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 1-9 in the reply filed on 10/14/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 10-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II and III, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/14/2025.
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 nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3, 6, 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garcia (US 20200032061) in view of Taylor (US 4511663).
Garcia ‘061 is directed to an insulation material includes a matrix comprising a reaction product formed from a silicon carbide precursor resin and a silicon dioxide precursor resin. At least one filler, such as carbon fiber is dispersed within the matrix (ABST).
The silicon carbide precursor resin and silicon dioxide precursor resin are reacted, cured and ceramification [0013]; [0035] and therefore equated with at least one polymer derived ceramic resin.
Garcia ‘061 teaches the insulation material disclosed may be formed from an insulation precursor that comprises a silicon carbide precursor resin, a silicon dioxide precursor resin, a filler (e.g., a low-density filler such as hollow glass microspheres, or an ablation-enhancement filler such as carbon fiber), and, optionally, a crosslinking agent, a catalyst, an adhesion promoter, etc. In some embodiments, the insulation precursor may comprise from about 1% to about 20% silicon carbide precursor resin by weight, such as from about 5% to about 10% by weight, or from about 6% to about 9% by weight. The silicon carbide precursor resin is a polycarbosilane preceramic polymer formed of monomers with the following structure:
PNG
media_image1.png
82
122
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The silicon dioxide can be an organically modified silicon dioxide [0022].
Garcia ‘061 is silent with regard to a solvent and therefore does not teach a solvent in the composition.
Garcia ‘061 does not teach the carbon fibers comprise one or more metals.
Taylor is directed to fiber-reinforced composite having improved mechanical strength and being composed of metal-coated, carbon fibers embodied within a glass-ceramic matrix (ABST). The metal film appears to present a more compatible bonding surface for the glass or glass-ceramic than does the uncoated carbon fiber (col. 2, lines 27-30). In the case of uncoated fibers, it is my belief that the silicate matrix is exposed to a highly non-polar surface formed by the Pi-electron cloud of the oriented graphite crystals. This has no tendency to bond with the oxygen in the silicate matrix. The presence of a metal film effectively cancels out this non-polar surface and provides a metallic cation which readily combines with oxygen to form an oxide and a tight bond (col. 2, lines 30-38).
Taylor teaches any readily oxidizable metal should behave in similar manner to provide an effective metal-carbon bond. Any these metals should be effective: Y, Zr, Nb, Mo, Ag, Cd, Ta, W, Zn, Cu, Co, Fe, Mn, Cr, V, Ti, Sc, Al, Mg, and Ni. Metals which do not readily oxidize, such as platinum and gold, may still be useful where such features as thermal or electrical conductivity are significant. Metals may be applied by various physical and chemical methods including electroplating and vacuum deposition (col. 2, lines 38-53).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to employ metal coated carbon fibers in the PDC resin matrix motivated to produce an improved bond between the silicon matrix and the carbon fiber and improve the mechanical properties of the composite.
As to claim 2, Garcia ‘061 teaches the matrix is a silicon carbide precursor resin is a polycarbosilane preceramic polymer and an organically modified silicon dioxide precursor resin [0022].
As to claim 3, Garcia ‘061 differs and does not teach metal coated carbon fiber reinforcement.
Taylor teaches metal coating carbon fibers for ceramic composites can be coated with metals such as Y, Zr, Nb, Mo, Ag, Cd, Ta, W, Zn, Cu, Co, Fe, Mn, Cr, V, Ti, Sc, Al, Mg, and Ni as well as gold and platinum. These metals include copper, nickel, silver, molybdenum, gold, platinum as claimed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to employ the claimed metals motivated to select a metal that is readily oxidizable to provide an effective metal-carbon bond.
As to claim 6, Garcia ‘061 teaches a catalyst in amount of 5 parts in the composition in the total parts of the composition of 687 parts wherein the 5 parts is 0.7 % and in the claimed range [0050].
As to claim 7, Garcia ‘061 teaches the viscosity of the polycarbosilane preceramic polymer can be 1cP-250cP [0023]. The viscosity of the silicon dioxide precursor is 1000cP to 7000cP [0026]. The viscosities of the precursor materials overlap the claimed range of 200 cP to 10000 cP and combined would be in the claimed range.
As to claim 9, Garcia ‘061 does not teach the carbon fibers are coated with a metal, i.e. nickel.
Taylor teaches metal coating carbon fibers for ceramic composites can be coated with metals such as Y, Zr, Nb, Mo, Ag, Cd, Ta, W, Zn, Cu, Co, Fe, Mn, Cr, V, Ti, Sc, Al, Mg, and Ni as well as gold and platinum. These metals include nickel as claimed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to employ nickel motivated to select a metal that is readily oxidizable to provide an effective metal-carbon bond.
Claims 4 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garcia (US 20200032061) in view of Taylor (US 4511663) and in further view of Benitsch et al (WO03043951).
As to claims 4 and 8, Garcia and Taylor do not teach the carbon fiber length.
Benitsch is directed to a fiber reinforced composite body comprising a first zone made of a ceramic matrix which predominantly contains silicon carbide and optionally silicon and/or carbon and/or compounds thereof and comprising a second zone formed of fiber reinforced C/SiC ceramic. The fiber length decreases from the exterior fiber reinforced ceramic zone up to the first zone. Benitsch teaches the invention relates to protective armor for civilian and military applications (ABST).
Benitsch teaches the object is achieved by provision of a multi-zone, at least partly fiber-reinforced composite having at least two zones. The first zone, which represents the projectile-breaking zone, is formed by a monolithic ceramic which contains predominantly silicon carbide and, if desired, silicon and/or carbon and/or compounds thereof. The second zone is located on the side of the first zone which is opposite the projectile-breaking surface and is formed by a C/SiC ceramic reinforced with short fibers, with the fiber length decreasing gradually from the outside of the fiber-reinforced ceramic zone in the direction of the first zone [0016].
The composite is particularly preferably used as protective armor, for example in the vehicle sector and also as protective vests. The layers are the first projectile-breaking layer and the second multi-hit-resistant zone. The second zone can, in particular, stop projectiles that are close to one another. The second zone is, in particular, characterized in that it does not shatter like conventional monolithic ceramic. The graduated structure achieved by the fiber length of the fibers within the second zone makes it possible, to achieve matching to the coefficients of expansion of the adjoining first zone [0019].
The short fibers of the second zone are preferably present in the form of bundles held together by carbon-containing compounds [0020].
The fiber length is gradually altered within the second zone so that it increases from the side of impact, i.e. from the first zone to the other zone surface. The fiber length here is the mean fiber length. The fiber length on the one side (facing zone 1) is typically not more than about 0.01 mm and increases continuously or in steps to up to 50 mm at the other side. The fibers are preferably divided into fractions whose mean length is in the range from 0.01 to 50 mm, preferably from 0.01 to 20 mm and particularly preferably from 0.1 to 10 mm. The fiber length gradient as the ratio of longest fiber length to shortest fiber length can change uniformly or in steps and is typically in the range from 5 to 2000, preferably above 5 and particularly preferably above 10. If fiber bundles are present, the gradient of the fiber length is typically coupled with a gradient in the fiber bundle thickness, with the fiber bundle thickness increasing from the side facing the first zone to the opposite side [0043].
Example 1 is made with four fiber fractions having maximum length of 0.5 mm, 1 mm, 2 mm and 4 mm [0068]. 0.5 mm is equivalent to 500 micron; 1 mm to 1000 micron; 2 mm to 2000 micron.
Benitsch teaches the carbon fiber lengths that overlap the claimed range. The second zone holds the first zone together and does not shatter [0021].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to employ the claimed fiber sizes motivated to achieve a protective armor that does not shatter.
With regard to claim 8, Garcia ‘061 teaches the viscosity of the polycarbosilane preceramic polymer can be 1cP-250cP [0023]. The viscosity of the silicon dioxide precursor is 1000cP to 7000cP [0026]. The viscosities of the precursor materials overlap the claimed range of 200 cP to 10000 cP and combined would be in the claimed range.
Garcia ‘061 does not teach the carbon fiber length.
Benitsch teaches the carbon fiber lengths having maximum length of 0.5 mm, 1 mm, 2 mm and 4 mm [0068]. 0.5 mm is equivalent to 500 micron; 1 mm to 1000 micron; 2 mm to 2000 micron and that overlap the claimed range. The second zone holds the first zone together and does not shatter [0021].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to employ carbon fibers of the claimed length motivated to produce a composite that does not shatter.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Garcia (US 20200032061) in view of Taylor (US 4511663) and in further view of Garcia (US 20200062663).
As to claim 5, Garcia ‘061 teaches the carbon fibers may be in the insulation precursor in amount of 0.5% to 10% by weight. Garcia teaches the carbon fiber fillers are used to provide ablation characteristics of the insulation material. Garcia does not teach the volume percent. Wherein volume percent is not equal to weight percent, as Garcia teaches the same materials and therefore inherently the same density of the materials, it is reasonable to presume the weight percents of Garcia overlaps the claimed volume percent. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to employ the claimed volume of carbon fiber motivated to improve the ablation characteristic of the ceramic insulation material.
Garcia ‘663 is directed to barrier comprising at least one polycarbosilane, one organically modified silicon dioxide and at least one filler (ABST). The filler can be carbon fibers. Garcia ‘663 teaches the filler can be used for density, thermal conductivity or ablation [0042]. Garcia ‘663 teaches the filler can be used in volume percentages of 1 to 50 volume percent [0043]; [0044] which overlaps the claimed range.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to employ the claimed volume % of carbon fiber filler motivated to achieve the desired ablation or thermal conductivity characteristics.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chung et al (US 5827997)
Ohnishi et al (US 20050142346)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER A STEELE whose telephone number is (571)272-7115. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.
/JENNIFER A STEELE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789