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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on June 16, 2026 has been entered.
Withdrawn Rejections
Any rejections and or objections, made in the previous Office Action, and not repeated below, are hereby withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendments and/or arguments in the response dated June 16, 2026. However, new rejections may have been made using the same prior art if still applicable to the newly presented amendments and/or arguments.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 11, 18 – 25, 31 – 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Wu et al. (WO 2019/216869 A1).
Wu et al. disclose a laminate (Figure 2, Abstract) comprising: a first thermally-insulative layer (Figure 2, #104), the first thermally-insulative layer comprising an organic polymeric aerogel having a thermal conductivity that is less than or equal to 0.05 Watts per meter-Kelvin (W/m-K), and wherein the first thermal-insulative layer has a thickness between 75 and 175 microns (Paragraphs 0018, 0028, 0029; Although Wu do not explicitly teach the limitations with regard to thermal conductivity, it is reasonable to presume that said limitations are inherent to the invention. Support for said presumption is found in the use of similar materials (i.e. the aerogel being made from the same materials and having the desired thickness) and in the similar production steps (i.e. layered materials) used to produce the laminate. The burden is upon the Applicant to prove otherwise. MPEP 2112.); a protective layer comprising graphite (Paragraph 0027; Figure 2, #102), wherein the protective layer has a thickness between 35 and 127 microns and defines at least a portion of the front surface of the laminate (Paragraph 0027); and an adhesive layer disposed between and in direct contact with the protective layer and the first thermally-insulative layer (Figure 2, #202), wherein the laminate comprises a thickness that is less than or equal to 500 micrometers (µm) (Paragraph 0027 and 0029); and wherein the laminate comprises a thermal diffusivity that is less than or equal to 0.10 square millimeters per second (mm2/s) (Paragraphs 0018, 0028, 0029; Although Wu do not explicitly teach the limitations with regard to thermal conductivity, it is reasonable to presume that said limitations are inherent to the invention. Support for said presumption is found in the use of similar materials (i.e. the aerogel being made from the same materials and having the desired thickness) and in the similar production steps (i.e. layered materials) used to produce the laminate. The burden is upon the Applicant to prove otherwise. MPEP 2112.) as in claim 1. With respect to claim 2, a second adhesive layer coupled to the first thermally-insulative layer, wherein at least a portion of a back surface of the laminate is defined by the second adhesive layer (Paragraph 0045). Regarding claim 11, the thickness of the protective layer is from 40 µm to 60 µm (Paragraph 0027). For claim 18 – 24, the organic polymeric aerogel comprises an open-cell structure, the organic polymeric aerogel comprises micropores, mesopores, and/or macropores, the organic polymeric aerogel has a pore volume, and at least 10% of the pore volume is made up of micropores, the organic polymeric aerogel has a pore volume, and at least 10% of the pore volume is made up of mesopores, the organic polymeric aerogel has a pore volume, and at least 10% of the pore volume is made up of macropores, the organic polymeric aerogel has a pore volume and at least 10% of the pore volume is made up of micropores and/or mesopores, the organic polymeric aerogel has an average pore diameter that is between 2.0 nanometers (nm) and 50 nm, and the organic polymeric aerogel has: an average pore diameter between 50 nm and 5,000 nm; and/or a median pore diameter between 50 nm and 5,000 nm (Paragraph 0029; Paragraphs 0018, 0028, 0029; Although Wu do not explicitly teach the limitations with regard to thermal conductivity, it is reasonable to presume that said limitations are inherent to the invention. Support for said presumption is found in the use of similar materials (i.e. the aerogel being made from the same materials and having the desired thickness) and in the similar production steps (i.e. layered materials) used to produce the laminate. The burden is upon the Applicant to prove otherwise. MPEP 2112.). In claim 31, the thickness of the first thermally- insulative layer of polymeric aerogel is approximately 165 microns (Paragraphs 0018, 0028, 0029). With regard to claims 32 and 33, the layer comprising the organic polymeric aerogel has a decomposition temperature that is greater than or equal to 400 °C, and a coefficient of thermal expansion of the polymeric aerogel is less than or equal to 40 µm/m-K (Paragraph 0029; Paragraphs 0018, 0028, 0029; Although Wu do not explicitly teach the limitations with regard to thermal conductivity, it is reasonable to presume that said limitations are inherent to the invention. Support for said presumption is found in the use of similar materials (i.e. the aerogel being made from the same materials and having the desired thickness) and in the similar production steps (i.e. layered materials) used to produce the laminate. The burden is upon the Applicant to prove otherwise. MPEP 2112.).
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.
Claims 26, 29, 35, and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al. (WO 2019/216869 A1) in view of Winthrop-Chen et al. (GB 2571292 A).
Wu et al. disclose a laminate (Figure 2, Abstract) comprising: a first thermally-insulative layer (Figure 2, #104), the first thermally-insulative layer comprising an organic polymeric aerogel having a thermal conductivity that is less than or equal to 0.05 Watts per meter-Kelvin (W/m-K), and wherein the first thermal-insulative layer has a thickness between 75 and 175 microns (Paragraphs 0018, 0028, 0029; Although Wu do not explicitly teach the limitations with regard to thermal conductivity, it is reasonable to presume that said limitations are inherent to the invention. Support for said presumption is found in the use of similar materials (i.e. the aerogel being made from the same materials and having the desired thickness) and in the similar production steps (i.e. layered materials) used to produce the laminate. The burden is upon the Applicant to prove otherwise. MPEP 2112.); a protective layer comprising graphite (Paragraph 0027; Figure 2, #102), wherein the protective layer has a thickness between 35 and 127 microns and defines at least a portion of the front surface of the laminate (Paragraph 0027); and an adhesive layer disposed between and in direct contact with the protective layer and the first thermally-insulative layer (Figure 2, #202), wherein the laminate comprises a thickness that is less than or equal to 500 micrometers (µm) (Paragraph 0027 and 0029); and wherein the laminate comprises a thermal diffusivity that is less than or equal to 0.10 square millimeters per second (mm2/s) (Paragraphs 0018, 0028, 0029; Although Wu do not explicitly teach the limitations with regard to thermal conductivity, it is reasonable to presume that said limitations are inherent to the invention. Support for said presumption is found in the use of similar materials (i.e. the aerogel being made from the same materials and having the desired thickness) and in the similar production steps (i.e. layered materials) used to produce the laminate. The burden is upon the Applicant to prove otherwise. MPEP 2112.). The organic polymeric aerogel has: an average pore diameter between 50 nm and 5,000 nm; and/or a median pore diameter between 50 nm and 5,000 nm, (Paragraph 0029; Paragraphs 0018, 0028, 0029; Although Wu do not explicitly teach the limitations with regard to thermal conductivity, it is reasonable to presume that said limitations are inherent to the invention. Support for said presumption is found in the use of similar materials (i.e. the aerogel being made from the same materials and having the desired thickness) and in the similar production steps (i.e. layered materials) used to produce the laminate. The burden is upon the Applicant to prove otherwise. MPEP 2112.). However, Wu et al. fail to disclose the average pore diameter is between 100 nm and 500 nm and the median pore diameter is between 250 and 600 nm, the layer of the organic polymeric aerogel comprises at least 90% by weight of polyimide, a second thermally- insulative layer and a third adhesive layer, wherein the second thermally-insulative layer is directly adhered to the thermally-insulative polymeric organic aerogel by the third adhesive layer, wherein the second thermally-insulative layer comprises a polymeric organic aerogel having a thermal conductivity that is less than or equal to 0.05 Watts per meter-Kelvin (W/m-K), and wherein the second thermal-insulative layer has a thickness between 75 and 200 microns, the laminate is disposed in a roll such that a portion of the front surface of the laminate faces a portion of the back surface of the laminate.
Winthrop-Chen et al. teach a laminate (Figures; Abstract) comprising: one or more thermally-insulative layers (Page 6, 3rd paragraph), each having a thermal conductivity that is less than or equal to 0.05 Watts per meter-Kelvin (W/m-K) (Example 1, Page 19, Although Winthrop-Chen et al. does not explicitly teach the limitations, it is reasonable to presume that said limitations are inherent to the invention. Support for said presumption is found in the use of similar materials (i.e. same aerogel in the Example is the same as Applicant’s invention) and in the similar production steps (i.e. layered materials) used to produce the laminate. The burden is upon the Applicant to prove otherwise. MPEP 2112.); and a protective layer directly adhered to the thermally-insulative layer, wherein the protective layer defines at least a portion of the front surface of the laminate (Page 10, 2nd full paragraph; Claims 1, 2 and 14), the thickness of the protective layer is less than or equal from 40 µm to 60 µm (Page 10, 1st paragraph), the average pore diameter is between 100 nm and 500 nm (Page 4, 1st full paragraph), and the median pore diameter is between 250 and 600 nm (Page 4, 1st full paragraph), the layer of polymeric aerogel comprises at least 90% by weight of polyimide (Page 4, 1st full paragraph; Page 9, 1st full paragraph), the thickness of the layer of polymeric aerogel is approximately 165 µm (Abstract), the layer of polymeric aerogel has a decomposition temperature that is greater than or equal to 400 °C, a coefficient of thermal expansion of the layer of polymeric aerogel is less than or equal to 40 µm/m-K (Abstract; Page 4, 1st full paragraph; Although Winthrop-Chen et al. does not explicitly teach the limitations, it is reasonable to presume that said limitations are inherent to the invention. Support for said presumption is found in the use of similar materials (i.e. same aerogel in the Example is the same as Applicant’s invention) and in the similar production steps (i.e. layered materials) used to produce the laminate. The burden is upon the Applicant to prove otherwise. MPEP 2112., a second thermally-insulative layer and a third adhesive layer, wherein the second thermally-insulative layer is directly adhered to the thermally-insulative polymeric organic aerogel by the third adhesive layer (Page 5, 3rd paragraph; Claims 14, 1 and 2), and the laminate is disposed in a roll such that a portion of the front surface of the laminate faces a portion of the back surface of the laminate (Page 18, 5th Paragraph) for the purpose of a composite with excellent thermal insulation (Page 3, line 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a multilayer aerogel and adhesive construction in a roll form in Wu et al. in order to have a composite with excellent thermal insulation as taught by Winthrop-Chen et al.
Claims 13 – 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al. (WO 2019/216869 A1) in view of Hubbard et al. (WO 2017/200905 A1).
Wu et al. disclose a laminate (Figure 2, Abstract) comprising: a first thermally-insulative layer (Figure 2, #104), the first thermally-insulative layer comprising an organic polymeric aerogel having a thermal conductivity that is less than or equal to 0.05 Watts per meter-Kelvin (W/m-K), and wherein the first thermal-insulative layer has a thickness between 75 and 175 microns (Paragraphs 0018, 0028, 0029; Although Wu do not explicitly teach the limitations with regard to thermal conductivity, it is reasonable to presume that said limitations are inherent to the invention. Support for said presumption is found in the use of similar materials (i.e. the aerogel being made from the same materials and having the desired thickness) and in the similar production steps (i.e. layered materials) used to produce the laminate. The burden is upon the Applicant to prove otherwise. MPEP 2112.); a protective layer comprising graphite (Paragraph 0027; Figure 2, #102), wherein the protective layer has a thickness between 35 and 127 microns and defines at least a portion of the front surface of the laminate (Paragraph 0027); and an adhesive layer disposed between and in direct contact with the protective layer and the first thermally-insulative layer (Figure 2, #202), wherein the laminate comprises a thickness that is less than or equal to 500 micrometers (µm) (Paragraph 0027 and 0029); and wherein the laminate comprises a thermal diffusivity that is less than or equal to 0.10 square millimeters per second (mm2/s) (Paragraphs 0018, 0028, 0029; Although Wu do not explicitly teach the limitations with regard to thermal conductivity, it is reasonable to presume that said limitations are inherent to the invention. Support for said presumption is found in the use of similar materials (i.e. the aerogel being made from the same materials and having the desired thickness) and in the similar production steps (i.e. layered materials) used to produce the laminate. The burden is upon the Applicant to prove otherwise. MPEP 2112.). A second adhesive layer coupled to the first thermally-insulative layer, wherein at least a portion of a back surface of the laminate is defined by the second adhesive layer (Paragraph 0045). However, Wu et al. fail to disclose the second adhesive layer comprises a pressure-sensitive adhesive, each of the adhesive layer(s) comprises silicone, acrylic, and/or rubber, each of the adhesive layer(s) has a thickness less than or equal to 50 µm, and the thickness of each of the adhesive layer(s) is between 15 and 35 µm.
Hubbard et al. teach a laminate (Figures; Abstract) comprising: one or more thermally-insulative layers (Figures), having a first adhesive layer coupled to the thermally-insulative layer(s) (Figure 1, #30), wherein at least a portion of a back surface of the laminate is defined by: the first adhesive layer (Figure 1, #30); or a liner layer removably disposed on the first adhesive layer (Figure 1, #34; Paragraph 0006), the first adhesive layer comprises a pressure- sensitive adhesive (Paragraph 0012), each of the adhesive layer(s) comprises silicone, acrylic, and/or rubber (Paragraphs 0050 – 0062), each of the adhesive layer(s) has a thickness that is less than or equal to 50 µm, and the thickness of each of the adhesive layer(s) is between 15 and 35 µm (Paragraph 0052) for the purpose of attaching the assembly to a surface (Paragraph 0006).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have pressure sensitive adhesive layer in Wu et al. in order to attach the assembly to a surface as taught by Hubbard et al.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 2, 13 – 16, 18 – 26, 29, 31 – 33, 35, and 38 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
In response to Applicant’s argument that the prior art fails to disclose an organic polymeric aerogel, please see the newly presented rejections in view of Wu et al.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Patricia L Nordmeyer whose telephone number is (571)272-1496. The examiner can normally be reached 10am - 6:30pm EST, Monday - Friday.
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 571-272-1490. 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.
/Patricia L. Nordmeyer/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1788
/pln/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788 June 25, 2026
Prosecution Insights