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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group III, in the reply filed on 3/3/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that, by its terms, the process of Group IV requires every element of Group III. This is not found persuasive because the structure of the Group IV language does not require the entire apparatus of Group III to be provided and/or used. Claim 25 simply recites a single, generic fabricating step. There is no specific recitation of a method step that requires using the rigid chamber. Additionally, the “using the system” limitation in claim 25 is intended use. As stated above, it does not expressly require each and every component (e.g. the rigid chamber, the seal, the vacuum zone, etc) of the Group III apparatus to be used.
Applicant then asserts that, as amended, Group I requires the rigid chamber and thus is not distinct from Group III. The examiner asserts that the inventions are still independent or distinct because the process as claimed can be practiced by another and materially different apparatus such as an apparatus without the seals connected to the walls. Further the applicant assert that the claims of Group II require a rigid chamber. This is not correct. The claims of Group II are product-by-process claims, and thus do not expressly require the rigid chamber.
The applicant appears to assert the examiner must prove the restricted inventions are independent AND distinct. Respectfully, MPEP 803 I (A) states the examiner is only required to demonstrate the inventions are independent OR distinct. The examiner respectfully submits, for the reasons detailed above and in the restriction requirement, the independent or distinct requirement has been met.
The argument for lack of burden is likewise unpersuasive as the claims are classified in different areas, require different searches, and prior art applicable to one group is not necessarily applicable to both. See details of restriction.
Claim 1-20 and 25 are withdrawn with traverse.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 21 and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Altan et al. (US 2021/0001575).
As o claim 21 Altan discloses a system that comprises: a rigid chamber 104 that comprises walls and a cavity 112 formed by the walls (fig 1, 14); and seals (gaskets, para 37) connected to the walls of the rigid chamber (fig 1, 14, para 37), the seals configured to maintain a vacuum zone (maintained by vacuum pump 140) formed within the cavity between the rigid chamber and a cure tool 102 when a positive pressure or a negative pressure is within the vacuum zone (figs 1, 14, para 35-52).
As to claim 23, Altan discloses the cure tool 102, the cure tool configured to support a composite laminate during curing (fig 14, para 38-39, 46); and a number of retention clamps (para 37) configured to hold the rigid chamber against the cure tool (para 37).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Altan, as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Watson et al. (US 2016/0207256).
Altan does not expressly disclose a pressure relief valve connected to rigid chamber configured to relieve pressure above a set point. Watson discloses a pressure relief valve 26 connected to a rigid chamber configured to relieve pressure above a certain set point (fig 1, 3, 5, para 39, 56). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the device of Altan such that a pressure relief valve is connected to rigid chamber and configured to relieve pressure above a set point as taught by Watson above as such a modification enables the pressure to be controlled (para 46-47).
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Altan, as applied to claim 23 above, and further in view of Hirano et al. (US 3912542).
Hirano disclose retention clamps 11 connected to a cure tool 9. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, for the retention clamps of Altan to be connected to the cure tool as taught by Hirano above as such has a reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER T SCHATZ whose telephone number is (571)272-6038. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 9-6.
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, Michael Orlando can be reached at 571-270-5038. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER T SCHATZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1746