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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-14 in the reply filed on December 5, 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Group II, claim 15 is specifically linked to claim 1 and requires similar features Additionally, the applicant argues that the Patent Office does not have the authority to require restriction between different statutory classes of claims unless the claims cover "independent and distinct inventions" and that the statutory requirements have not been met here.
This is not found persuasive because the examiner has determined that distinctness exists between Group I and Group II in that claim 1 and claim 15 are materially different processes due to the possibility of the process of claim 1 to be made to make another and materially different product using a wet nonwoven layer.
Moreover, independent claim 1 of Group I recites that a flow-closed side faces the nonwoven layer and, therefore, is always connected to the nonwoven layer. In contrast, claim 15 (Group II) recites that the surface layer can be connected to the nonwoven layer as an option which is contradictory to the nonoptional connection of the flow-closed side to the nonwoven layer of claim 1 that claim 15 purports to be linked to.
Therefore, restriction is proper because the Group I and II inventions are independent and distinct and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required due to the reasons given in the previous office action (November 6, 2025).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
Claims 1 , 3, 4, 5, 6 ,7, 9, 11, 12, 13 and 14 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.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c).
In the present instance, claims 1, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13 and 14 recite the broad recitation "in particular", and the claim also recites a function or an object which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Additionally, claims 1, 9, 11 and 14 recite the broad recitation "preferably", and the claim also recites a function or an object which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim 9 recites broad and narrow ranges in the same claim where the alternatives of greater than 80° C greater than 100° C, greater than 120° C and selected from the group consisting of greater than 130° C and/or is placed in the vacuum/steam tool at a temperature selected from the group consisting lower than 200° C lower than 180° C lower than 160° C and lower than 150° C and is, therefore, considered to be indefinite.
For the purposes of compact prosecution, the examiner will consider these limitations as reading on the narrower statement of the limitation, as the required feature of the claims.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the upper tool and/or lower tool" in the fourth method step. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the underside of the nonwoven layer" in the fifth method step. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 1 and 9 recite the limitation "the layer composite" in the seventh method step of claim 1 and the fourth line of claim 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the calibration tool" in the seventh method step. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For the purposes of compact prosecution, the examiner will consider the above insufficient antecedent terms to be the actual terms recited. The term “layer composite” will be considered as the combination of the wear layer and the nonwoven layer bonded together.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the tool opening" in the fourth method step. It is unclear which of the claim 1 recited tools is referenced (steam/vacuum tool or upper tool and/or lower tool. See claim 1 lines 2-3).
Claim 6 recites “the surface” in lines 3-4. It is unclear which surface is being referenced in claim 1 (surface and/or visible surface layer from claim 1 lines 3 and first step).
Claim 9 recites “the material structure” in line 3 of the paragraph. It is unclear what material structure is being referenced.
Claim 14 recites “the surface” in line 3. It is unclear whether this refers to “a wear layer with a surface” or “a wear layer with a visible surface layer” or both from claim 1 line 3.
For the purposes of compact prosecution, the examiner will consider that the “tool opening” of claim 3 refers to the steam/vacuum tool of claim 1, that “the surface” of claim 6 refers to the surface of the wear layer of the sound insulation of claim 1, that “the material structure” of claim 9 is the material structure of the sound insulation of claim 1 and “the surface” of claim 14 will refer to “a wear layer with a surface” from claim 1 lines 2-3.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase "the nonwoven comprises" does not make grammatical sense. The examiner considers that this should be "the nonwoven . Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase "the compound of the wear layer and the nonwoven layer" appears not to have an antecedent basis and should be changed to "layer composite" for consistency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase "the connection of the wear layer and the nonwoven layer" appears not to have an antecedent basis and should be changed to "layer composite" for consistency. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(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) 1-2, 4-11 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nicolai (DE 10 2012 222 000 A1) with machine translation IDS 06/05/2024. Evidence provided for claim 7: Q. Maddox Glass Helper “Tempered Glass vs Regular Glass: What’s the Difference? October 17, 2022. https://glasshelper.com/tempered-vs-regular-glass/
Regarding Claim 1, Nicolai anticipates a method for producing a sound insulation, in particular for floor linings and luggage compartment linings for a motor vehicle (abs, paragraphs [0011] [0012] process for the production of at least two-layer components as absorptive cladding in the interior and/or trunk or for floor trims of motor vehicles, comprising an outer product (material) and an absorber; defined acoustic properties are achieved),
wherein the sound insulation has a wear layer with a surface and/or visible surface layer (paragraph [0012] outer material (wear layer) is formed by applying a vacuum to its visible side) and a non-woven layer (paragraph [0008] open absorbers or insulations include nonwovens produced particularly using the faber flocking process),
the mechanical-physical and acoustic properties of which differ over the surface of the sound insulation, preferably zonally and/or partially (paragraphs [0012] [0022] material deliberately accumulated locally and the required thickness, different densities result and thus different mechanical and acoustic properties of the absorber or insulation), comprising the steps of:
- Positioning the nonwoven layer as a blank in a steam/vacuum tool (paragraphs [0012] [0020] introduces a one-sided shaped absorber material in a flock box into a steam/vacuum tool, insulation material is suppled as a top layer with a steam-vacuum flow-tight closed back);
- Insertion of a wear layer into the steam/vacuum tool in such a way that a flow-closed side faces the nonwoven layer (paragraph [0012] introduces the top material into the tool with its flow-closed side facing the absorber material), wherein the nonwoven layer has a binding element and in particular a binding fiber (paragraphs [0018] [0019] absorber material comprises a thermoplastic binder in fiber form; binder mixed homogeneously with the filler material);
- Close the steam/vacuum tool (paragraph [0012] the tool closes);
- Applying a vacuum to the upper tool and/or lower tool, which makes it easier to contour the wear layer (paragraph [0012] the outer material is formed by applying a vacuum to its visible side, while the absorber material is solidified);
- Applying steam or hot air to the underside of the nonwoven layer, which deforms the wear layer, activates the binding fiber in the nonwoven layer and bonds the wear layer and the nonwoven layer together (paragraph [0012] then a steam/vacuum to its underside thereby forming the component into its final contour, bonding the outer material and the absorber material together)
- Reduction of the steam or hot air pressure, in particular through a lower pressure on the wear layer side compared to the pressure on the underside of the nonwoven layer (paragraphs [0005] [0026] absorber and surface material deformed and cooled in the cold tool; trapped air extracted from the cavity using a vacuum created via the bore system and the steam is extracted from the cavity, and both tool halves can be heated to different temperatures, which intrinsically lowers the pressure on the outer material thereby cooling the part)
- Preferably demolding of the layer composite from the steam/vacuum tool and cooling in the calibration tool or a storage tray (paragraph [0012] cools component in a calibration tool or a storage tray).
Regarding Claim 2, Nicolai anticipates all the limitations of claim 1 and further anticipates that the nonwoven layer is an airlay nonwoven layer (paragraph [0008]).
Regarding Claim 4, Nicolai anticipates all the limitations of claim 1 and further anticipates that the method is carried out in one step and/or in exactly one tool, in particular exactly one steam/vacuum tool (paragraph [0012] where steps (a)-(d) disclose one steam/vacuum tool where step (e) is a separate calibration tool).
Regarding Claim 5, Nicolai anticipates all the limitations of claim 1 and further anticipates that
before inserting the wear layer into the steam/vacuum tool, larger thickness and/or contour jumps in the sound insulation are compensated for by partially adding elements (paragraph [0022] amount of material deliberately accumulated locally and the required thickness) and in particular fibers or pads, in particular airlay pads (paragraph [0008]).
Regarding Claim 6, Nicolai anticipates all the limitations of claim 1 and further anticipates that the nonwoven comprises a base nonwoven with nonwoven pads partially distributed over the surface in a predetermined manner (paragraph [0011] absorber or insulation produced by flaking absorbing material in a mold creating defined material accumulations (which can be pads) across the component).
Regarding Claim 7, Nicolai anticipates all the limitations of claim 1 and further anticipates that the wear layer is inserted into the steam/vacuum tool in a non-tempered state and, in particular, the wear layer is inserted into the steam/vacuum tool in a non-tempered state (paragraph [0032] outer fabric with mixed fiber (fleece) is placed into the steam/vacuum by hand then heated) to produce largely flat and/or less contoured sound insulation (paragraph [0008] where the nonwoven insulation can include undeformed (flat) sheets). Note: cold condition is determined to be the same as a non-tempered state while heated is equal to a tempered state. See Q. Maddox Glass Helper “Tempered Glass vs Regular Glass: What’s the Difference? October 17, 2022. https://glasshelper.com/tempered-vs-regular-glass/
Regarding Claim 8, Nicolai anticipates all the limitations of claim 1 and further anticipates that the non-woven layer is inserted into the steam/vacuum tool in a non-tempered state (paragraphs [0020] -0022] [0026] pre-formed absorber material placed into a tool using a robot followed by the outer material where they are brought together into their final shape by heating).
Regarding Claim 9, Nicolai anticipates all the limitations of claim 1 and further anticipates that the wear layer is placed in the steam/vacuum tool at a tempered state (paragraph [0033] lower half of tool was heated) and preferably at a temperature in the layer composite in the steam/vacuum tool which - in particular depending on the material structure - is greater than 80° C greater than 100° C, greater than 120° C and selected from the group consisting of greater than 130° C and/or is placed in the vacuum/steam tool at a temperature selected from the group consisting lower than 200° C lower than 180° C lower than 160° C and lower than 150° C (paragraph [0033] where the tool is heated to 120° C which meets the above range criteria of greater than 80° C, and greater than 100° C and lower than 200° C lower than 180° C lower than 160° C and lower than 150° C).
Regarding Claim 10, Nicolai anticipates all the limitations of claim 1 and further anticipates that the wear layer comprises a film which causes one side of the wear layer to be flow-closed, wherein the film is preferably a multilayer film (paragraph [0030] [0032] top fabric (wear layer) is a 90 µm PE/PA/PE film is laminated with the film beforehand).
Regarding Claim 11, Nicolai anticipates all the limitations of claim 1 and further anticipates that in a further method step, the compound of the wear layer and the nonwoven layer (paragraph [0036] outer material firmly bonded to the absorber or insulation), which is in particular an airlay nonwoven layer (paragraph [0008]), is cooled, which is preferably carried out in a calibration tool or a storage tray (paragraph [0037]).
Regarding Claim 14, Nicolai anticipates all the limitations of claim 1 and further anticipates that the wear layer has at least one further and preferably further layers located underneath the surface and/or visible surface layer, wherein these further layers are preferably selected from a group of layers which includes adhesive layers, acoustic layers and in particular acoustic nonwovens, stiffening layers and in particular stiffening nonwovens, sealing films, heavy films, contact nonwovens and film nonwovens. (paragraph [0032] outer fabric may contain a mixed fiber fleece as a carrier, is laminated with the film beforehand or an extrusion layer is applied).
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.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicolai (DE 10 2012 222 000 A1) with machine translation IDS 06/05/2024 in view of Doehring (EP 2 108 497 B1) with machine translation IDS 07/03/2024.
Regarding Claim 3, Nicolai anticipates all the limitations of claim 1, but does not disclose that the vacuum is drawn again briefly after reducing the steam or hot air pressure and before the tool opening.
Doehring discloses a method of making molded parts from a nonwoven semi-finished product made from compressed and bonded flakes with fibers (abs, paragraphs [0012] [0018] thermoplastic binding fibers contained within 3D fiber fleece mat). In at least one embodiment, hot air is introduced to activate the binder and at least partially solidifying the semi-finished product which is then transferred into a steam/vacuum-capable tool. The hot air is reduced by evacuation which reduces the hot air pressure, and this is followed by a vacuum drawn briefly before the tool opening (paragraphs [0011] [0020] vacuum is subsequently drawn to cool the semi-finished product, tool is first emptied of air, thermally active with saturated steam, and then cooled again by applying a vacuum) followed by tool opening. (paragraph [0021] the product is then transferred to a porous shaping tool).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Nicolai with Doehring whereby in the method of producing a sound insulation by binding a wear layer with a non-woven layer, that after reducing the hot air pressure by vacuum in the lower tool of Nicolai that vacuum is drawn briefly before the tool opening, as disclosed by Doehring. The skilled artisan would have taken this step in order to cool the layer composite while maintaining the range of saturated steam temperature to avoid condensation (paragraph [0020]).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicolai (DE 10 2012 222 000 A1) with machine translation IDS 06/05/2024 in view of H. Fuchs and W. Albrecht "Nonwovens (Vliesstoffe), Raw materials, production, application, properties, testing" Second edition, Wiley-VCH, 2012 with translation IDS 07/03/2024.
Regarding Claim 12, Nicolai anticipates all the limitations of claim 1 but does not anticipate that in a further method step, the connection of the wear layer and the nonwoven layer, which is in particular an airlay nonwoven layer, is die-cut and/or cut.
The non-patent literature treatise on Nonwovens (“Vliesstoffe”) which discusses the “airlay” process to manufacture nonwoven composite layer (p. 159, 170 § 4.1.3.1 nonwoven composites bonded with thermoplastic binders). In one embodiment which is a variant of the airlay process, the airlaid process (p. 168 § 4.1.3.2) the fibers used to form a nonwoven fleece and forming a homogenous fiber flow whereby under vacuum a layer structure is created (p. 169 4th paragraph). These fibers are created from shredded pulp using high performance cutting machines (p. 168 2nd paragraph).
It would have been obvious to have modified Nicolai with the disclosure of H. Fuchs, and W. Albrecht whereby the method of Nicolai for producing sound insulation is combined with the method of H, Fuchs and W. Albrecht as disclosed in there non-patent literature paper on Nonwovens, whereby the fibers used in the airlay process are produced by cutting. In order to prepare fibers for homogeneity and disintegration short fibers with lengths from 1 mm would have to be produced by cutting (p. 169 2nd paragraph).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicolai (DE 10 2012 222 000 A1) with machine translation IDS 06/05/2024 in view of Oussama (DE 10 2021 108 602 A1) with machine translation IDS 07/03/2024.
Regarding Claim 13, Nicolai anticipates all the limitations of claim 1 but does not anticipate that the wear layer is stretched before forming.
In the same field of endeavor, Oussama discloses a one-step process for floor cladding for a sound insulation made of fiber/absorption fleece which are nonwoven structures (abs). These structures have a wear layer that is stretched before forming and, in particular, is stretched over the course of a longitudinal side to varying degrees in the transverse direction and/or over the course of a transverse side to varying degrees in the longitudinal direction (paragraphs [0048] [0063]).
It would have been obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the disclosure of Nicolai with the teaching of Oussama whereby the method of making sound insulation for floor linings and luggage compartment linings for a motor vehicle with a wear layer and a non-woven layer, as disclosed in Nicolai, would include that the wear layer is stretched before forming of the course of a longitudinal side in varying degrees in the transverse direction, as taught by Oussama.
The skilled artisan would include this as part of the method step because significant material savings can be achieved by stretching the wear layer over a large area in at least one direction and by stretching it to varying degrees along an axis perpendicular to the stretching direction (paragraph [0063]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WAYNE K. SWIER whose telephone number is (571)272-4598. The examiner can normally be reached M-F generally 8:30 am - 5:30 pm PST.
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, Abbas Rashid can be reached at 571-270-7457. 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.
/WAYNE K. SWIER/Examiner, Art Unit 1748
/Abbas Rashid/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1748