DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claim’s computer readable medium would be considered a transitory signal which does not fall into a statutory category. See MPEP 2160.03 (I-II).
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.
Claim(s) 16-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vasquez Quintero (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0387619). Regarding Claims 16-17, 21, and 23, Vasquez Quintero shows that it is known to carry out a method for designing a flat device to be thermoformed into a shape-retaining non-flat device using a mold (Abstract; 0003), the flat device comprising two concentric annular layers, a carrier layer having a particular size/shape (stress relief layer 0078-0082) and a support layer having a particular size/shape (support layer 0084) mechanically attached to the carrier layer (0029), the method comprising carrying out simulations which include desired values of the layers, shapes of the end product (0078, 0081, 0110-0113). Vasquez Quintero does not specifically describe the particularly-claimed obtaining/simulation/determination steps, however these would be held to be implicit in his teaching of the modeling simulation, as the simulation would need the obtained values and steps to accurately predict the molding conditions.
Regarding Claim 18, Vasquez Quintero shows the process of claim 16 above, including one wherein the support layer comprises a thermoset material (0084).
Regarding Claim 19, Vasquez Quintero shows the process of claim 16 above, including one wherein the carrier layer comprises a thermoplastic material (stress relief layer 0082).
Regarding Claim 20, Vasquez Quintero shows the process of claim 16 above, including one wherein the support layer comprises at least one electrical component (0083).
Regarding Claim 22, Vasquez Quintero shows the process of claim 16 above, including one wherein the simulation is a finite element method simulation (0081).
Regarding Claim 24, Vasquez Quintero shows the process of claim 16 above, including one wherein the mold is a spherical mold (0023, 0123).
Regarding Claim 25, Vasquez Quintero shows that it is known to carry out a method for manufacturing a flat device to be thermoformed into a shape-retaining non-flat device using a mold (Abstract; 0003), the flat device comprising two concentric annular layers, a carrier layer having a particular size/shape (stress relief layer 0078-0082) and a support layer having a particular size/shape (support layer 0084), the method comprising carrying out simulations which include desired values of the layers, shapes of the end product (0078, 0081, 0110-0113), arranging the support layer on the carrier layer to be concentric with the carrier layer and mechanically attaching the support layer to the carrier layer (Figure 6; element 10, 30; 0027-0029; 0127-0133). Vasquez Quintero does not specifically describe the particularly-claimed obtaining/simulation/determination steps, however these would be held to be implicit in his teaching of the modeling simulation, as the simulation would need the obtained values and steps to accurately predict the molding conditions.
Regarding Claim 26, Vasquez Quintero shows the method of claim 25 above, but he does not show two carrier layers. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include an additional carrier layer (stress relief layer) in Vasquez Quintero’s process in order to satisfy customer specifications and because duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced (MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(B)).
Regarding Claim 27, Vasquez Quintero shows the method of claim 25 above, including one wherein the mechanical attachment comprises laminating the support layer to the carrier layer (0129-0130).
Regarding Claim 28, Vasquez Quintero shows the method of claim 25 above, including one further comprising providing a least one electrical component and embedding the at least one electrical component in the support layer (0083).
Regarding Claim 29, Vasquez Quintero shows the method of claim 25 above, including thermoforming the device into a shape retaining non-flat device using a mold (0027, 0123, 0127-0133).
Claim(s) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vasquez Quintero, in view of Daware et al. (U.S. Patent Application 2022/0108053). Vasquez Quintero shows the method of claim 16 above, but he does not show using a computer readable medium comprising instructions. Daware et al., hereafter “Daware,” show that it is known to use a computer readable medium which comprises instructions for simulations and optimization processes (0012, 0017, 0041). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use Daware’s computer readable medium instructions to carry out Vasquez Quintero’s method because there is art recognized suitability for using processors to carry out optimization and simulation processes (MPEP 2144.07).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MONICA HUSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1198. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8a-4p.
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, Christina Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1176. 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.
MONICA ANNE HUSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1742
/MONICA A HUSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742