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 .
Withdrawn Rejection
The 35 U.S.C. §103 rejection of claims 14-15 and 17-18 as over Millard et al. (WO 2012/118516) in view of Nakaoka (JP 2005-008462), made of record in the office action mailed on 03/25/2026, page 2, have been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment in the response filed on 06/22/2026.
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 21 is 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. In claim 21 line 2 which recites, “5 % of carbon”, it is not clear if the “%” is weight percent or mol%, clarification is requested.
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.
Claim(s) 14-15 and 17-18, 21, 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Millard et al. (WO 2012/118516) in view of Nakaoka (JP 2005-008462) and Fouquet et al. (US 2016/003106).
Regarding claims 14 and 17-18, 23 Millard discloses ceramic matrix composite sandwich structures, gas turbine engine components that comprise such sandwich structures, and methods of producing such sandwich structures. The ceramic matrix composite sandwich structure includes a core having oppositely-disposed first and second surfaces, a first facesheet bonded to the first surface, and a member bonded to the second surface so that the core is between the first facesheet and the member. The first facesheet and the core comprise, respectively, first and second ceramic matrix composite materials (abstract). Millard discloses invention relates to ceramic matrix composite sandwich structures, gas turbine engine components comprising such structures, and processes of making such structures (para 0002). Millard discloses the ceramic matrix of the facesheets 42 and 44 can be formed from a ceramic slurry, in which case the facesheets 42 and 44 are initially in the form of a prepreg. As used herein, a "ceramic slurry" refers to any fluid material containing a mixture of one or more types of polymer materials and one or more types of ceramic particles (para 0023). Nonlimiting examples of ceramic particle constituents that are suitable for use in the ceramic slurry include oxides of such elements as Al, Si, B, and combinations thereof, including such commercially available materials as AI2O3, S1O2.sub., B2O3 and 3Al.sub.20.sub.3. Typically, preferred ceramic particles sizes are believed to have diameters of less than one micrometer (para 0024), where the ceramic particles used in facesheet 42 corresponds to second ceramic particles having a particle size of less than 1 microns (para 0024). As Millard discloses ceramic particles
However, Millard fails to disclose that the second ceramic particles having a particle size range of 10-500 microns and the core structure defines a molten-silicon transport path configured to transport molten silicon through the core structure and into the composite face sheet in a thickness direction of the composite face sheet during densification of the composite panel.
Whereas, Nakaoka discloses composite sintered body in which a plurality of composite fiber bodies coated with a skin material having a composition different from that of the core material is collected around a fibrous core material, and the core material has a diameter of 5 to 50 μm (claim 1). Nakaoka discloses as a material constituting the core material 11 of the composite fiber body 13 used in the present invention, at least one oxide, carbide, nitride, and the like selected from the group of the periodic table 4a, 5a and 6a group metals, aluminum and silicon, and A first ceramic made of carbonitride, among which at least one selected from the group of alumina-zirconia, alumina-titanium carbide (titanium carbonitride), alumina-silicon carbide, silicon carbide, silicon nitride, zirconia, titanium boride (para 0024).
Whereas, Fouquet discloses method including impregnating a fiber structure defining a cellular structure with a ceramic precursor resin; polymerizing the ceramic precursor resin while holding the fiber structure on tooling presenting a curved shape corresponding to the final shape of the cellular structure; docking the cellular structure with first and second skins, each formed by a fiber structure impregnated with a ceramic precursor resin, each skin being docked to the cellular structure before or after polymerizing the resin of the skins; pyrolyzing the assembly constituted by the cellular structure and the first and second skins; and densifying the assembly by chemical vapor infiltration (abstract). The fiber structure 200 is placed on tooling 500 that, like the tooling 400, presents a curved shape corresponding to the shape of the acoustic panel that is to be fabricated and to the shape of the part on which the panel is to be mounted. The cellular structure 150 is then placed on the impregnated fiber structure 200. The resin impregnating the fiber structures 200 and 300 is polymerized so as to give them sufficient strength to enable them to conserve their shape during subsequent operations (para 0063). The pressure and the temperature in the oven and the composition of the gas are selected so as to enable the gas to diffuse within the pores of the parts so as to form a matrix therein by depositing a solid material that results either from a component of the gas decomposing, or else from a reaction between a plurality of its components. By way of example, gaseous precursors of ceramic, in particular of SiC, may be methyltrichlorosilane (MTS), which gives SiC by the MTS decomposing (possibly in the presence of hydrogen). This co-densification of the parts of the sound attenuation panel provides final bonding between the parts (para 0065-0066).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to form second ceramic particles of Millard having a diameter of 5-50 microns as taught by Nakaoka motivated by the desire to have high strength and toughness (para 0018) and to do densification treatment as taught by Fouquet between the core structure and composite face sheet of Millard motivated by the desire to have improved strength between core and face sheet.
As Fouquet discloses densification of the composite panel as presently claimed, therefore it would be obvious that core structure would intrinsically define a molten-silicon transport path configured to transport molten silicon through the core structure and into the composite face sheet in a thickness direction of the composite face sheet.
Regarding claim 15, Millard discloses ceramic matrix composite sandwich structure includes a core having oppositely-disposed first and second surfaces, a first facesheet bonded to the first surface, and a member bonded to the second surface so that the core is between the first facesheet and the member. The first facesheet and the core comprise, respectively, first and second ceramic matrix composite materials (abstract). Millard discloses the ceramic matrix of the facesheets 42 and 44 can be formed from a ceramic slurry, in which case the facesheets 42 and 44 are initially in the form of a prepreg. As used herein, a "ceramic slurry" refers to any fluid material containing a mixture of one or more types of polymer materials and one or more types of ceramic particles (para 0023). Nonlimiting examples of ceramic particle constituents that are suitable for use in the ceramic slurry include oxides of such elements as Al, Si, B, and combinations thereof, including such commercially available materials as AI2O3, S1O2.sub., B2O3 and 3Al.sub.20.sub.3. Typically, preferred ceramic particles sizes are believed to have diameters of less than one micrometer (para 0024).
Regarding claim 21, Millard discloses the ceramic reinforcement material of the core 46 is a felt material, the core 46 can be made by first suspending and blending ceramic fibers, optional glass fibers, and one or more fugitive bulking materials in a soapy water solution to make a core suspension. The core suspension may include varying combinations of materials, a nonlimiting example of which is, by weight, about 50% to about 83% ceramic fibers, about 0% to about 30% glass fibers, and about 10% to about 35% fugitive material(s). Preferred ceramic fibers for the felt core 46 of FIG. 2 are capable of promoting the strain properties of the core 46. Notable examples include silicon-containing CMC fibers such as silicon nitride, silicon oxynitrides, and mixtures thereof (para 0027-0028). As Millard discloses core structure comprising silicon nitride, therefore the carbon content would intrinsically be less than 5 wt%.
Claim(s) 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Millard et al. (WO 2012/118516) in view of Nakaoka (JP 2005-008462) and Fouquet et al. (US 2016/003106) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Massa et al. (US 5677042).
Regarding claim 16, Millard fails to disclose that a grain ratio of first average of the first particle size range to a second average of the second particle size is from 10:1 to 500:1.
Whereas, Massa discloses methods for using and articles comprising cermets, preferably cemented carbides and more preferably tungsten carbide, having at least two regions exhibiting at least one property that differs are discussed. Preferably, a first region of the cermet comprises a first ceramic component having a relatively coarse grain size and a prescribed binder content and a second region, juxtaposing or adjoining the first region, comprises a second ceramic component, preferably carbide(s), having a grain size less than the grain size of the first region (abstract). The ratio of the grain size of the tungsten carbide of the first cemented carbide composition to the grain size of the tungsten carbide of the second cemented carbide composition comprises about 1.5 to about 12 (claim 26).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to form second ceramic particle and first ceramic particle of Millard having a grain ratio size in a range of 10:1 as taught by Massa motivated by the desire to have wear and impact resistance.
Claim(s) 19-20, 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Millard et al. (WO 2012/118516) in view of Nakaoka (JP 2005-008462) and Fouquet et al. (US 2016/003106) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Liu et al. (CN 117694615).
Regarding claims 19-20, 22 Millard fails to disclose core further comprises a plurality of first pore having a first pore size range and composite face sheet comprises a plurality of second pores having a second pore size range.
Whereas, Liu discloses a multi-sheet layer porous ceramic substrate and atomization core thereof, the multi-sheet layer porous ceramic substrate is composed of several groups of ceramic sheet layers which are stacked up and down and sintered integrally, each group of ceramic sheet layers comprises 1 to several layers of ceramic sheet layers, each layer of ceramic sheet layer is uniformly distributed with bubble-shaped micro-holes, the average aperture of the micro-pore in the ceramic sheet layer of the same group of different layers is the same, the average aperture of the micro-pore in the ceramic sheet layer of different groups is different, several groups of ceramic sheet layers are arranged from bottom to top, the average aperture of the micro-pore in each group of ceramic sheet layer has the rule that the size changes alternately or changes from big to small (abstract). The pore-forming agent has an average particle size of 5 to 100 .mu.m, or 15 to 80 .mu.m, or 25 to 60 .mu.m. Preferably, the pore-forming agent is a material for vaporizing and evaporating when sintering and forming micro-pores in the porous ceramic substrate, comprising at least one of graphite, starch, wood powder, flour, bean powder, polystyrene micro-sphere, polymethyl methacrylate micro-sphere, sucrose and fibre (page 9, para 1-2). The aggregate is the main material of the skeleton forming the multi-sheet porous ceramic substrate, comprising kaolin, diatomite, alumina, silicon nitride, silicon carbide, quartz sand, glass sand, clay, feldspar powder, fused quartz, at least one of cordierite and mullite (claim 14).
With respect to the pore ratio of first pore size to the second pore size, In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to form core of Millard having a plurality of pores having first infiltrant having a higher pore size as taught by Liu and to form first face sheet of Millard having a plurality of pores having second infiltrant having low pore size as taught by Liu motivated by the desire to have improved processability for end use applications.
Response to Arguments
Applicants arguments filed on 06/22/2026 have been fully considered, but they are moot in view of new grounds of rejections as stated above.
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 RONAK C PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-1142. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30AM-6:30PM (FLEX).
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, ALICIA CHEVALIER can be reached at 5712721490. 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.
/RONAK C PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788
