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 .
Claims 1-8, and 15-18, and 20 have been examined.
Claims 9-14 are withdrawn from examination.
Claim 19 has been canceled.
Applicants have amended the claim 1 with the limitation of requiring both the borax and red phosporus, and further amended claim 15 with the incorporation of the features of the now canceled claim 19, specifically regarding the use of borax and the wt%.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see response and amended claims from which the arguments are based upon, filed 8/4/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-8 and 15-20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of additional reference ISHIGURO (US 2003/0175512 A1).
The arguments by the applicants have focused upon the latest changes over the prior art of YIWU an the KR20210046899 reference. Whereupon, the specific material of borax was emphasized along with the weight percent are seen in the ISHIGURO reference, see [0067-0072], with the specific teaching of borax being used along with the wt% range that overlaps with the claimed range used in polymer. Further, the ISHIGURO reference teaches of the known combination of borax and red phosphorus within the polymer.
The rejection of the claims in light of the amendment as shown below, with the previous rejections being modified with the additional teachings by ISHIGURO.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 3, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YIWU (CN112477310B, see IDS) in view of KR (KR 20210046899 A, see IDS) and ISHIGURO (US 2003/0175512 A1).
Re 1, YIWU teaches of a method for forming a fire-retardant thermoplastic composite panel (see teaching of flame retardant effect in the molded parts, see [0005, 0006, 0008, 0009], the method comprising:
mixing a thermoplastic polymer with a fire-retardant additive to form a fire-retardant polymer composition (see teaching of mixing in an extruder and fed into a mold to form a film [0053]);
assembling a composite layup of a plurality of first layers and a plurality of second layers by alternatingly positioning the plurality of first layers and the plurality of second layers (see of carbon fiber and resin film being alternatively laid, see [0055]) with:
each first layer including a fire-retardant polymer composition film of the fire- retardant polymer composition (see phosphorus and borate); and
each second layer including a carbon-fiber fabric (see [0023, 0050, 0051, 0055]); and
compression molding the composite layup to form the fire-retardant thermoplastic composite panel (see of mold at 220 C and 3 MPa, [0055]).
YIWU teaches of borate and phosphorus, and wherein borax being a borate, and of phosphorus. Regarding “the fire-retardant additive including borax and red phosphorus”, though YIWU does not state of the specific material combination.
Wherein, the KR reference teaches of resin matrix that includes dispersed flame retardants, and in this known material such as borax, see claim 1 of the KR reference, and further in use with a carbon fiber layer with the base resin layer.
Regarding the combination of borax and red phosphorus, the ISHIGURO reference teaches that it is known in the art of the combined use of borax and red phosphorus for their properties within a polymer. Here, the red phosphorus being a char forming agent provides to not produce toxic phosphines upon heating in the presence of water, see [0070-0071], and borax being one of known inorganic flame retardants, see [0067-0069], are used in combination, see in [0072]: “When a char forming agent containing red phosphorus is used in combination with an inorganic flame retardant, more preferable results can be obtained by a concurrent use with at least one kind of additive selected from carbon black and borate (e.g., zinc borate, barium metaborate, borax and the like).”
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified YIWU with the use of borax as taught by the KR reference as a known flame retardant material used in the composite structure, and further of the combined use of red phosphorus and borax as taught by ISHIGURO, this is seen under KSR rationale, MPEP 2143, as combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Re 3 (upon 1), wherein the fire-retardant additive is five to eight percent (5-8%) of the fire-retardant polymer composition by weight.
YIWU teaches of the additive at 2-20 wt%, see [0002].
See also ISHIGURO regarding borate being 0.5-10 wt%, see [0072].
Although the references do not explicitly state the claimed range, there is an overlapping ranges taught in the reference and the claimed range. Here, regarding the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Re 8 (upon 1), further comprising extruding the fire-retardant polymer composition to form the fire-retardant polymer composition film.
YIWU teaches of extrusion, see use of extruder [0034, 0053, 0069] in forming the film.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YIWU in view of the KR reference and ISHIGURO as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of USUI (US 2021/0039356 A1).
Re 2 (upon 1), YIWU does not teach of wherein the thermoplastic polymer includes polyether ether ketone (PEEK).
The use of PEEK as the resin layer in a composite structure that includes an adjacent carbon fiber layer is known in the art as seen in USUI, see resin layer 20 that includes polyether ether ketone, see [0061], as seen in Figure 1A, the resin layer is adjacent to the carbon fiber layer 30, and wherein combined the layers form a composite 1, and d see also in Fig. 1B, of alternating layers.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have further modified YIWU with the use of PEEK as taught by USUI as a known resin used in forming the composite structure, this is seen under KSR rationale, MPEP 2143, as combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Claim(s) 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YIWU in view of KR reference and ISHIGURO as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of TANAKA (US 2021/0276276 A1).
Re 4 (upon 1), wherein compression molding the composite layup includes exposing the composite layup to a consolidation temperature in a range of 380 0C to 420 C.
YIWU instead teaches of consolidation at 220 C, see [0103, 0109].
Re 5 (upon 1), wherein compression molding the composite layup includes applying a consolidation pressure to the composite layup, the consolidation pressure less than twelve (12) bar.
YIWU instead teaches of consolidation at 3 MPa or 30 bar, see [0103, 0109].
Re 6 (upon 5), wherein the consolidation pressure less than seven (7) bar.
YIWU instead teaches of consolidation at 3 MPa or 30 bar, see [0103, 0109].
Wherein, YIWU does not teach of the particular consolidation temperature and pressure for the composite layup.
However, it is known in the art as seen in TANAKA regarding the use of the particular material of PEEK (see [0144]), wherein of the consolidation operations include at least 340 C (see claim 2 of TANAKA), and pressure at less than 10 bar and further less than 8 bar (see claim 3 of TANAKA), or less than 5, 3, and around 1 bar (see claims 14-16 of TANAKA). As shown, the operations of the particular materials in the process can affect the operation conditions for the optimum consolidation.
Wherein, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have further modify the consolidation operations of the modified YIWU with the temperature and pressure as taught by TANAKA for operations upon a particular material such as PEEK in the process, see KSR rationale, MPEP2143, wherein, as combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YIWU in view of the KR reference and ISHIGURO as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of SHI (WO2021/194585A2, see IDS).
Re 7 (upon 1), YIWU fails to teach of further comprising applying a plasma cleaning process to the carbon-fiber fabric prior to assembling the composite layup of the plurality of first layers and the plurality of second layers.
SHI teaches of pre-treating carbon fiber with plasma cleaning. This being a known surface treatment for the one or more pre-treated carbon fibers, see page 8, lines 15-20, as it allows to improve one or more properties such as mechanical properties of carbon fibers, see page 8, lines 4-8.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have further modified YIWU with the as a known processing step of the formed carbon fibers for improving properties.
Claim(s) 15, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YIWU in view of SHI (WO2021/194585A2, see IDS).
Re 15, similar to a combination of claims 1 and 3, difference, only statement of 5-8 wt% borax, and also teaches of a plasma cleaning step of the carbon-fiber fabric.
Wherein, see teaching above by the YIWU reference for the elements of claim 1.
YIWU does not teach of the plasma cleaning step of the carbon-fiber fabric. This being a known surface treatment for the one or more pre-treated carbon fibers, see page 8, lines 15-20, as it allows to improve one or more properties such as mechanical properties of carbon fibers, see page 8, lines 4-8.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have further modified YIWU with the plasma cleaning step of the carbon fibers as taught by SHI as a known processing step of the formed carbon fibers for improving properties.
Regarding the use of borax, the ISHIGURO reference teaches that it is known in the art of the use of borax for their properties within a polymer, with borax being one of known inorganic flame retardants, see [0067-0069]. Wherein, YIWU teaches of the additive at 2-20 wt%, see [0002], and more specifically, ISHIGURO regarding borate being 0.5-10 wt%, see [0072].
Although the references do not explicitly state the claimed range, there is an overlapping ranges taught in the reference and the claimed range. Here, regarding the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Re 18 (upon 15), wherein the carbon-fiber fabric includes a plurality of continuous carbon fibers.
See YIWU reference, see carbon fiber layer [0025].
Claim(s) 16-17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YIWU in view of SHI and ISHIGURO as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of TANAKA (US 2021/0276276 A1).
Re 16 (upon 15), similar to claim 5, see rejection above with the teachings by the YIWU and TANAKA references.
Re 17 (upon 16), similar to claim 6, see rejection above with the teachings by the YIWU and TANAKA references.
Re 20 (upon 15), similar to claim 4, see rejection above with the teachings by the YIWU and TANAKA references.
YIWU instead teaches of consolidation at 3 MPa or 30 bar, see [0103, 0109].
Wherein, YIWU does not teach of the particular consolidation temperature and pressure for the composite layup.
However, it is known in the art as seen in TANAKA regarding the use of the particular material of PEEK (see [0144]), wherein of the consolidation operations include at least 340 C (see claim 2 of TANAKA), and pressure at less than 10 bar and further less than 8 bar (see claim 3 of TANAKA), or less than 5, 3, and around 1 bar (see claims 14-16 of TANAKA). As shown, the operations of the particular materials in the process can affect the operation conditions for the optimum consolidation.
Wherein, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have further modify the consolidation operations of the modified YIWU with the temperature and pressure as taught by TANAKA for operations upon a particular material such as PEEK in the process, see KSR rationale, MPEP2143, wherein, as combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 EMMANUEL S LUK whose telephone number is (571)272-1134. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 to 5.
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, Xiao S Zhao can be reached at 571-270-5343. 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.
/EMMANUEL S LUK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights