DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Applicant’s response and submission of the Terminal Disclaimer filed April 30, 2026 are acknowledged.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 22-26 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-4, 6 and 11-12 of U.S. Patent No. 12/606,941 Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims in
A reinforcement material comprising
a web formed from a plurality of carbon fiber yarns wherein each yarn has filaments that are twisted by between 6 and 12 turns/meter and with the yarns having either a S-twist or a Z- twist; and wherein the plurality of yarns arranged in a plane with the yarns being aligned in a parallel orientation and; wherein in respect to a line bisecting the plane with there being an equal number of yarns having an S-twist on one side of the bisecting line and an equal number of Z- twists on the other side of the bisecting line; and a layer of nonwoven polymeric material on each of the top and bottom surfaces of the plane with the polymeric material comprising between 2 to 6% by weight of the reinforcing material.
The claims in both co-pending applications recite that the reinforcement material includes the width of the reinforcement being between 12 to 51 mm; the unidirectional web has a weight between 126 to 210 g/m³; and the yarns have a titer of 6 to 12K.
The claims in both co-pending applications recite that the reinforcement material includes the polymeric layers comprising a veil; the polymeric layers comprise thermoplastic polymers, partially cross-linked thermoplastic polymers, or mixtures thereof; and the polymeric layers have a basis weight of 0.2 g/m² to 20 g/m² and a thickness of 3 to 35 microns.
The claims in both co-pending applications recite that the reinforcement material includes yarns that are arranged with respect to S-twist and Z-twist orientation of their filaments in a sequences selected from the group consisting of SZZS, SZSZ, SZSZS, SSZZSS, SZSSZS, SZSZSZ, and SSZZSSZZ.
The claims in both co-pending applications recite a preform comprising a plurality of layers suitable for infusion with the stack of layers being assembled without perforation, sewing or knitting. Applicant's claim 24 is a product-by-process claim. The manner in which the stack is assembled is given minimal patentable weight. Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). See MPEP 2113.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's Terminal Disclaimer filed April 30, 2026 has been fully considered; however, it is not approved. The POA submitted to our office on 4/22/26 was not accepted. Please reference N572 date 5/1/26 listed in the file wrapper for the reason(s) make the correction(s) and resubmit along with the TD form. No additional fee is required with the resubmission. This is in response to the power of attorney filed 04/28/2026. The power of attorney in this application is not accepted for the reason(s) listed below: The power of attorney has not been accepted because the party who is giving power has not been identified. Power of attorney may only be signed by the applicant for patent (37 CFR 1.42) or the patent owner. A party who is not the applicant must become the applicant in accordance with 37 CFR 1.46(c) and appoint any power of attorney in compliance with 37 CFR 3.71 and 3.73. For a reissue application, reexamination proceeding, or supplemental examination proceeding, a patent owner who was not the applicant under 37 CFR 1.46 must appoint any power of attorney in compliance with 37 CFR 3.71 and 3.73. See 37 CFR 1.32(b)(4).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAMIE S THOMPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1530. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am - 5:30 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, Jennifer Boyd, can be reached at 571-272-7783. 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.
/CAMIE S THOMPSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights