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 .
Applicant’s amendment and accompanying remarks filed November 11, 2025 are acknowledged.
Examiner acknowledges amended claims 1-2 and 5-6.
Examiner acknowledges cancelled claims 11-20.
Examiner acknowledges newly added claim 21-30.
The rejection of claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112(pre-AIA ), second paragraph is overcome by Applicant’s amendment.
The rejection of claim 9 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112(pre-AIA ), second paragraph is withdrawn due to Applicant’s argument.
The rejection of claims 1-5 and 7 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) & (a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Weaver et al., U.S. Pre Grant Publication 2017/0015595 is overcome by Applicant’s amendment.
The rejection of claims 1-10 under the provisionally ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over 1-6 and 11 of co-pending Application No. 18/356,995 is overcome by Applicant’s amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1, 9 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sassin, U.S. Pre Grant Publication 2020/0152989.
Regarding claim 1, Sassin discloses a laminated article having a first layer and a second layer wherein each layer has a porous carbon structure and a porous polymer with the two porous polymers having different pore sizes [porous gradient [abstract and 0005-0006]. Paragraph 0020 of Sassin discloses multiple layers of polymer nanofoam-filled carbon fiber papers [first and second fabric]. Paragraph 0026 discloses that polymer is a polymer of resorcinol and formaldehyde [thermoset]. Additionally, paragraph 0025 discloses that the two layers use different polymers. Applicant’s claim is not specific to the fugitive component. Examiner is corresponding the polymer nanofoam as the fugitive component. Applicant’s claim does not exclude the polymer material from being the fugitive component.
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.
Claims 2-6, 10 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)91) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Sassin, U.S. Pre Grant Publication 2020/0152989.
Sassin, above, remains relied upon for claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, Sassin teaches the claimed invention but fails to teach wherein, in response to the porosity gradient fibrous preform being heated to the a curing temperature, the first resin is configured to separate into a first fusible resin component and the first plurality of fugitive pore formers, and the second resin is configured to separate into a second fusible resin component and a second plurality of fugitive pore formers, wherein a volume of the first plurality of fugitive pore formers is greater than a volume of the second plurality of fugitive pore formers. It is reasonable to presume that wherein, in response to the porosity gradient fibrous preform being heated to the a curing temperature, the first resin is configured to separate into a first fusible resin component and the first plurality of fugitive pore formers, and the second resin is configured to separate into a second fusible resin component and a second plurality of fugitive pore formers, wherein a volume of the first plurality of fugitive pore formers is greater than a volume of the second plurality of fugitive pore formers is inherent to Sassin. Said presumption is based on Sassin’s disclosure of a laminated article having a first layer and a second layer wherein each layer has a porous carbon structure and a porous polymer with the two porous polymers having different pore sizes [porous gradient [abstract and 0005-0006]. Paragraph 0020 of Sassin discloses multiple layers of polymer nanofoam-filled carbon fiber papers [first and second fabric]. Paragraph 0026 discloses that polymer is a polymer of resorcinol and formaldehyde [thermoset]. Additionally, paragraph 0025 discloses that the two layers use different polymers. Applicant’s claim is not specific to the fugitive component. Examiner is corresponding the polymer nanofoam as the fugitive component. Applicant’s claim does not exclude the polymer material from being the fugitive component. Burden is upon Applicant to prove otherwise. Fitzgerald, In re, 619 F.2d 67, 205 USPQ 594 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 3, paragraph 0032 of Sassin discloses that the graded/gradient polymer nanofoam paper was pyrolyzed wherein the pores are interconnected [0026].
Regarding claim 4, paragraph 0023 discloses that the two layers have different pore size distributions from each other wherein the distribution across multiple layers form a gradient from one surface of the structure to the opposite surface. One layer will have a greater porosity from the other layer. Applicant’s claims do not distinguish between the first and second layers.
Regarding claim 5, paragraph 0030 discloses acetone as the solvent.
Regarding claims 6, 10 and 30, Sassin is silent to the fiber volume in the layers. However, this is an optimizable feature. The volume of the carbon fiber paper affects the porosity of the layers. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would optimize the carbon fiber in each layer to at least 25% by volume for enhanced porosity.
Claims 7-8, 21-24, 26-29 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. Applicant claims a porosity gradient fibrous preform as recited in claim 1. The closest prior art, Sassin et al., U.S. Pre Grant Publication 2020/0152989.
teaches a laminated article having a first layer and a second layer wherein each layer has a porous carbon structure and a porous polymer with the two porous polymers having different pore sizes [porous gradient [abstract and 0005-0006]. Paragraph 0020 of Sassin discloses multiple layers of polymer nanofoam-filled carbon fiber papers [first and second fabric]. Paragraph 0026 discloses that polymer is a polymer of resorcinol and formaldehyde [thermoset]. Additionally, paragraph 0025 discloses that the two layers use different polymers. Applicant’s claim is not specific to the fugitive component. Examiner is corresponding the polymer nanofoam as the fugitive component. Applicant’s claim does not exclude the polymer material from being the fugitive component. Sassin fails to teach or suggest the limitations of claims 7-8, 21-24, 26-29.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the present claims 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.
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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAMIE S THOMPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1530. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am - 5:30 pm.
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, Jennifer Boyd, can be reached at 571-272-7783. 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.
/CAMIE S THOMPSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights