semi-permeable membrane 7 is made of a plastic material which meets the process conditions [0027]. Woolum (US 4,936,939) discloses the process conditions including curing in an autoclave at pressures of
from about 25 PSI to about 200 PSI, preferably 50 to 100 PSI and at temperatures of about 104 to about
232 °C (219.2 to 449.6°F), preferably 120 to 180 °C (248 to 356 °F) (col. 5, lines 50-60). Thus, it would be
further obvious that the at least one permeable membrane would be autoclave compatible up to
approximately 100 PSI and up to approximately 350 °F in view of these teachings.
As to claims 4 and 14, Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) further disclose the semi-permeable
membrane being a two-part material including a first layer and a second layer, wherein the first layer is the at least one plastic sheet 7 positioned facing the stack 1 and the second layer 32 is a woven material
sheet facing away from the stack 1, such that the first layer 7 is between the stack 1 and the second
layer 32 (fig. 1; [0027]-[0028], plastic sheet 7, woven fabric 32).
Claim(s) 5 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) in view of Bernetich et al. (US 2017/0057182) as applied to claims 1, 11 and 19 above, and further in view of Woolum S 4,936,939) and DE 19813104.
Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) and Bernetich et al. (US 2017/0057182) disclose the method substantially as claimed, as mentioned above, except for the limitations of claims 5 and 15
Woolum (US 4,936,939) discloses a method of fabricating a composite material into a composite
part (fig. 1; col. 2, line 25, to col. 6, line 12), the method comprising arranging a plurality of composite
plies pre-impregnated with a ceramic matrix, containing solid ceramic particles in suspension, into a
stack which are then vacuum bagged (col. 2, lines 25-64; the plies are saturated (pre-impregnated) with
a slurry (matrix) including ceramic powder (particles)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to further modify the method wherein the prepreg composite plies include a plurality of composite plies pre-impregnated with a ceramic matrix, containing solid ceramic particles in suspension, into a stack, as disclosed by Woolum 4,936,939), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for the stack. Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) further disclose wherein the semi-permeable membrane includes at least one plastic sheet having a plurality of pores large enough to allow volatile gasses to escape therethrough during curing but equal to or smaller than the matrix material [0021], [0027]. In the combination, the matrix material includes solid ceramic particles or clusters of the solid ceramic particles suspended in the ceramic matrix, and thus the pores would be sized to be equal to or smaller than the solid ceramic particles or clusters of the solid ceramic particles suspended in the ceramic matrix in view of the teachings of Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094).
Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) further disclose the semi-permeable membrane being a two-part material including a first layer and a second layer, wherein the first layer is the at least one plastic sheet 7 positioned facing the stack 1 and the second layer 32 is a woven material sheet facing away from the stack 1, such that the first layer 7 is between the stack 1 and the second layer 32 (fig. 1; [0027]-[0028], plastic sheet 7, woven fabric 32).
DE 19813104 disclose a method of fabricating a composite material into a composite part (fig.
1), wherein a semi-permeable membrane 6 is comprised of polyurethane [0006], [0009], [0019], [0021].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to further modify the first layer of the semi-permeable membrane to be comprised of
polyurethane, as disclosed by DE 19813104, because such a modification is known in the art and would
provide an alternative configuration for the semi-permeable membrane known to be operable in the
art.
Claim(s) 6 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) in view of Bernetich et al. (US 2017/0057182) as applied to claims 1, 11 and 19 above, and further in view of Woolum S 4,936,939) and Seal et al. (US 6,013,361).
Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) and Bernetich et al. (US 2017/0057182) disclose the method substantially as claimed, as mentioned above, except for the limitations of claims 6 and 16
Woolum (US 4,936,939) discloses a method of fabricating a composite material into a composite
part (fig. 1; col. 2, line 25, to col. 6, line 12), the method comprising arranging a plurality of composite
plies pre-impregnated with a ceramic matrix, containing solid ceramic particles in suspension, into a
stack which are then vacuum bagged (col. 2, lines 25-64; the plies are saturated (pre-impregnated) with
a slurry (matrix) including ceramic powder (particles)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to further modify the method wherein the prepreg composite plies include a plurality of composite plies pre-impregnated with a ceramic matrix, containing solid ceramic particles in suspension, into a stack, as disclosed by Woolum 4,936,939), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for the stack. Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) further disclose wherein the semi-permeable membrane includes at least one plastic sheet having a plurality of pores large enough to allow volatile gasses to escape therethrough during curing but equal to or smaller than the matrix material [0021], [0027]. In the combination, the matrix material includes solid ceramic particles or clusters of the solid ceramic particles suspended in the ceramic matrix, and thus the pores would be sized to be equal to or smaller than the solid ceramic particles or clusters of the solid ceramic particles suspended in the ceramic matrix in view of the teachings of Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094).
Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) further disclose the semi-permeable membrane being a two-part material including a first layer and a second layer, wherein the first layer is the at least one plastic sheet 7 positioned facing the stack 1 and the second layer 32 is a woven material sheet facing away from the stack 1, such that the first layer 7 is between the stack 1 and the second layer 32 (fig. 1; [0027]-[0028], plastic sheet 7, woven fabric 32).
Seal et al. (US 6,013,361) disclose a method of fabricating a composite material into a composite
part (fig. 5), wherein a semi-permeable membrane comprises a first layer 113 and a second layer 114,
wherein the second layer 114 is comprised of nylon or polyester (col. 9, line 65, to col. 11, line 36).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to further modify the second layer of the semi-permeable membrane to be comprised of nylon or
polyester, as disclosed by Seal et al. (US 6,013,361), because such a modification is known in the art and
would provide an alternative configuration for the semi-permeable membrane known to be operable in
the art.
Claim(s) 7-9, 17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) in view of Bernetich et al. (US 2017/0057182) as applied to claims 1, 11 and 19 above, and further in view of Woolum S 4,936,939) and Mortimer et al. (US 2018/0361682).
Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) and Bernetich et al. (US 2017/0057182) disclose the method substantially as claimed, as mentioned above, except for the limitations of claims 7-9, 17 and 20.
Woolum (US 4,936,939) discloses a method of fabricating a composite material into a composite
part (fig. 1; col. 2, line 25, to col. 6, line 12), the method comprising arranging a plurality of composite
plies pre-impregnated with a ceramic matrix, containing solid ceramic particles in suspension, into a
stack which are then vacuum bagged (col. 2, lines 25-64; the plies are saturated (pre-impregnated) with
a slurry (matrix) including ceramic powder (particles)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to further modify the method wherein the prepreg composite plies include a plurality of composite plies pre-impregnated with a ceramic matrix, containing solid ceramic particles in suspension, into a stack, as disclosed by Woolum 4,936,939), because such a modification is known in the art and would provide an alternative configuration for the stack. Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094) further disclose wherein the semi-permeable membrane includes at least one plastic sheet having a plurality of pores large enough to allow volatile gasses to escape therethrough during curing but equal to or smaller than the matrix material [0021], [0027]. In the combination, the matrix material includes solid ceramic particles or clusters of the solid ceramic particles suspended in the ceramic matrix, and thus the pores would be sized to be equal to or smaller than the solid ceramic particles or clusters of the solid ceramic particles suspended in the ceramic matrix in view of the teachings of Filsinger et al. (US 2003/0011094).
Mortimer et al. (US 2018/0361682) discloses a method of fabricating a composite material into a
composite part, wherein a resin (matrix content) of a prepreg stack is from 30 to 45 percent of the total
weight of the stack [0058]-[0061].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was
made, to further modify the weight percent of the ceramic matrix to an overall weight of the stack to be
35 to 45 percent, to be 37 to 43 percent, or to be 40 to 42 percent because such weight percents would
have been found in finding operable weight percents in view of the teachings of Mortimer et al. (US
2018/0361682) of 30 to 45 percent.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 16, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Filsinger discloses composite plies including dry fibers and does not disclose the composite plies being prepreg composite plies wherein no matrix material is added after applying the semi-permeable membrane.
The Examiner agrees. However, it is known in the art that the composite plies can be alternatively pregreg (wherein no additional matrix is added) or dry fiber. See prior art rejection above.
Applicant argues that modifying Filsinger would destroy the principle operation. The Examiner respectfully disagrees as the alternatives are known in the art as mentioned above.
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 JOSEPH S LEYSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5061. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4:30pm.
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 Xiao Zhao can be reached at 5712705343. 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.
/J.S.L/Examiner, Art Unit 1744
/XIAO S ZHAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1744