DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered.
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Allowable Subject Matter
The indicated allowability of claim 2 is withdrawn in view of the newly discovered reference(s). Rejections based on the newly cited reference(s) follow.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claim 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podgorski (US 20190134848 A1) in view of Kessel (NPL 20231)
In reference to claim 2, Podgorski discloses a tooling for infiltrating a slurry into a textile preform comprising (Fig 2-7):
a mold which comprises an impregnation chamber including on one of its faces a filtration element for filtering a liquid phase of the slurry adapted to receive a first face of a textile preform (Fig 2-7 at bottom surface of mold has a filtration element for filtering a liquid phase of the slurry), the impregnation chamber being closed by a counter-mold located facing the filtration element (See figures), and
an output vent present on the mold and configured to eliminate a filtrate of the filtration element at an elimination pressure (vent at bottom of mold in Figs 2-7),
Podgorski shows multiple ports but does not describe a closed circuit to recirculate molding material during molding.
In the same field of endeavor or reasonably pertinent to the particular problem faced by the inventor, slurry molding, Kessel demonstrates that by recirculating a slurry in a mold that it is possible to form complex shapes (see abstract, Fig 2-3, and description thereof). Fig 2 of Kessel shows a recirculation closed circuit for accomplishing the method.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art with a reasonable expectation of success before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the invention as further comprising an input port and an output port adapted to circulate the slurry in the impregnation chamber from the input port to the output port at a circulation pressure greater than the elimination pressure, comprising a recirculation circuit connecting the output port to the input port forming a closed circuit.
Conclusion
Prior art not used in rejections but pertinent to the claims or disclosure: See references cited in the cited prior art for additional information regarding the technology and background information relevant to the administration of the claimed technology.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS KRASNOW whose telephone number is (571)270-1154. The examiner can normally be reached M-R: 8am-5pm.
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, Xiao Zhao can be reached at 571-270-5343. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Examiner has utilized USPTO approved search resources, such as EIC or external tools, beyond routine search tools and/or leveraged experts in the field. Examiner has cited and explained the relevance of prior art not used in rejections but pertinent to the claims or disclosure. Examiner has provided detailed search documentation through detailed Search Notes, such as annotated search results that identify which data sets were reviewed. When citing the prior art examiner has used annotations clearly in prior art rejections such as, using item-to-item matching to the prior art, pairing exact claim language to particular language used in the prior art, and/or clearly explaining examiner’s interpretation as to how a citation maps to claim language especially when there is not a one-to-one matching of terms.
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.
/NICHOLAS KRASNOW/Examiner, Art Unit 1744
1 https://elib.dlr.de/201216/1/1-s2.0-S0955221923003515-main.pdf
Prosecution Insights