DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicants’ submission filed on March 10, 2026, has been entered.
Priority
Applicants’ priority claim to provisional applications 61/541,162 and 62/011,890, and parent applications 13/632,895, 13/839,350, and 14/465,908 is acknowledged. Additionally, the current case recites that it is a continuation of U.S. Appl. No. 14/715,849, which is a continuation-in-part of the parent applications. When Applicants file a continuation-in-part whose claims are not supported by the parent application, the effective filing date is the filing date of the child CIP. Any prior art disclosing the invention or an obvious variant thereof having a critical reference date more than 1 year prior to the filing date of the child will bar the issuance of a patent under 35 U.S.C. 102(b). Paperless Accounting v. Bay Area Rapid Transit System, 804 F.2d 659, 665, 231 USPQ 649, 653 (Fed. Cir. 1986). As best Examiner can determine, each of the applications from which the current case claims priority does not recite at least "an envelope … disposed around the binderless pack of glass fibers” and "a pipe having an outer surface.” Since the aforementioned limitation directed to an "envelope” is recited in all of the claims and does not appear to be recited in any of the provisional or parent applications, the effective filing date of all of the claims is the filing date of U.S. Appl. No. 14/715,849, which is the only priority application reciting the aforementioned limitations.
Applicants are invited to show where each of the product claims are set forth in their entirety in the earliest applications from which the current case claims priority. Absent a showing for each of the claims, and with the understanding that the current case is a continuation-in-part of earlier filed parent applications, the effective filing date is interpreted as only the filing date of U.S. Appl. No. 14/715,849.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-5 and 7-9 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 2013/0266784 to Haley in view of USPN 8,262,826 to Heller.
Regarding claims 1-5 and 7-9, Haley teaches fibrous material webs formed in a continuous process, wherein fibers are formed into a web of binderless glass fibers and the fibers can be mechanically entangled by needling (Haley, Abstract). Haley teaches that the glass fibers have an average diameter of about 16-17 HT (Id., paragraph 0053). Haley teaches that the use of relatively long and thin fibers advantageously provides a pack having better thermal and acoustic insulative performance, as well as better strength properties (Id.). Haley teaches that the pack of glass fibers comprises 99% to 100% glass or 99% glass to 100% glass and inert components (Id., claim 6). Haley teaches that the webs can have a thickness of about 0.1 inch to about 2.0 inches (Id., paragraphs 0070-0076). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the thermal insulation art at the time the invention was made to form the fibrous thermal insulating webs of Haley, wherein the fibrous material comprises a thickness such as about one inch, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional insulating fibrous material based on the totality of the teachings of Haley.
Haley teaches forming a high-density pack, such as a high-density entangled web, having a density in a range from about 0.4 lb/ft3 to about 12 lb/ft3 (Haley, paragraphs 0072, 0073). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the thermal insulation art at the time the invention was made to form the fibrous thermal insulating webs of Haley, and adjusting, varying and optimizing the density, such as within the claimed range, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional thermal and acoustic insulating fibrous material structure based on the totality of the teachings of Haley.
Haley does not appear to teach the claimed fabric. However, Haley teaches various applications for the glass webs including heating, ventilation, HVAC components, acoustic insulating panels and materials, and molded fiberglass components (Haley, paragraph 0180).
Heller teaches an insulation wrap comprising a strip of fabric and insulation material deposited onto the fabric, wherein fabric is folded over the insulation to form insulation tape that may be wrapped around pipes (Heller, Abstract). Heller teaches that the fabric is typically woven fiberglass cloth (Id., column 1 line 53 to column 2 line 4). Heller teaches that the insulation includes glass fibers (Id., column 2 lines 5-20). Heller teaches that a first flap is folded against the insulation that overlies the bottom portion, and the other flap is folded over the first flap to enclose the insulative material (Id., column 2 lines 50-60, claim 1). Heller teaches that if a more secure bond is desired to fasten the flaps together, stitching may be added, wherein the stitching is sewn through both flaps and through the bottom portion of the insulation tape (Id., column 3 lines 7-20). Note that the insulation wrap does not require adhesive tape (Id., claim 1). Heller teaches that the insulation tape is highly insulative yet flexible and may easily be wrapped around pipes (Id.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the thermal insulation art at the time the invention was made to form the insulating material of Haley, wherein the insulating material includes a fabric surrounding and contacts both major surfaces of the insulating material and is stitched through all of the layers, as taught by Heller, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional insulating material which is secured together to predictably enclose the insulating material such that the material is highly insulative yet flexible and capable of being easily wrapped around pipes.
Regarding the claimed preamble, a preamble is generally not accorded any patentable weight where it merely recites the purpose of a process or the intended use of a structure, and where the body of the claim does not depend on the preamble for completeness but, instead, the process steps or structural limitations are able to stand alone. See In re Hirao, 535 F.2d 67, 190 USPQ 15 (CCPA 1976) and Kropa v. Robie, 187 F.2d 150, 152, 88 USPQ 478, 481 (CCPA 1951). Since the prior art combination teaches a substantially similar structure and composition as claimed, the invention of the prior art combination appears capable of the claimed use.
Regarding the claimed properties set forth in claims 3-5 and 7-9, although the prior art combination does not specifically disclose the claimed properties, the claimed properties are deemed to naturally flow from the structure in the prior art combination, since the prior art combination teaches an invention with a substantially similar structure and chemical composition as the claimed invention. Products of identical structure and composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties. The burden is on the Applicants to prove otherwise.
Claims 3, 4, 7, and 8 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Haley in view of Heller, as applied to claims 1-5 and 7-9 above, and further in view of USPN 7,993,724 to Chacko.
Regarding claims 3, 4, 7, and 8, as set forth above, the prior art combination teaches a substantially similar structure and composition as the claimed invention, including an overlapping and obvious density and fiber diameter. Alternatively, Chacko teaches insulation for high temperature applications including glass fibers (Chacko, Abstract) which are needled to consolidate the fiberglass into a mat or blanket (Id., column 3 lines 16-22), wherein the insulation is suitable for use as an insulation wrap for a water heater (Id., column 3 lines 4-8). Chacko teaches that the insulation does not include a binder as the insulation is bonded by needling (Id., column 5 lines 29-42). Chacko teaches that the lower the average diameter of the glass fibers, the lower the thermal conductivity or k-value, and the lower the k-value at elevated temperatures for densities in the range of about 0.5 to 6 pcf (Id., column 4 lines 28-64). Chacko shows at Table A (Id., column 4 lines 47-60) the relationship between density and k-values at 500°F for various fiber diameters, wherein the lower the thermal conductivity the better the performance of the thermal insulation (Id., column 4 lines 61-64).
Chacko establishes that needled and binderless fiberglass mats having diameters of 3.8 and 5.6 microns comprise similar thermal conductivities at similar densities, although lower fiber diameters result in better insulating performance. Additionally, Chacko establishes predictable trends based on the fiber diameter and density. For example, Chacko establishes that increasing the density of fiberglass mats having diameters of 3.8 micron, such as increasing the density greater than 3.38 would predictably result in a thermal conductivity less than 0.406 at 500°F. Additionally, increasing the density of fiberglass mats having diameters of 5.6 micron, such as increasing the density greater than 3.71 would predictably result in a thermal conductivity less than 0.443 at 500°F.
Based on the similarities between the structures disclosed by the prior art, it is reasonable for one of ordinary skill in the art to expect that the fiber diameter and density values disclosed by the prior art, can be predictably adjusted and varied by routine experimentation based on the desired thermal insulation properties, such as k-value and corresponding r-value, and the intended application. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the thermal insulation art at the time the invention was made to form the fibrous thermal insulating webs of the prior art combination, and adjusting and varying the k-value and corresponding r-value, such as within the claimed ranges, as taught by Chacko, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional thermal and acoustic insulating fibrous material structure suitable for use on pipes, comprising a structure known in the art as predictably providing increased coherence and handling of the resulting product.
Claims 6 and 10 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Haley in view of Heller, as applied to claims 1-5 and 7-9 above, and further in view of USPN 4,522,673 to Fell.
Regarding claims 6 and 10, the prior art combination does not appear to teach the claimed property and the fabric being closed on all sides. However, Fell teaches a heat insulating blanket comprised of a layer of insulation material 12 with layers of a heat and first resistant fabric 14 and 16 placed on opposites sides of the layer of insulating material to keep the insulating material layer intact (Fell, Abstract). Fell teaches that the layer of fibrous material can be of any suitable construction such as fibrous glass confined between a pair of heat and fire-resistant layers, wherein a stitching tread will pass through all of the layers of the assembly (Id., column 1 line 47 to column 2 line 3). Fell teaches that the layer of insulating material can be in the form of a loose mat of strands or fibers (Id., column 2 line 41 to column 3 line 4). Fell teaches that the heat and fire-resistant layers may be the same fibers used in a fabricating layer 18, such as a cloth woven from fibers capable of withstanding high temperatures, such as 2000°F (Id., column 2 line 41 to column 3 line 12, column 3 lines 34-43). Fell teaches that the insulation blanket has an edge binding held in place by a thread stitched to the layers, surrounding the edge margins of the layer of insulating material, wherein the edge binding is integral with the layer of fibrous material (Id., column 3 lines 19-27).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the thermal insulation art at the time the invention was made to form the insulating material of the prior art combination, wherein the fabric is formed from fibers capable of withstanding high temperatures, such as 2000°F, and the fabric encloses the insulating material on all sides, as taught by Fell, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional insulating material which is capable of use in high temperature environments and comprises a structure which predictably contains the insulating material to prevent movement of fiber material at the ends.
Claims 11-17 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Haley in view of Heller and USPN 2,514,170 to Walter.
Regarding claims 11-17, the teachings of the prior art combination set forth above are incorporated here. The prior art combination teaches an insulation wrap that may be wrapped around pipes. Additionally, Walter teaches a high temperature insulating material comprising an insulating wrapper or envelope adapted to withstand temperatures on the order of 1000°F, or more suitable for use as a covering for high temperature steam pipes, parts of airplane engines, gas turbines, and other engines or machines operating at very high temperatures (Walter, column 1 lines 1-20). Walter teaches that the composite or envelope is adapted to withstand long periods of use, which may quickly and conveniently be applied to the desired surface or part, which may be removed without damage to itself, and which may be again replaced to continue its useful functions after repair or reassembly is completed (Id, column 1 lines 21-30). Walter teaches that the envelope or pocket is filled with loosely packed heat resistant fibrous material such as glass wool or the like non-combustible fibrous material (Id., column 3 lines 30-34). Walter teaches that the envelope comprises an outer covering layer 14 and a base layer 15, joined together by stitches (Id., column 2 lines 30-45, Figure 2). Walter teaches that the envelope comprises woven heat resistant fibrous material such as woven fibrous glass and a mesh flexible metallic fabric (Id., column 2 lines 30-45).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the thermal insulation art at the time the invention was made to form the fibrous thermal insulating webs of the prior art combination, wherein the fibrous insulating material is used in an insulating composite structure for use in combination with a pipe having a temperature within the claimed range to insulate the pipe, as taught by Walter, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional insulating fibrous material structure for a predictably suitable purpose for such materials, wherein the composite can predictably withstand high temperatures on the order of 1000°F or more.
Regarding the claimed properties set forth in claims 13-15, although the prior art combination does not specifically disclose the claimed properties, the claimed properties are deemed to naturally flow from the structure in the prior art combination, since the prior art combination teaches an invention with a substantially similar structure and chemical composition as the claimed invention. Products of identical structure and composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties. The burden is on the Applicants to prove otherwise.
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Haley in view of Heller and Walter, as applied to claims 11-17 above, and further in view of Chacko.
Regarding claims 13 and 14, as set forth above, the prior art combination teaches a substantially similar structure and composition as the claimed invention, including an overlapping and obvious density and fiber diameter. Alternatively, Chacko teaches insulation for high temperature applications including glass fibers (Chacko, Abstract) which are needled to consolidate the fiberglass into a mat or blanket (Id., column 3 lines 16-22), wherein the insulation is suitable for use as an insulation wrap for a water heater (Id., column 3 lines 4-8). Chacko teaches that the insulation does not include a binder as the insulation is bonded by needling (Id., column 5 lines 29-42). Chacko teaches that the lower the average diameter of the glass fibers, the lower the thermal conductivity or k-value, and the lower the k-value at elevated temperatures for densities in the range of about 0.5 to 6 pcf (Id., column 4 lines 28-64). Chacko shows at Table A (Id., column 4 lines 47-60) the relationship between density and k-values at 500°F for various fiber diameters, wherein the lower the thermal conductivity the better the performance of the thermal insulation (Id., column 4 lines 61-64).
Chacko establishes that needled and binderless fiberglass mats having diameters of 3.8 and 5.6 microns comprise similar thermal conductivities at similar densities, although lower fiber diameters result in better insulating performance. Additionally, Chacko establishes predictable trends based on the fiber diameter and density. For example, Chacko establishes that increasing the density of fiberglass mats having diameters of 3.8 micron, such as increasing the density greater than 3.38 would predictably result in a thermal conductivity less than 0.406 at 500°F. Additionally, increasing the density of fiberglass mats having diameters of 5.6 micron, such as increasing the density greater than 3.71 would predictably result in a thermal conductivity less than 0.443 at 500°F.
Based on the similarities between the structures disclosed by the prior art, it is reasonable for one of ordinary skill in the art to expect that the fiber diameter and density values disclosed by the prior art, can be predictably adjusted and varied by routine experimentation based on the desired thermal insulation properties, such as k-value and corresponding r-value, and the intended application. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the thermal insulation art at the time the invention was made to form the fibrous thermal insulating webs of the prior art combination, and adjusting and varying the k-value and corresponding r-value, such as within the claimed ranges, as taught by Chacko, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional thermal and acoustic insulating fibrous material structure suitable for use on pipes, comprising a structure known in the art as predictably providing increased coherence and handling of the resulting product.
Claim 18 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Haley in view of Heller, Walter and Fell and Chacko.
Regarding claim 18, the teachings of Haley in view of Heller and Walter set forth above are incorporated herein. The prior art combination does not appear to teach the claimed property and the fabric being closed on all sides. However, Fell teaches a heat insulating blanket comprised of a layer of insulation material 12 with layers of a heat and first resistant fabric 14 and 16 placed on opposites sides of the layer of insulating material to keep the insulating material layer intact (Fell, Abstract). Fell teaches that the layer of fibrous material can be of any suitable construction such as fibrous glass confined between a pair of heat and fire-resistant layers, wherein a stitching tread will pass through all of the layers of the assembly (Id., column 1 line 47 to column 2 line 3). Fell teaches that the layer of insulating material can be in the form of a loose mat of strands or fibers (Id., column 2 line 41 to column 3 line 4). Fell teaches that the heat and fire-resistant layers may be the same fibers used in a fabricating layer 18, such as a cloth woven from fibers capable of withstanding high temperatures, such as 2000°F (Id., column 2 line 41 to column 3 line 12, column 3 lines 34-43). Fell teaches that the insulation blanket has an edge binding held in place by a thread stitched to the layers, surrounding the edge margins of the layer of insulating material, wherein the edge binding is integral with the layer of fibrous material (Id., column 3 lines 19-27).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the thermal insulation art at the time the invention was made to form the insulating material of the prior art combination, wherein the fabric encloses the insulating material on all sides, as taught by Fell, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional insulating material which is capable of use in high temperature environments and comprises a structure which predictably contains the insulating material to prevent movement of fiber material at the ends.
Regarding the claimed properties, Chacko teaches insulation for high temperature applications including glass fibers (Chacko, Abstract) which are needled to consolidate the fiberglass into a mat or blanket (Id., column 3 lines 16-22), wherein the insulation is suitable for use as an insulation wrap for a water heater (Id., column 3 lines 4-8). Chacko teaches that the insulation does not include a binder as the insulation is bonded by needling (Id., column 5 lines 29-42). Chacko teaches that the lower the average diameter of the glass fibers, the lower the thermal conductivity or k-value, and the lower the k-value at elevated temperatures for densities in the range of about 0.5 to 6 pcf (Id., column 4 lines 28-64). Chacko shows at Table A (Id., column 4 lines 47-60) the relationship between density and k-values at 500°F for various fiber diameters, wherein the lower the thermal conductivity the better the performance of the thermal insulation (Id., column 4 lines 61-64).
Chacko establishes that needled and binderless fiberglass mats having diameters of 3.8 and 5.6 microns comprise similar thermal conductivities at similar densities, although lower fiber diameters result in better insulating performance. Additionally, Chacko establishes predictable trends based on the fiber diameter and density. For example, Chacko establishes that increasing the density of fiberglass mats having diameters of 3.8 micron, such as increasing the density greater than 3.38 would predictably result in a thermal conductivity less than 0.406 at 500°F. Additionally, increasing the density of fiberglass mats having diameters of 5.6 micron, such as increasing the density greater than 3.71 would predictably result in a thermal conductivity less than 0.443 at 500°F.
Based on the similarities between the structures disclosed by the prior art, it is reasonable for one of ordinary skill in the art to expect that the fiber diameter and density values disclosed by the prior art, can be predictably adjusted and varied by routine experimentation based on the desired thermal insulation properties, such as k-value and corresponding r-value, and the intended application. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the thermal insulation art at the time the invention was made to form the fibrous thermal insulating webs of the prior art combination, and adjusting and varying the k-value and corresponding r-value, such as within the claimed ranges, as taught by Chacko, motivated by the desire of forming a conventional thermal and acoustic insulating fibrous material structure suitable for use on pipes, comprising a structure known in the art as predictably providing increased coherence and handling of the resulting product.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments have been considered but are moot based on the new ground of rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER Y CHOI whose telephone number is (571)272-6730. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM - 3:00 PM.
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, Jennifer Boyd can be reached at 571-272-7783. 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.
/PETER Y CHOI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights