DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 filed on April 6, 2026 has been entered.
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 1-6 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nathoo (US 4,943,222) in view of Segal (US 4,044,188) and Braun (WO 2010127837).
As to claim 1, Nathoo teaches a stamping system for forming a composite component for a structure, the stamping system comprising: a blank formed of a composite material (12), a blank heater (heater 86) configured to heat the blank to a temperature to define a heated blank, and a press movable to an open position to present an opening to receive the heated blank and movable to a closed position to stamp the heated blank (Figs. 3-5). The Nathoo press includes tooling (Fig. 1, items 14 and 40) having a predetermined configuration configured to change the blank to the predetermined configuration of the tooling when the press is in the closed position to stamp the blank (Fig. 5). Nathoo further teaches a feature (68, 70) that meets the claimed heat transfer component cooperating with the heated blank (Fig. 2, item 12) and the tooling (See Fig. 5) capable of decelerating heat transfer between the heated blank and tooling and delaying onset of a temperature change in the heated blank when the heated blank is disposed in the opening of the press.
Nathoo is silent to (a) a composite material that has a crystallization temperature, and a blank heater for heating the blank to the melt temperature greater than the crystallization temperature, and (b) a movable platform interconnected between stations of the stamping system and configured to move the heated blank into the opening of a press.
Regarding (a), Segal teaches an apparatus for heating a thermoplastic sheet to greater than its melting point (13:54-61) which is inherently greater than its crystallization temperature. The Seagal apparatus is also inherently capable of stamping the sheet (Title) and cooling. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to filing to incorporate this feature/blank from Segal into Nathoo because Nathoo teaches/suggests a composite blank with a softenable material (6:55-58), and this is what Segal provides. Alternatively, Segal teaches/suggests a heated blank for use in a stamping press with matched dies (1:45-60) and this is what Nathoo provides.
Regarding (b), Braun teaches a movable platform (14f) configured to move a heated workpiece (11) from a heating station into the opening of a press (15). It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to filing to incorporate this movable platform from Braun into Nathoo because Nathoo teaches/suggests moving a blank from a heater into a press (Fig. 1, see arrow from 86 into position of 12). A reasonable expectation of success is evident in the combination by the similarity of the Braun and Nathoo devices.
As to claim 2, Nathoo provides a first liner and second liner which provide a barrier (Figures). Since the Nathoo barriers may be latex, they would delay the onset of cooling to the crystallization temperature. As to claim 3, the Nathoo tooling includes two faces with an opening between then, a first liner that covers the first face of the tooling and a second liner that covers the second face of the tooling in the open position (Figs. 1-4). Nathoo further provides that the first liner contacts a first side of the heated blank and a second liner contacts a second side of the heated blank (see Fig. 2). As to claim 4, Nathoo’s tooling includes two faces facing each other with an opening between them in the open position (Figs. 3-4). Nathoo further provides that the first liner covers a first side of the heated blank and a second liner covers a second side of the heated blank (see Fig. 2). Nathoo’s first liner abuts the first face of the tooling and the second liner abuts the second face of the tooling when pressure is applied by the tooling through the press (Fig. 4, item 96). The Nathoo latex liners are capable of decelerating heat transfer and delay onset of the crystallization temperature of the heated blank as claimed even though the claimed invention is an apparatus. As to claim 5, the Nathoo press is movable to a closed position to apply pressure through the tooling to form a composite component. The Nathoo latex liners are capable of declerating heat transfer and delay onset of the crystallization temperature of the heated blank as claimed even though the claimed invention is an apparatus. As to claim 6, Nathoo’s items 52 and 58 meet the claimed end effectors and are capable of removing the liners from the composite component after reopening (Fig. 6). As to claim 10, Nathoo’s stamping system press is movable to the closed position to apply a pressure to the heated blank through the tooling to form the composite component (Figs. 4-5). The Nathoo latex liners are capable of decelerating heat transfer from the blank to the press and delaying onset/cooling to the crystallization temperature as claimed.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nathoo (US 4,943,222) in view of Segal (US 4,044,188), Braun (WO 2010127837), and further in view of Santoni (US 20210023799). Nathoo, Segal, and Braun teach the subject matter of claim 2 above under 35 U.S.C. 103.
As to claim 7, Nathoo teaches a stamping system and heats the blank separately from the first liner and second liner (Fig. 1, item 86), but is silent to a liner heater configured to heat both liners.
Santoni teaches heaters (Fig. 2, item 112) configured to heat a first liner and second liner to an elevated temperature (4:64-66) before shaping (Fig. 5e-5f).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to filing to incorporate the Santoni heaters into Nathoo because Nathoo teaches/suggests a heater (6:50-55) and Santoni provides a heater. Alternatively, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it prima facie obvious to use the Santoni heater as an obvious interchangeable substitute heater means for the exemplary (“such as”) heater means already taught by Nathoo.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nathoo (US 4,943,222) in view of Segal (US 4,044,188), Braun (WO 2010127837), and further in view of Murata (Int. J. of Automation Technology, Vol. 10, No. 1 (2016), pp. 79-86). Nathoo, Segal, and Braun teach the subject matter of claim 1 above under 35 U.S.C. 103.
As to claims 8-9, Nathoo teaches a stamping system, and in the combination with Braun above provides a movable platform capable of moving anything (blank, tool heater) into the opening of the press. However, the cited references are silent to a tool heater for the first and second faces of the tooling.
Murata teaches a movable heater platform that is moved into and out of a press capable of heating first and second faces of tooling (Fig. 1). Even if the Murata movable heater platform is one-sided, it would have been prima facie obvious to use two in a back-to-back configuration to heat Nathoo’s first and second tools to the appropriate temperature.
It would have been prima facie obvious to incorporate the Murata heater platform into Nathoo motivated by adjusting or optimizing the temperature of the Nathoo mold in the same way. There is a reasonable expectation of success since Nathoo provides an open mold and Murata’s heater is configured for heating open molds.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nathoo (US 4,943,222) in view of Segal (US 4,044,188), Braun (WO 2010127837), and further in view of Lin (US 20130015178). Nathoo, Segal, and Braun teach the subject matter of claim 1 above under 35 U.S.C. 103.
As to claims 8-9, Nathoo teaches a stamping system, and in the combination with Braun above provides a movable platform capable of moving anything (blank, tool heater) into the opening of the press. However, the cited references are silent to a tool heater for the first and second faces of the tooling.
Lin teaches a movable heater platform that is moved into and out of a mold opening capable of heating first and second faces of the tooling (Fig. 2). Even if the Lin movable heater platform is interpreted as one-sided, it would have been prima facie obvious to use two in a back-to-back configuration to heat Nathoo’s first and second tools to the appropriate temperature.
It would have been prima facie obvious to incorporate the Lin heater platform into Nathoo motivated by adjusting or optimizing the temperature of the Nathoo mold in the same way. There is a reasonable expectation of success since Nathoo provides an open mold and Lin’s heater is configured for heating open molds.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed April 6, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The arguments appear to be on the grounds that the cited references do not disclose a heat transfer component to decelerate heat transfer between the heated blank and the tooling to delay onset of crystallization temperature of the heated blank when disposed in the opening of the press. Applicant argues that the Nathoo elastomeric sheets are placed to establish a vacuum, and even if they control temperature, Nathoo still fails to disclose a heat transfer component configured to decelerate heat transfer between the heated blank and the tooling.
These arguments were carefully considered. In an attempt to understand what is necessary for a heat transfer component to be configured to decelerate heat transfer between the heated blank and the tooling to delay onset of the crystallization temperature, the Examiner consulted the specification and learned that specific examples of the liner may include steel foil. If a (metallic) steel foil is within the scope of liners that are configured to decelerate heat transfer and delay onset of the crystallization temperature, then the Examiner does not see how the Nathoo elastomeric sheets (that may be natural latex rubber) could perform differently than claimed. A natural latex rubber would be expected to provide slower heat transfer than a steel foil and therefore decelerate heat transfer and delay onset of the crystallization temperature as claimed. Additionally, while Applicant argues that the elastomeric sheets “are placed to establish a vacuum” (see Arguments at 10), the Examiner believes that the vacuum established between the elastomeric sheets would contribute to the deceleration of heat transfer and delaying onset of the crystallization temperature. Considering the claim terms in light of the specification and comparing these features to what is disclosed in Nathoo, the Examiner believes the claimed capabilities and configuration are obvious over Nathoo.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW J DANIELS whose telephone number is (313)446-4826. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30-5:00 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, Christina Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1176. 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.
/MATTHEW J DANIELS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights