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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 4-5 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding Claims 4 and 9, the limitation of “materials arranged by a unidirectional arrangement along a fixed direction of different angles” makes it difficult to understand what materials are arranged in a unidirectional arrangement. For purposes of examination, it is interpreted that all the fiber tows in each individual sheet is arranged in a unidirectional arrangement in one fixed direction, and fiber tows between different sheets are arranged in different angles such that the fixed direction of each sheet is different.
Claims 5 and 9 are also rejected, due to their respective dependency on Claim 2 and 8.
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.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Koji (JP 2007-038519 A).
Regarding Claim 1, Koji teaches a laminated composite component for use in housing of electronics (Abstract; Fig. 2; Paragraph 0002) comprising a foam material having a first surface and a second surface opposite to each other (Fig. 2, Item IIb; Paragraph 0017), a first laminated sheet group disposed on the first surface, wherein the first laminated sheet group comprises a plurality of first sheets (Paragraph 0032; Fig. 2, Top IIa), a second laminated sheet group disposed on the second surface, wherein the second laminated group comprises a plurality of second sheets, (Paragraph 0032; Fig. 2, Bottom IIa), and the foam material layer, the first sheets and second sheets are laminated and pressed to form an integral whole. (Paragraph 0038).
Regarding Claim 2, Koji teaches the first sheets is formed from fiber tows arranged in a unidirectional arrangement. (Paragraph 0034).
Regarding Claim 3, Koji teaches the fiber tows are carbon-fiber tows. (Paragraph 0035; Claim 2 of Koji).
Regarding Claim 4, Koji teaches that in the first laminated group, each individual first sheet has unidirectional fibers arranged in a single direction, and the first sheets are oriented perpendicular to each other using the direction of the fibers as the orientation of the sheet (Paragraph 0034; Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 5, Koji teaches the fiber tows are carbon-fiber tows. (Paragraph 0035; Claim 2 of Koji).
Regarding Claim 6, Koji teaches the second sheets is formed from fiber tows arranged in a unidirectional arrangement. (Paragraph 0034).
Regarding Claim 7, Koji teaches the fiber tows are carbon-fiber tows. (Paragraph 0035; Claim 2 of Koji).
Regarding Claim 8, Koji teaches that in the second laminated group, each individual second sheet has unidirectional fibers arranged in a single direction, and the second sheets are oriented perpendicular to each other using the direction of the fibers as the orientation of the sheet (Paragraph 0034; Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 9, Koji teaches the fiber tows are carbon-fiber tows. (Paragraph 0035; Claim 2 of Koji).
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 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koji in view of Hammer et al. (US 2016/0263818 A1) and Tsuchiya (JP 2010-253937 A).
Regarding Claim 10, Koji teaches press molding the laminated composite component. (Paragraph 0038). Koji does not specifically teach pressing the laminated component with hot-pressing molding to form a curved structure.
Hammer teaches hot-press molding a foam core with cover layers, where a cover layer can fiber-reinforced plastic. (Abstract; Claim 1 of Hammer) Hammer teaches this hot-press molding allows for faster production and for better bonding between the foam core and the cover layers. (Paragraph 0012, 0014. 0037). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to use hot-press molding as taught by Hammer to the product of Koji to ensure better bonding.
Koji and Hammer do not specifically teach the composite is shaped into a curved structure.
Tsuchiya teaches molded product comprising foam and unidirectional fibers sheets. (Abstract; Paragraph 0047, 0056), where the FRP/foam product is molded into an electronic housing (Paragraph 0071). Tsuchiya teaches these curved and complex shaped products can be suitable for electronics, as various curvatures allow for holding different components for different types of electronics, allowing a housing to shaped for different electronic purposes. (Paragraph 0039-0040). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to shape the laminated composite component of Koji into a curved shape to allow it to be used for housing various electronic components to form various electronic products.
Regarding Claim 11, Tsuchiya teaches a radius of curvature of a molded curved electronic housing product should be 0.1 to 5 mm. (Paragraph 0037). This overlaps the claimed point of Tsuchiya teaches this radius of curvature allow for forming of ordinary to complex complicated shapes (Paragraph 0037). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to have the claimed radius of curvature to reach certain shapes.
Regarding Claim 12, Hammer teaches the material can be hot-pressed as discussed above. Tsuchiya teaches a recessed structure opposite to the curved structure, the recessed structure includes a first lateral side, a second lateral side and a third lateral side, the first lateral side is connected to the third lateral side through the second lateral side, and included angles formed by any two of the first lateral side, the second lateral side and the third lateral side are not equal to one another. (Fig. 3-5) Tsuchiya teaches this shape allows for a sufficient electronic housing with good strength. (Paragraph 0014, 0043, 0045). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to shape the composite into the claimed shape, as it allows the composite to be used for electronic housings.
Claims 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koji in view of Hammer et al.
Regarding Claim 13, Koji teaches the laminated composite can have a thickness of 3 mm or less. (Paragraph 0018). This overlaps the claimed point of 0.8 mm.
Koji does not specifically teach pressing the laminated component with hot-pressing molding.
Hammer teaches hot-press molding a foam core with cover layers, where a cover layer can fiber-reinforced plastic. (Abstract; Claim 1 of Hammer) Hammer teaches this allows for faster production and for better bonding between the foam core and the cover layers. (Paragraph 0012, 0014. 0037). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to use hot-press molding as taught by Hammer to the product of Koji to ensure better bonding.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-0358. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday: 9:30am-3:30pm, 8:30PM-10:30PM.
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, Frank Vineis can be reached at (571) 270-1547. 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.
/Michael Zhang/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781