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 of Group I (Claims 1-12) in the reply filed on 01/30/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claims 13-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 5 recites “complementary stiffening elements that when joint form the stiffening structure”. The term “joint” in this context is interpreted as “joined”.
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 1-12 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.
Claim 1 recites “the stiffening structures”. The claim previously recites “at least one of the first HFQ process or the second HFQ process forms a stiffening structure”. Based on the prior recitation, the claim only requires a single stiffening structure. It is unclear whether the claim requires one or multiple stiffening structures due to the combination of recitations of “at least one” and plural “stiffening structures”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-3 and 6-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Periyasamy (US20250236382A1) in view of Kumar (NPL V).
Claim 1
Periyasamy teaches a method comprising: forming a first aluminum sheet (Figure 1, Item 200 and ¶0058) using a first process (¶0093); forming a second aluminum sheet (Figure 1, Item 100 and ¶0049) using a process (¶0049 teaches a forming process for the first panel. Figure 1 shows the panel is curved), wherein at least one of the process or the second forms a stiffening structure on a surface of the first aluminum sheet or the second aluminum sheet (Figure 3 shows stiffening structures (210, 220, 230). Figure 4 shows other stiffening structures (270). ¶0096 teaches the formation process of the first panel (200) forms these features integrally with the panel.) joining together the first aluminum sheet and the second aluminum sheet (¶0098 teaches the two panels (100, 200) are bonded.) so that the stiffing structures are placed between the first aluminum sheet and the second aluminum sheet thereby forming a reinforced aluminum component (Figure 4 shows that the stiffening portions (210, 220, 230, 270) are located between the outer bounds of the first (200) and second (100) panel.); and constructing an aviation vehicle with the reinforced aluminum component. (¶0107 teaches the component is used in an aircraft application.)
Periyasamy does not disclose HFQ as the formation method.
However, Kumar teaches the use of HFQ to form aircraft structures from aluminum. (Page 10, “Introduction” teaches the document relates to aircraft structures. Page 13, “The Advanced metal forming” teaches the use of HFQ to form an aluminum alloy.”
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to apply the known HFQ technique of Kumar to the forming method of Periyasamy in order to use a forming method that provides a homogenous microstructure, enhances ductility, enhances the formability, reduces spring back on complex components (such as a curved shape), and improves mechanical characteristics.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed, to apply the known HFQ technique of Kumar to the forming method of Periyasamy because it has been held to be prima facie obvious to apply a known technique to a known method/apparatus to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(D).
The predictable result is the panels of Periyasamy will be formed using HFQ.
Claim 2
Periyasamy in view of Kumar teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the stiffening structure is orthogonal. (Periyasamy, Figure 2 teaches the stiffening structure extends at a right angle from the side surface of the panel.)
Claim 3
Periyasamy in view of Kumar teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the stiffening structure is non-orthogonal. (Periyasamy, ¶0062 teaches the stiffening structures can be orthogonal or non-orthogonal (angled) with respect to the surface (201).)
Claim 6
Periyasamy in view of Kumar teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the first HFQ process forms the first aluminum sheet with the stiffening structure and the second HFQ process forms the second aluminum sheet with no stiffening structure. (Periyasamy Figure 1 teaches the first sheet (200) has the stiffening structures and the second (100) does not. Kumar teaches the use of HFQ to form aluminum.)
Claim 7
Periyasamy in view of Kumar teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the reinforced aluminum component is an airframe. (Periyasamy ¶0107 teaches the component is used for an airframe component.)
Claim 8
Periyasamy in view of Kumar teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the reinforced aluminum component is a fuselage, a wing, or a empennage skin. (Periyasamy ¶0107 teaches the component is used for a fuselage, wing, or tail component.)
Claim 9
Periyasamy in view of Kumar teaches the method of claim 1, wherein joining together comprises adhesive bonding the first and second aluminum sheets. (Periyasamy ¶0098 teaches the use of adhesives to join the panels.)
Claim 10
Periyasamy in view of Kumar teaches the method of claim 1, wherein joining together comprises fastening the first and second aluminum sheets. (Periyasamy ¶0098 teaches the use of rivets to join the panels.)
Claim 11
Periyasamy in view of Kumar teaches the method of claim 1, wherein joining together comprises welding the first and second aluminum sheets. (Periyasamy ¶0098 teaches the use of fusion bonding to join the panels.)
Claims 1 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Denkmann (US20190248112A1) in view of Kumar (NPL V).
Claim 1
Denkmann teaches a method comprising: forming a first aluminum sheet (Figure 7b, Item 90 and ¶0109) using a first process (¶0109); forming a second aluminum sheet (Figure 7b, Item 92 and ¶0109) using a process (¶0109), wherein at least one of the process or the second forms a stiffening structure on a surface of the first aluminum sheet or the second aluminum sheet (Figure 7b shows that each sheet (90, 92) has stiffening elements (94) formed thereon after the forming process.) joining together the first aluminum sheet and the second aluminum sheet (¶0110) so that the stiffing structures are placed between the first aluminum sheet and the second aluminum sheet thereby forming a reinforced aluminum component (Figure 7b shows that the beads (94) are located between the outer bounds of each sheet (90, 92).); and constructing an aviation vehicle with the reinforced aluminum component. (¶0032)
Denkmann does not disclose HFQ as the formation method.
However, Kumar teaches the use of HFQ to form aircraft structures from aluminum. (Page 10, “Introduction” teaches the document relates to aircraft structures. Page 13, “The Advanced metal forming” teaches the use of HFQ to form an aluminum alloy.”)
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to substitute the known forming method of Denkmann with the forming method of Kumar in order to use a forming method that provides a homogenous microstructure, enhances ductility, enhances the formability, reduces spring back on complex components (such as a curved shape), and improves mechanical characteristics.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed, to substitute the known forming method of Denkmann with the forming method of Kumar because it has been held to be prima facie obvious to substitute one known element for another to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
The predictable result is the sheets in Denkmann will be formed into their respective shapes using HFQ.
Claim 4
Denkmann in view of Kumar teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the stiffening structure is hexagonal. (Denkmann, Figure 7b shows the cross section of the stiffening structure after assembling is six sided, or hexagonal.)
Claim 5
Denkmann in view of Kumar teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the first HFQ process and the second HFQ process form respective complementary stiffening elements that when joint form the stiffening structure. (Denkmann, Figures 7a-7b show each sheet (90, 92) has stiffening elements (94) that are joined together. Kumar teaches HFQ of aluminum materials.)
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Periyasamy (US20250236382A1) in view of Kumar (NPL V), as applied in Claim 1, further in view of MatWeb Aluminum 6061 (NPL X).
Claim 12
Periyasamy in view of Kumar teaches the method of Claim 1, wherein the first aluminum sheet or the second aluminum sheet comprises an aluminum alloy. (Periyasamy ¶0049 teaches the use of a 6000 series alloy.)
Periyasamy in view of Kumar does not disclose the first aluminum sheet or the second aluminum sheet comprises aluminum alloy 2024, aluminum alloy 6061 or aluminum alloy 7075.
However, Matweb Aluminum 6061 teaches the use of aluminum alloy 6061 for aircraft applications. (“Material Notes” indicates the use of AA6061 in aircraft parts.)
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine the known AA6061 of Matweb Aluminum 6061 to the 6000 series aluminum alloy teaching of Periyasamy in order to use an alloy that has high strength, good workability, high resistance to corrosion, and is widely available. (See Matweb Aluminum 6061 “Material Notes” section.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed, to combine the known AA6061 of Matweb Aluminum 6061 to the 6000 series aluminum alloy teaching of Periyasamy because it has been held to be prima facie obvious to combine prior art structures according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
The predictable result is the panels in Periyasamy will be formed using AA6061.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found on the PTO-892 Form.
Document
Date
Description of Relevant Subject Matter
US20250236382A1
2024-01-19
Figures 1 and 4 show an assembly made from a first (100) and second (200) panel made from aluminum alloy 6000 (¶0049 and ¶0058). The first panel is formed (¶0049) to have a curve (¶0070). The second panel (200) is formed using hot forming (¶0093) to form the structural formations (210, 220, 250, 270). ¶0098 teaches the bonding of the stringer panel (200) with the base panel (100) using adhesive, fasteners (rivets), or welding (fusion bonding). ¶0097 teaches that integrally forming the panel(s) with the various features (vs adding them later) minimizes the number of parts used, decreases costs, increases quality, and eases manufacturing. ¶0062 teaches the stiffening structures can be orthogonal or non-orthogonal with respect to the surface (201). The formed component can be a fuselage component, a structural component, or a wing component, etc (¶0107).
US20200307756A1
2020-03-11
Figures 1-2 teach an assembly made from a first (24) and second (4) panel made from aluminum (¶0008 and ¶0021). ¶0021 teaches both sheets are made from “a” metallic material, meaning that both are the same material. Figure 1 teaches the first sheet (24) is formed to have a curved surface (¶0043). The second sheet (4) is formed using hot forming methods (¶0041) to have a curvature and stiffening elements. ¶0021 teaches the sheets are connecting through gluing or welding.
US20200377191A1
2019-05-29
Figures 2B and 2C teach an assembly made from two panels (302 and 304) that are coupled at edges using adhesive or fasteners (¶0043). The panels have an inner honeycomb reinforcement (Figure 4) that is added later. The panels are made from aluminum (¶0051).
US20010015043A1
2001-02-22
Figure 1 teaches a panel (1) made from aluminum (¶0034) that has integrally formed reinforcing elements (3, 4).
US20190283856A1
2018-03-13
Figure 4 teaches a panel assembly having two panels (26, 28) that are bonded (¶0007) using an adhesive. One of the panels (28) has integrally formed stiffening elements.
US20190248112A1
2019-04-25
Figure 7b teaches an assembly including two panels (90, 92) that are made from aluminum (¶0109) that are formed to have a number of stiffening structures (94) that have a hexagonal shape in cross section (Figure 7b). The two sheets are joined using adhesives or welding after forming (¶0110).
US6848233B1
1999-10-29
Figures 2A-2C teach a number of embodiments where panels of aluminum are joined to one another after forming. The panels include stiffening shapes after forming. Figure 2C shows the stiffening structure forms a hexagonal cross section after assembling.
US5262220A
1991-06-18
Figures 1-2 and 13 teach an assembly made from two panels of aluminum (10, 12), each having ribs (18) formed therein. The ribs are joined to one another to form a stiffened panel assembly.
US20100133380A1
2007-08-24
¶0017 teaches the use of aluminum alloys for aircraft skin panels including 2024 and 7075.
Kumar et al., 2023
A review: aeronautical components and systems should have their weight reduced throughout the design process
2023
Page 13, “The Advanced metal forming” teaches the use of HFQ to form an aluminum alloy. The use of HFQ is stated as providing a homogenous microstructure, enhancing ductility, enhance the formability, reducing spring back on complex components (such as a curved shape), and improving mechanical characteristics.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Raj-Kumar-343/publication/369480291_A_Review_Aeronautical_Components_and_Systems_Should_have_their_Weight_Reduced_throughout_the_Design_Process/links/641d6fb766f8522c38cd02be/A-Review-Aeronautical-Components-and-Systems-Should-have-their-Weight-Reduced-throughout-the-Design-Process.pdf
Impression Technologies NPL
2017
Page 3 teaches HFQ is used for complex shaping of high strength aluminum and reduces cost, Page 6 teaches the process uses less parts and reduces springback, Page 10 teaches the process allows for tight radii, high formability, single draw operations. Page 11 shows an example finished product where multiple bends are formed on the sheet of material.
https://www.lbcg.com/media/downloads/events/613/glmmus17-d2-0215-john-sellors-hot-form-quench.11381.pdf
CN115303362B
2022-11-08
Lines 197-201 teach that HFQ used with aluminum allows for complex curved surfaces to be formed at a lower cost, without springback, reduces the number of parts and connections, improves the stability of the part and rigidity of the formed body.
US8245971B2
2006-09-26
Figures 3a-3b and 4 teach the formation of a panel assembly made from two panels (20, 21) that each have reinforcements/stiffening elements formed thereon.
US2742247A
1956-04-17
Figures 3-8 teach a panel assembly including an internal reinforcement (5). The reinforcement is in the shape of an orthogonal (Figure 7) or non-orthogonal/hexagonal (Figure 8) orientation.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael W Hotchkiss whose telephone number is (571)272-3854. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 0800-1600.
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, Sunil K Singh can be reached at 571-272-3460. 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 W HOTCHKISS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726