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 .
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 14-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The specification as originally filed does not provide support for the limitation that “all fiber bodies of the bundle” extend longitudinally between the first end and the second end. Applicant points to figures 3A-3C, however, these figures are disclosed as being simplified side views and the disclosure is silent as to the presence or absence of any additional fibers extending in any directions.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claim(s) 14, 18, 20-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0016103.
Song discloses a composite radius filler material. The radius filler can comprise first fibers which are equated with the claimed fiber bodies. The first fibers can have various lengths within a range of 0.25 to 2 times the transverse dimension. The first fibers extend in a longitudinal direction. The radius filler can have a paste like structure which is equated with having a variable geometry. See paragraph 0075. Song discloses that it is known to provide only longitudinally oriented fibers, (see paragraph 0021), but that in some embodiments it can be useful to provide additional fibers having different lengths which are oriented in other directions, in order to provide strength in different directions. See paragraph 0028. Song teaches selecting the lengths of the fibers depending on the strength properties desired in different directions, so that shorter fibers can align if desired in the transverse direction. See paragraphs 0032, 0036 and 0040. Additionally, Song teaches that rather than orienting transversely, the shorter second fibers can also fill corners of the structure. See paragraph 0068. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select the amount and orientation of the second fibers, if any, which provided the desired strength in the transverse direction, and/or to have omitted the second fibers if strength in the transverse direction was already sufficient with just the first fibers, which can have a variable length. Song teaches that such structures with only longitudinal fibers were conventional in the art but that adding the second fibers can provide improved strength in the transverse direction, or can provide reinforcement in corners. Additionally, it is noted that removal of an element which results in the removal of the function would have been obvious. Therefore, since Song teaches that only orienting the first fibers, which can have a variety of lengths, in a longitudinal direction was well known and conventional, it would have been obvious to have only used first fibers having various lengths, (which would correspond to the claimed first, second and third fibers bundles), oriented in the first direction if this provided sufficient strength in the transverse direction in a given application.
With regard to new claims 21-24, since Song clearly teaches that the longitudinally oriented fibers can have a variety of lengths and that the fibers are provided to reinforce the radius filler, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to select suitable lengths and positions within the longitudinally oriented fibers which produced the desired degree of reinforcement, in view of the teaching of Song that the particular lengths, positions and orientations are directly related to the properties of the final product. See paragraphs 0028, 0032, 0036 and 0040.
The radius filler can further include ceramic or carbon particles. See paragraph 0022. Note that silicon carbide is a well-known and conventional type of ceramic. Therefore, it would have been obvious to have employed silicon carbide as the ceramic particle in Song.
Claim(s) 15, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0016103 in view of Konopaske et al, WO 2023/122009.
Song discloses a composite radius filler material. The radius filler can comprise first fibers which are equated with the claimed fiber bodies. The first fibers can have various lengths within a range of 0.25 to 2 times the transverse dimension. The first fibers extend in a longitudinal direction. The radius filler can have a paste like structure which is equated with having a variable geometry. See paragraph 0075. Song discloses that it is known to provide only longitudinally oriented fibers, (see paragraph 0021), but that in some embodiments it can be useful to provide additional fibers having different lengths which are oriented in other directions, in order to provide strength in different directions. See paragraph 0028. Song teaches selecting the lengths of the fibers depending on the strength properties desired in different directions, so that shorter fibers can align if desired in the transverse direction. See paragraphs 0032, 0036 and 0040. Additionally, Song teaches that rather than orienting transversely, the shorter second fibers can also fill corners of the structure. See paragraph 0068. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select the amount and orientation of the second fibers, if any, which provided the desired strength in the transverse direction, and/or to have omitted the second fibers if strength in the transverse direction was already sufficient with just the first fibers, which can have a variable length. Song teaches that such structures with only longitudinal fibers were conventional in the art but that adding the second fibers can provide improved strength in the transverse direction, or can provide reinforcement in corners. Additionally, it is noted that removal of an element which results in the removal of the function would have been obvious. Therefore, since Song teaches that only orienting the first fibers, which can have a variety of lengths, in a longitudinal direction was well known and conventional, it would have been obvious to have only used first fibers having various lengths, (which would correspond to the claimed first, second and third fibers bundles), oriented in the first direction if this provided sufficient strength in the transverse direction in a given application.
Song differs from the claimed invention because it does not disclose employing silicon carbide tows or incorporating polyvinyl alcohol fibers into the structure.
However, Konopaske discloses incorporating sacrificial yarns such as polyvinyl alcohol into preforms such as radius fillers. See paragraphs 0035, 0054 and 0064-0065. The fibers making up the structures can further include silicon carbide tows. See paragraph 0008. The use of polyvinyl alcohol sacrificial yarns provides spaces for infiltration between the tows for a matrix material. See paragraph 0043.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have employed a silicon carbide tow in view of their art recognized suitability for this purpose as taught by Konopaske. It further would have been obvious to have employed polyvinyl alcohol yarns in order to provide spaces for infiltration between the tows.
Claim(s) 16 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0016103 in view of Rossi et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0217508
Song discloses a composite radius filler material. The radius filler can comprise first fibers which are equated with the claimed fiber bodies. The first fibers can have various lengths within a range of 0.25 to 2 times the transverse dimension. The first fibers extend in a longitudinal direction. The radius filler can have a paste like structure which is equated with having a variable geometry. See paragraph 0075. Song discloses that it is known to provide only longitudinally oriented fibers, (see paragraph 0021), but that in some embodiments it can be useful to provide additional fibers having different lengths which are oriented in other directions, in order to provide strength in different directions. See paragraph 0028. Song teaches selecting the lengths of the fibers depending on the strength properties desired in different directions, so that shorter fibers can align if desired in the transverse direction. See paragraphs 0032, 0036 and 0040. Additionally, Song teaches that rather than orienting transversely, the shorter second fibers can also fill corners of the structure. See paragraph 0068. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select the amount and orientation of the second fibers, if any, which provided the desired strength in the transverse direction, and/or to have omitted the second fibers if strength in the transverse direction was already sufficient with just the first fibers, which can have a variable length. Song teaches that such structures with only longitudinal fibers were conventional in the art but that adding the second fibers can provide improved strength in the transverse direction, or can provide reinforcement in corners. Additionally, it is noted that removal of an element which results in the removal of the function would have been obvious. Therefore, since Song teaches that only orienting the first fibers, which can have a variety of lengths, in a longitudinal direction was well known and conventional, it would have been obvious to have only used first fibers having various lengths, (which would correspond to the claimed first, second and third fibers bundles), oriented in the first direction if this provided sufficient strength in the transverse direction in a given application.
Song differs from the claimed invention because it does not disclose employing braided tows.
However, Rossi discloses radius filler materials. Rossi discloses that the fibers can be braided and encompassed by woven fabric sleeves in order to further stabilize the structure and reduce cracking. See paragraphs 0008, 0010 and 0074. Rossi discloses cutting the braided structures to desired length depending on the structure into which the radius filler will be disposed. See paragraph 0085.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have braided the fiber tows and to have provided sleeves in order to improve the stability of the structure and reduce crack propagation.
Applicant's arguments filed 5/20/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Song teaches that the addition of fibers in the transverse direction improves the uniformity of the properties. However, Song also teaches that it was well known and conventional to provide only fibers having various lengths in the longitudinal direction. Song teaches that in addition to orienting in the transverse direction shorter fibers can also be used to reinforce corners of the structure. Song teaches employing multiple lengths of reinforcing fibers oriented in a longitudinal direction as set forth above. Song further teaches that fiber length, aspect ratio and orientation are result effective variables and therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to select the desired orientation, length and aspect ratio of the fibers which produced the desired properties in the final product, recognizing that in some applications, sufficient strength may be provided by using the conventionally oriented fibers which, while having different lengths, may extend in only the longitudinal direction.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Guzman et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0034236 teaches that it was known to provide reinforcing fibers for a radius filler so that all the fibers the fibers are oriented in a longitudinal direction or that may have some oriented in a different direction. See paragraph 0047. Guzman does not teach that the fibers have different lengths.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH M IMANI whose telephone number is (571)272-1475. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Wednesday 7AM-7:30; Thursday 10AM -2 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, 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.
/ELIZABETH M IMANI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Prosecution Insights