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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-5) in the reply filed on 03/06/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 non-obviousness.
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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CARTWRIGHT et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2012/0313307, hereinafter CARTWRIGHT).
Regarding claims 1-3, CARTWRIGHT teaches fiber-reinforced polymer composites (Abstract) wherein the composites comprise polymer matrix (e.g. elastomer) reinforced with a plurality of fibers [0042]. The composites can be used for rebar (Claim 12). The polymer include polyurethane , thermoplastic elastomers, plasticized epoxies ([0053]; Claims 3 and 4), and vinyl ester [0082] in the range between about 30 vol% to about 70 vol% [0059] and the fibers include carbon [0046] and continuous fibers including fiberglass in the range between about 30 vol% to about 70 vol% [0061].
The elastomer may be impregnated into a dry preform of the selected plurality of fibers [0059]. The invention may be applied to a variety of applications including civil engineering, structures, buildings, bridges, and etc. [0096].
However, CARTWRIGHT does not explicitly teach 55-85 vol. % of a fiber mixture.
Given CARTWRIGHT teaches the polymer matrix is reinforced with a plurality of fibers of carbon fibers and fiberglass in the range between about 30 vol% to about 70 vol%, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to select the portion of the prior art's range which is within the range of applicant's claims because it has been held to be obvious to select a value in a known range by optimization for the best results. As to optimization results, a patent will not be granted based upon the optimization of result effective variables when the optimization is obtained through routine experimentation unless there is a showing of unexpected results which properly rebuts the prima facie case of obviousness. See In re Boesch, 627 F.2d 272,276,205 USPQ 215,219 (CCPA 1980). See also In re Woodruff 919 F.2d 1575, 1578,16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936-37 (Fed. Cir. 1990), and In re AIIer, 220 F.2d 454,456,105 USPQ 233,235 (CCPA 1955).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 5 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
CARTWRIGHT et al., one of the closest prior art of record fails to disclose the FRP rebar comprises 1-3 wt% of a coupling agent and wherein the FRP rebar comprises 97-99 wt% of the hybrid composition.
EDWARDS et al., one of the closest prior art of record, fails to teach a FRP rebar comprising a hybrid composition as claimed and wherein the FRP rebar comprises 1-3 wt% of a coupling agent and wherein the FRP rebar comprises 97-99 wt% of the hybrid composition.
BRANDSTROM, one of the closest prior art of record, fails to teach a FRP rebar comprising a hybrid composition as claimed and wherein the FRP rebar comprises 1-3 wt% of a coupling agent and wherein the FRP rebar comprises 97-99 wt% of the hybrid composition.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVE V HALL whose telephone number is (571)270-7738. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9 am-5 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, Joseph Del Sole can be reached at (571) 272-1130. 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.
DEVE V. HALL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1763
/DEVE V HALL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
Prosecution Insights