DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information disclosure statements have been received and considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 19 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.
Regarding claim 19 the limitation of:“.. the densifying the preform is performed in an absence of a compressive load on the preform”. Is not understood from the specification and/or drawings.
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(s) 1-3,6-13,16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Fryska et al. U.S. 2020/0061964.
Regarding claims 1,11 Fryska shows one of applicant’s prior composite preform designs (with which they are well familiar) including:
A preform for a composite, the preform comprising: 1. a plurality of fibrous layers (figure 8B) consolidated together and forming the preform extending along a longitudinal axis, the plurality of fibrous layers comprising at least one first fibrous layer and at least one second fibrous layer (102—FIGURE 3), the at least one first fibrous layer comprising a plurality of first segments 106-FIGURE 3, the least one second fibrous layer comprising a plurality of second segments, wherein at least one first segment of the plurality of first segments comprises a plurality of reinforcing fibers (each layer comprises web and tow carbon fibers) extending at an angle -α relative to a radial direction extending from the longitudinal axis (The fiber orientation angle (a) of the fabric segments described herein may be between 0° and ±90° (e.g., anywhere from negative (−90°) to positive)(+90°).—see para 0048)., wherein at least one second segment of the plurality of second segments comprises a plurality of reinforcing fibers extending at an angle +a relative to the radial direction, and wherein α is greater than 0° and less than 90° (see para 0048).
Regarding claims 2,12 see the fibrous layers as discussed therein with regard to figure 3.
Regarding claims 3,13 as explained above, the preform uses carbon fibers.
Regarding claims 6,16 as readily apparent from the figures these limitations are met.
Regarding claims 7,17 as explained throughout the document these limitations are capable of being met.
Regarding claim 8,18 Fryska states in para 0086:
[0086] In other examples, fibrous preform 160B may be densified (204) using other suitable techniques including for example, resin infiltration and carbonization via resin transfer mold (RTM) processing, vacuum pressure infiltration (VPI) processing, high pressure infiltration (HPI), or the like. In some examples, the densification step (204) may produce a densified C—C composite substrate having a final density of about 1.65 to about 1.95 g/cc.
As broadly claimed these limitations are therefore considered to be met.
Regarding claims 9,10,20 as explained above, these limitations are considered to be met.
Regarding claim 19, as broadly claimed (and subject to the 112 1st rejection above—as best understood) since Fryska makes no mention of a ‘compressive load’ on the preform these limitations are considered to be met.
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.
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) 4,5,14,15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fryska et al ‘964 in view of Fryska 2020/0063812.
Regarding claims 4,14 Fryska ‘964 lacks specifically stating that the fibrous layers comprise an ‘XY’ (1:1) segment pattern of the at least one first segment and the at least one second segment.
However, as broadly claimed, as shown in the figures of Fryska ‘964 (and as generally discussed therein) it is believed these limitations are met.
Nevertheless Fryska ‘812 (same inventor) shows a similar composite preform and states in para 0054:
Each fabric segments 56 may each define an arc angle (α) fiber orientation angles (φ) -- (these angles have been inadvertently reversed) -- as described above and may be selected or modified to obtain the desired web to tow fiber ratio, areal weight, and/or pre-needled/fabric thickness for a respective fibrous layer 52.
One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have modified the segment patterns of the first and second segments in the fibrous layers of Fryska ‘964, as suggested by Fryska ‘812, to achieve the desired anisotropic physical properties in the preform(s) for a specific aircraft application or to eliminate waste of the products (i.e. cost reduction).
Regarding claims 5,15 for the reasons above these limitations are considered to be met.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER P SCHWARTZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7123. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 A.M.-7:00P.M..
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, Rob Siconolfi can be reached at 571-272-7124. 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 P SCHWARTZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
1/19/26