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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1, 3-5, 8-10, 13, 16, 18, 20 and 23-24, in the reply filed on 02/12/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 25-28, 31-32 and 34 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 02/12/2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign mentioned in the description: paragraph [0060] describes FIGS. 12A-12D mentions reference sign 35, however, none of FIGS. 12A-12D includes reference sign 35.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference characters not mentioned in the description: FIG. 12C includes reference character 32, however, the Specification does not mention 32. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in paragraph [0039] a space should be added between “BL” and “as”. Appropriate correction is required.
Further, the lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 3-5, 8-10, 13, 16, 18, 20 and 23-24 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In reference to claim 1, in line 1, it is suggested to after “said” and before “assembly”, insert “composite sandwich panel”, in order to ensure consistency and proper antecedent basis in the claim language. Appropriate correction is required.
In reference to claims 3-4, 8-9, 13, 16, 18, 20 and 23-24, in line 1, after “The” and before “assembly”, insert “composite sandwich panel”, in order to ensure consistency and proper antecedent basis in the claim language. Appropriate correction is required.
In reference to claim 5, it is suggested to (1) in line 1, after “The” and before “assembly”, insert “composite sandwich panel” and (2) in line 2, amend “0.01-1:1” to “0.01 to 1:1”, in order to ensure consistency and proper antecedent basis in the claim language. Appropriate correction is required.
In reference to claim 10, it is suggested to (1) in line 1, after “The” and before “assembly”, insert “composite sandwich panel”, in order to ensure consistency and proper antecedent basis in the claim language and (2) in line 2, amend “SMC” to “a sheet molding compound (SMC)”, in order to avoid any misunderstanding of the abbreviations. Appropriate correction is required.
In reference to claim 20, it is suggested to (1) in line 1, after “The” and before “assembly”, insert “composite sandwich panel” and (2) in line 2, after “the” and before “interface”, insert “touching”, in order to ensure consistency and proper antecedent basis in the claim language. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 5, 8, 10, 18, 20 and 23 are 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 reference to claim 5, the limitation “said open area core” is recited in line 2. There is an inconsistent use of singular and plurals in the claim. Specifically, claim 1, on which claim 5 ultimately depends, recites “two or more open area cores”, however, claim 5 refers to a single open area core. It is unclear if “said open area core” is meant to refer to just one of the two or more open area cores, each of said open area cores, or at least one of the two or more open area cores. For the purpose of compact prosecution, “said open area core” will be interpreted as at least one of the two or more open area cores. However, clarification is requested.
In reference to claim 8, the limitation “said open area core” is recited in line 2. There is an inconsistent use of singular and plurals in the claim. Specifically, claim 1, on which claim 8 ultimately depends, recites “two or more open area cores”, however, claim 8 refers to a single open area core. It is unclear if “said open area core” is meant to refer to just one of the two or more open area cores, each of said open area cores, or at least one of the two or more open area cores. For the purpose of compact prosecution, “said open area core” will be interpreted as at least one of the two or more open area cores. However, clarification is requested.
In reference to claim 10, the limitation “said open area core” is recited in lines 2-3. There is an inconsistent use of singular and plurals in the claim. Specifically, claim 1, on which claim 10 ultimately depends, recites “two or more open area cores”, however, claim 10 refers to a single open area core. It is unclear if “said open area core” is meant to refer to just one of the two or more open area cores, each of said open area cores, or at least one of the two or more open area cores. For the purpose of compact prosecution, “said open area core” will be interpreted as at least one of the two or more open area cores. However, clarification is requested.
In reference to claim 18, the limitation “said open area core” is recited in line 2. There is an inconsistent use of singular and plurals in the claim. Specifically, claim 1, on which claim 18 ultimately depends, recites “two or more open area cores”, however, claim 18 refers to a single open area core. It is unclear if “said open area core” is meant to refer to just one of the two or more open area cores, each of said open area cores, or at least one of the two or more open area cores. For the purpose of compact prosecution, “said open area core” will be interpreted as at least one of the two or more open area cores. However, clarification is requested.
In reference to claim 20, the limitation “said first structural skin” is recited in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if the first structural skin is meant to refer to the structural skin, a portion of said structural skin or an additional structural skin included in the composite sandwich panel assembly. For the purpose of compact prosecution, “said first structural skin” will be interpreted as “said structural skin”. However, clarification is requested.
In reference to claim 23, the limitation of “said first structural” is recited in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of examination, “said first structural” will be interpreted as “said structural skin”. However, clarification is requested.
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, 3-5, 8-10, 13, 16, 18, 20 and 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Durham et al. (WO 2020/117717) (Durham) in view of Hochet et al. (US 2005/0189674) (Hochet).
In reference to claim 1, 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 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, as presently claimed.
Hochet teaches a composite sandwich panel provided with a hinge ([0001]). An incision is made at a determined place in said panel so as to cut through one of the first and second skins, and substantially through the entire thickness of the core, while leaving the other skin intact so that it forms, at said determined place, the hinge between two portions of the incised panel ([0014]; [0043]-[0044]; FIG.1) (corresponding to one or more defined breakpoints; 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 panel thereby forms a hinge in one piece with it ([0067]). Hochet further teaches the hinge has increase traction strength and maximizes the functionality of the panel ([0009]; [0064]).
In light of the motivation of Hochet, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the presently claimed invention to include the hinge in the panel of Durham, in order to maximize the functionality of the panel, and thereby arriving at the presently claimed invention.
In reference to claim 3, Durham in view of Hochet 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 4, Durham in view of Hochet teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Durham further teaches a thickness of the high gloss surface sheet is in a range from 0.5 to 5 millimeters (mm) ([0024]) (corresponding to said high gloss surface sheet has a thickness of from 0.5 to 3.5 mm).
In reference to claim 5, Durham in view of Hochet teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Durham further teaches a ratio of the high gloss surface sheet average thickness to the open area core average thickness is 0.01-1:1 ([0029]) (corresponding to a ratio of a thickness of said high gloss surface sheet to a thickness of said open area core of 0.01-1:1).
In reference to claim 8, Durham in view of Hochet 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 core and a fill in said set of pores of said open area core, 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 Hochet 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 Hochet 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 SMC with an average thickness of from 1.5 to 5 mm and said open area core has a pore diameter of 6 to 25 mm).
In reference to claim 13, Durham in view of Hochet 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 Hochet 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 core).
In reference to claim 18, Durham in view of Hochet 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 core).
In reference to claim 20, Durham in view of Hochet 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). Durham n view of Hochet teaches that when the incision is made, it cuts through the high gloss surface sheet and substantially through the entire thickness of the open area core, while leaving the structural skin intact (Hochet, [0014]). Therefore, it is clear the structural skin is continuous over the determined place of the incision (corresponding to that is continuous over the interface).
In reference to claim 23, Durham in view of Hochet 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 Hochet 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, 3-5, 8-10, 13, 16, 18, 20 and 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foran et al. (WO 2020/252127) (Foran) in view of Heuser et al. (DE 10 2007 007 554) (Heuser).
The examiner has provided a machine translation of DE 10 2007 007 554. The citation of prior art in the rejection refers to the provided machine translation.
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 cores 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, as presently claimed.
Heuser teaches a sandwich composite component for an automobile (Abstract). The composite component comprises a sandwich constructure including a core layer between two cover layers ([0009]). At least one profile-shaped reinforcing element is embedded in the core layer ([0009]). By using the reinforcing element, which represents an insert or insert part, the bending stiffness of the composite component is increased, particularly at the location of the reinforcing element ([0010]). Figures 2 to 5 show a core layer and cover layers arranged on both sides ([0035]) (corresponding to one or more defined breakpoints; a touching interface between edges of each of the two or more open area cores determined a breakpoint of the one or more defines breakpoints). The core includes an internal insert which is embedded in the core layer to increase the bending stiffness ([0035]).
In light of the motivation of Heuser, 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 reinforcing elements embedded in the core creating breakpoints, in order to provide reinforcement to the panel and increase bending stiffness of the panel, and thereby arriving at the presently claimed invention.
In reference to claim 3, Foran in view of Heuser 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 4, Foran in view of Heuser teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Foran further teaches the high gloss surface sheet has a thickness of from 0.5 to 5 mm ([0028]) (corresponding to said high gloss surface sheet has a thickness of from 0.5 to 3.5 mm).
In reference to claim 5, Foran in view of Heuser teaches the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Foran further teaches a ratio of a thickness of the high gloss surface sheet to a thickness of the open area core of 0.01-1:1 (claim 10) (corresponding to a ratio of a thickness of said high gloss surface sheet to a thickness of said open area core of 0.01-1:1).
In reference to claim 8, Foran in view of Heuser 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 core and a fill in said set of pores of said open area core, 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 Heuser 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 Heuser 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 SMC with an average thickness of from 1.5 to 5 mm and said open area core has a pore diameter of 6 to 25 mm).
In reference to claim 13, Foran in view of Heuser 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 Heuser 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 core).
In reference to claim 18, Foran in view of Heuser 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 core).
In reference to claim 20, Foran in view of Heuser 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). Furan in view of Heuser teaches the covering layers are continuous over the core including the insert (Heuser, Figures 4-5) (corresponding to continuous over the interface).
In reference to claim 23, Foran in view of Heuser 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 Heuser 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).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon, namely Suzuki et al. (US 2012/0100337), Preisler et al. (US 2013/0278015), Preisler et al. (US 2017/0066229) and Schindlbeck (DE 10 2018 215 375), is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. However, the rejections using these references would be cumulative to the rejections of record set forth above.
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