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 Objections
Claims 1, 8, 10, 16, 18, 20 and 38 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In reference to claim 1, in line 13 before “interface” insert “touching”, in order to ensure consistency in the claim language. Appropriate correction is required.
In reference to claim 8, in each of lines 2 and 3, after “said” and before “open area cores” insert “two or more”, in order to ensure consistency in the claim language. Appropriate correction is required.
In reference to claim 10, in line 3 after “said” and before “open area cores” insert “two or more”, in order to ensure consistency in the claim language. Appropriate correction is required.
In reference to claim 16, in line 3 before “open area cores” insert “two or more”, in order to ensure consistency in the claim language. Appropriate correction is required.
In reference to claim 18, in line 2 after “said” and before “open area cores” insert “two or more”, in order to ensure consistency in the claim language. Appropriate correction is required.
In reference to claim 20, in line 3 before “interface” insert “touching”, in order to ensure consistency in the claim language. Appropriate correction is required.
In reference to claim 38, in line 2 after “the” and before “open area cores” insert “two or more”, in order to ensure consistency in the claim language. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3, 8-10, 13, 16, 18, 20, 23-24 and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Durham et al. (WO 2020/117717) (Durham) in view of Zhu (WO 2021/147125).
The examiner has provided a machine translation of WO 2021/147125. The citation of prior art in the rejection refers to the provided translation.
In reference to claims 1 and 38, Durham teaches a composite sandwich panel assembly including an open area core, a high gloss surface sheet, and a structural skin ([0007]) (corresponding to a composite sandwich panel assembly; said composite sandwich panel assembly comprising: an open area core; a high gloss surface sheet; a structural skin). The open area core defines a plurality of pores and has a first face and an opposing second face ([0007]) (corresponding to an open area core having a first face and a second face opposing the first face). The high gloss surface sheet is adhered to the first face of the open area core by a first adhesive layer ([0007]) (corresponding to a high gloss surface sheet adhered to the first face of each of said open area cores by a first adhesive layer). The high gloss surface sheet has a high gloss surface ([0007]) (corresponding to the high gloss surface having a high gloss surface). The structural skin is adhered to the second face of the open area core by a second adhesive ([0007]) (corresponding to a structural skin adhered to the second face of each of said open area cores by a second adhesive layer).
Durham does not explicitly teach the composite sandwich panel has one or more defined breakpoints and the open area core is two or more open area cores, as presently claimed. However, Durham teaches the open area core is a honeycomb core ([0019];[0034])
Zhu teaches a honeycomb core sandwich composite panel comprising a continuous honeycomb core material ([0007]). The continuous honeycomb core material consists of at least two continuous honeycomb core materials and a connecting structure which connects the at least two continuous honeycomb core materials ([0021]) (corresponding to two or more open area cores). Figs. 4a and 4b, provided below, show the continuous honeycomb core material including two continuous honeycomb core materials having a connecting structure at which edges of the adjacent core materials are connected (corresponding to a touching interface between edges of each of the two or more open area cores determined a breakpoint of the one or more defined breakpoints; the edges are directly adjacent one another and face one another). The connecting structures are used in order to prevent breaks and structural discontinuities when adjacent honeycomb more materials are connected laterally ([0004]) (corresponding to the breakpoint is a predetermined failure point of the composite sandwich panel assembly).
Zhu further teaches the adjacent side walls of the cells of the honeycomb core material are adhesively bonded to one another ([0027]) (corresponding to the open area core comprises pores with adhesive bonds or glue lines therebetween). The connecting parts of the cores are connected by facing each other or by inserting into one another ([0029]; [0125]; Fig. 4a) (corresponding to the breakpoint comprises two or more omitted adhesive bonds or omitted glue lines). Additional layers overlay the core in a continuous manner ([0033]; [0096]).
Zhu teaches the inclusion of the at least two continuous honeycomb core materials connected by the connecting structure improves the bending strength of the panel without changing the panel material, structure and composite processing technology ([0054]; [0160]). Further, the panel can achieve better mechanical properties with less material ([0054]).
PNG
media_image1.png
747
520
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In light of the motivation of Zhu, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the presently claimed invention to have the open area core of Durham comprise the at least two continuous honeycomb core materials connected by a connecting structure, in order to provide a panel of arbitrary length that has improved bending strength and better mechanical properties, and thereby arriving at the presently claimed invention.
Given that the high gloss surface sheet and the structural skin of Durham in view of Zhu is applied over the continuous honeycomb core materials, it is clear the high gloss surface sheet and the structural skin continuously overlay the connecting structures (corresponding to the high gloss surface sheet and the structural skin continuously overlay the interface).
In reference to claim 3, Durham in view of Zhu teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Durham further teaches the high gloss surface sheet is formed from sheet molding compound (SMC), thermoplastic, dicyclopentadiene (DCPD) or an overmold polyurethane (PU) ([0024]) (corresponding to said high gloss surface sheet is formed of any one of: sheet molding compound (SMC), thermoplastic sheet, dicyclopentadiene (DCPD), or overmold polyurethane (PU)).
In reference to claim 8, Durham in view of Zhu teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Durham further teaches the pores of the open area core are at least partially filled with a fill, wherein the fill includes foam pellets, fire retardant or a phase change material providing sound dampening, fire retardancy, thermal insulation or a combination thereof ([0031]) (corresponding to a set of pores in said open area cores and a fill in said set of pores of said open area cores, said fill being at least one of a sound dampening foam, a fire retardant, or a phase change material).
In reference to claim 9, Durham in view of Zhu teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Durham further teaches a decorative layer attached to the exposed surface of the structural skin ([0030]) (corresponding to a decorative layer attached to said structural skin).
In reference to claim 10, Durham in view of Zhu teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Durham further teaches the high gloss surface sheet has an average thickness of 1.5 to 5 mm and the open area core has an average pore diameter of 6 to 25 mm ([0029]) (corresponding to aid high gloss surface sheet is a sheet molding compound (SMC) with an average thickness of from 1.5 to 5 mm and said open area cores have pore diameters of 6 to 25 mm).
In reference to claim 13, Durham in view of Zhu teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Durham further teaches the high gloss surface sheet includes a filler material ([0024]) (corresponding to said high gloss surface sheet comprises a filler).
In reference to claim 16, Durham in view of Zhu teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Durham further teaches a cloth is embedded in the first adhesive layer ([0026]) (corresponding to a cloth intermediate between said high gloss surface and said open area cores).
In reference to claim 18, Durham in view of Zhu teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Durham further teaches the adhesive is applied to allow contact with the interior volume of the open area core ([0014]) (corresponding to said first adhesive layer contacts an interior volume of said open area cores).
In reference to claim 20, Durham in view of Zhu teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Durham further teaches the structural skin is formed of a fiber mat ([0028]) (corresponding to said first structural skin is formed of a fiber mat). Given that the structural skin of Durham in view of Zhu is applied over the continuous honeycomb core materials, it is clear the structural skin continuously overlays the connecting structures (corresponding to the structural skin is continuous over the interface).
In reference to claim 23, Durham in view of Zhu teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Durham further teaches the high gloss surface sheet and the structural skin are joined together along an edge of the composite sandwich panel assembly to form a seal ([0032]) (corresponding to said high gloss surface sheet and said structural skin are joined together to from an edge). The seal fully encloses the open area core and inhibits moisture from entering the interior of the composite sandwich panel assembly ([0032]) (corresponding to defining a moisture resistant seal).
In reference to claim 24, Durham in view of Zhu teaches the limitations of claim 23, as discussed above. Durham further teaches a gasket included in the edge seal disposed between the high gloss surface sheet and the structural skin ([0033]) (corresponding to a gasket disposed between said high gloss surface sheet and said first structural at said edge).
Claims 1, 3, 8-10, 13, 16, 18, 20, 23-24 and 37-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foran et al. (WO 2020/252127) (Foran) in view of Lewit et al. (US 2018/0209146) (Lewit).
In reference to claim 1, Foran teaches a composite sandwich material including an open area core defining a plurality of pores, a high gloss surface sheet adhered to a first face of the open area core by a first adhesive layer, and a structural skin adhered to a second face of the open area core by a second adhesive layer ([0007]). The first face is opposite the second face (claim 2; FIG. 2) (corresponding to a composite sandwich panel assembly; said assembly comprising an open area core having a first face and a second face opposing the first face; a high gloss surface sheet adhered to the first of each of said open area core by a first adhesive layer; a structural skin adhered to the second face each of said open area cores by a second adhesive layer). The high gloss surface sheet has a high gloss surface finish ([0024]) (corresponding to the high gloss surface sheet having a high gloss surface).
Foran does not explicitly teach the composite sandwich structure panel assembly includes one or more defined breakpoints and the open area core is two or more open area cores, as presently claimed.
Lewit teaches an assembly of composite structures ([0005]). The assembly allows the composite materials to withstand greater impact and lower maintenance costs ([0005]). The assembly comprises a nested C joint between two adjoining panels ([0014]; [0015]) (corresponding to two or more open area cores; a touching interface between edges of each of the two or more open area cores determine a breakpoint of the one or more defined breakpoints). The nested C joint acts as an internal spring in the wall, transferring the load of impact along the arcuate surfaces of the nested joints between panels, allowing the wall skin to deflect with a more gradual transition and flexible shear tie that prevents structural failure or other damage to the wall and shear tie ([0020]; Fig. 3a) (corresponding to the breakpoint is a predetermined failure point of the composite sandwich panel assembly and wherein edges are directly adjacent one another and face one another). Lewit further teaches additional layers of the panel assembly continuously overlay the joint (Fig. 3a; [0062]; [0063]).
In light of the motivation of Lewit, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the presently claimed invention to have the open area core of Foran include the nested C joint, in order to provide a stronger lightweight panel and prevent structural failure of the composite sandwich material, and thereby arriving at the presently claimed invention.
Given that the high gloss surface sheet and the structural skin are bonded to the open core including the nested C joint forming the composite sandwich material, it is clear the high gloss surface sheet and the structural skin continuously overlay the joint (corresponding to the high loss surface sheet and the structural skin continuously overlay the interface).
In reference to claim 3, Foran in view of Lewit teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Foran further teaches the high gloss surface sheet of the composite sandwich panel is formed from sheet molding compound (SMC), thermoplastic, dicyclopentadiene (DCPD) or an overmold polyurethane (PU) ([0028]) (corresponding to said high gloss surface sheet is formed of any one of: sheet molding compound (SMC), thermoplastic sheet, dicyclopentadiene (DCPD), or overmold polyurethane (PU)).
In reference to claim 8, Foran in view of Lewit teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Foran further teaches the pores of the open area core are at least partially filled with a fill ([0032]). The fill includes foam pellets, fire retardant or a phase change material providing sound dampening, fire retardancy, thermal insulation or a combination thereof ([0032]) (corresponding to a set of pores in said open area cores and a fill in said set of pores of said open area cores, said fill being at least one of a sound dampening foam, a fire retardant, or a phase change material).
In reference to claim 9, Foran in view of Lewit teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Foran further teaches a decorative layer attached to said structural skin (claim 17) (corresponding to a decorative layer attached to said structural skin).
In reference to claim 10, Foran in view of Lewit teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Foran further teaches the high gloss surface sheet is SMC with an average thickness of from 1.5 to 5 mm and the open area core of said composite sandwich material has a pore diameter of 6 to 25 mm (claim 20) (corresponding to said high gloss surface sheet is a sheet molding compound (SMC) with an average thickness of from 1.5 to 5 mm and said open area cores have pores with pore diameters of 6 to 25 mm).
In reference to claim 13, Foran in view of Lewit teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Foran further teaches the high gloss surface comprises a filler ([0028]) (corresponding to said high gloss surface sheet comprises a filler).
In reference to claim 16, Foran in view of Lewit teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Foran further teaches a cloth intermediate between the high gloss surface sheet and the open area core ([0025]; claim 11) (corresponding to a cloth intermediate between said high gloss surface and said open area cores).
In reference to claim 18, Foran in view of Lewit teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Foran further teaches the first adhesive layer contacts an interior volume of the open area core ([0016]; claim 13) (corresponding to said first adhesive layer contacts an interior volume of said open area cores).
In reference to claim 20, Foran in view of Lewit teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Foran further teaches the structural skin is formed of a fiber mat ([0031]) (corresponding to said first structural skin is formed of a fiber mat). Given that the structural skin is bonded to the open core including the nested C joint forming the composite sandwich material, it is clear the structural skin continuously overlays the joint (corresponding the structural skin is continuous over the interface).
In reference to claim 23, Foran in view of Lewit teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Foran further teaches the surface sheet and the structural skin are joined together to form a sealed edge ([0034]) (corresponding to said high gloss surface and said structural skin are joined together to form an edge). The open area core is fully enclosed and moisture is inhibited from entering the interior of the composite sandwich panel ([0033]) (corresponding to an edge defining a moisture resistant seal).
In reference to claim 24, Foran in view of Lewit teaches the limitations of claim 23, as discussed above. Foran further teaches a gasket disposed between the surface sheet and the structural skin at the edge ([0034]) (corresponding to a gasket disposed between said high gloss surface sheet and said first structural at said edge).
In reference to claim 37, Foran in view of Lewit teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Foran in view of Lewit teaches the convex and concave surface of the C joint includes step surfaces ([0068]). The convex surface step surface is adapted to receive the concave surface and bond the panels together ([0068]).
While Foran in view of Lewit does not explicitly teach the convex and concave surfaces include bevelled steps. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the before the effective filing date of the presently claimed invention to have the steps be bevelled, in order to join the convex and concave surfaces and since it has been held that the configuration was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration claimed was significant. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Claim 38 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foran in view of Lewit as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zhu (CN 113071129) (Zhu‘129).
The examiner has provided a machine translation of CN 113071129. The citation of prior art in the rejection refers to the provided translation.
In reference to claim 38, Foran in view of Lewit teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Foran in view of Lewit teaches the open area core includes a plurality of pores in an array of honeycombs (Foran, [0026]) (corresponding to the open area cores comprise pores).
Foran in view of Lewit does not explicitly teach adhesive bonds or glue lines between the pores, as presently claimed.
Zhu‘129 teaches a honeycomb core material ([n0015]). The honeycomb core material includes multiple core units ([n0016]). The adjacent sidewalls of the transversely adjacent units are bonded together by an adhesive layer ([n0016]; [n0054]) (corresponding to pores with adhesive bonds or glue lines therebetween). The honeycomb core material has good bonding strength between adjacent side and excellent mechanical properties, such as compressive strength, with less material usage ([n0013]; [n0055]; [n0061]; [n0071]; [n0078]).
In light of the motivation of Zhu‘129, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the presently claimed invention to have the open area cores of Foran in view of Lewit be the honeycomb core material including an adhesive layer bonding adjacent sidewalls of adjacent cells together, in order to provide core materials having good bonding strength between the sidewalls and improved compressive strength, and thereby arriving at the presently claimed invention..
Foran in view of Lewit and Zhu‘129 teaches the nested C joint and maybe bonded by any suitable chemical bonding (i.e., fusion welding) (Foran, [0063]; [0068]). Therefore, it is clear the joint may not include adhesive bonds or glue lines (corresponding to the breakpoint comprises two or more omitted adhesive bonds or omitted glue lines).
Response to Arguments
In response to the amended Specification and Drawings the previous Objections to each of the Specification and Drawings are withdrawn from record.
In response to amended claims 1, 2, 8-10, 13, 16, 18, 20 and 23-24 and cancelled claims 4-5, the previous Claim Objections of claims 1, 3, 8-10, 13, 16, 18 and 23-24 are withdrawn from record. However, some of the previous Claim Objects to claim 20 are maintained as set forth above. Further, the amendments necessitate a new set of Claim Objections as discussed above.
In response to amended claims 8, 10, 18, 20 and 24 and cancelled claim 5, the previous 35 USC 112(b) rejections of record are withdrawn.
In response to claim 1, which now recites the edges [of each of the two or more open area cores determining a breakpoint] are directly adjacent one another and face one another and the high gloss surface sheet and the structural skin continuously overlay the touching interface, it is noted that Durham, Hochet et al. (US 2005/0189674) (Hochet), Foran and Heusert et al. (DE 10 2007 007 554) (Heuser), alone or in combination, no longer meet the presently claimed limitations. Therefore, the previous 35 USC 103 rejections over Durham in view of Hochet and Foran in view of Heusert are withdrawn from record. However, the amendments necessitates a new set of rejections as discussed above.
Therefore, Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 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.
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 Mary I Omori whose telephone number is (571)270-1203. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4pm.
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, Humera Sheikh can be reached at (571) 272-0604. 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.
/MARY I OMORI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Prosecution Insights