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 § 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.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Han (US 2020/0393191 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Han discloses an insulation panel (“vacuum adiabatic body”: e.g. Fig. 1 – 11; ¶¶ [0008] – [0135]) comprising:
a core structure comprising:
a first plate having a first thickness, the first plate comprising a first porous material (a first “support plate” having a “lattice shape”, e.g. a first “support plate” 35: e.g. Fig. 3, 4; ¶ [0043]);
a second plate having the first thickness, the second plate comprising a second porous material (a second “support plate” having a “lattice shape”, e.g. a second “support plate” 35: e.g. Fig. 3, 4; ¶ [0043]); and
a plurality of supporting members spaced apart from each other and interposed between the first plate and the second plate (“supporting unit” comprising “bars”, e.g. “supporting unit” 30 comprising “bars” 31: e.g. Fig. 2 – 7; ¶¶ [0008], [0009], [0011], [0015], [0021] – [0023], [0043] – [0046], [0048], [0058], [0059], [0064], [0066], [0069] – [0072], [0074] – [0099], [0125], [0128] – [0133]), the plurality of supporting members having a second thickness that is greater than the first thickness and comprising a third porous material (due to connection by plural “radiation resistance sheets” 32 or by combining “bars” 31 with “porous material” 33: e.g. Fig. 3; ¶¶ [0013], [0040], [0045], [0046], [0054], [0049], [0069], [0071] – [0073]); and
a cover surrounding the core structure in a vacuum state (“first and second plate members” 10, 20: e.g. Fig. 2 – 4; ¶¶ [0011], [0013], [0035] – [0037], [0040], [0042], [0043], [0045], [0046], [0051] – [0053], [0058], [0059], [0066], [0067], [0069] – [0074], [0088], [0093]), and
wherein each of a surface of the first plate that is perpendicular to a thickness direction of the core structure and a surface of the second plate that is perpendicular to the thickness direction has a first area, and a surface of the supporting member that is perpendicular to the thickness direction has a second area that is smaller than the first area (as the “bars” are spaced from one another by a “pitch” a: e.g. Fig. 2 – 7; ¶¶ [0009], [0011], [0015], [0074], [0075], [0084], [0086], [0088], [0093] – [0099], [0125], [0129], [0130]).
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Yoon (US 2012/0128920 A1).
Regarding claim 14, although Han is not explicit as to the cover comprising a film that blocks moisture and gas, this feature would have been obvious in view of Yoon.
Yoon discloses a cover comprising a film that blocks moisture and gas in order to maintain the vacuum within a vacuum insulation panel (“aluminum foil” 120 and/or “getter” 200, whose use in Yoon’s inventive disclosure is also consistent with the cited purpose in the prior art: e.g. ¶¶ [0002] – [0059]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to provide Han’s cover with a film blocking moisture and gas, the motivation being to ensure the vacuum is maintained.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 – 12 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Han is considered the closest prior art for claim 1.
Han generally relates to vacuum insulation panels like those of claim 1 (as can be gleaned from the rejection of claim 13 above).
However, Han does not teach the first plate, the second plate, and the at least one supporting member respectively comprising first, second, and third porous materials with a Young’s modulus of at least 30 MPa.
Han provides an inequality based on the modulus of the supporting member (e.g. ¶ [0011]), but does not enumerate a range thereof, nor are ranges enumerated for the first and second porous materials.
Moduli are known for porous materials in vacuum insulation panels which are comparable with the claimed range. For instance, Hanaoka (AU 2014/276245 B2) describes a modulus for a foam insulating material which is 20 MPa or greater (Abstract) but fails to teach how such a modulus range applies to a first porous material, a second porous material, and a third porous material with the structures required of claim 1.
Therefore, claim 1 is allowed. Claims 2 – 12 depend, directly or indirectly, on claim 1. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. AIA 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph. Accordingly, each of claims 2 – 12 is allowable for the same reasons as claim 1.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claims 15 – 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Han is considered the closest prior art with respect to claims 15 – 20 for the same reasons as discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ETHAN A UTT whose telephone number is (571)270-0356. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 7:30 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Central.
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, Veronica Ewald can be reached at 571-272-8519. 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.
/ETHAN A. UTT/Examiner, Art Unit 1783
/MARIA V EWALD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1783