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 § 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.
Claims 1-3, 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by applicant cited Troconis, BC Rincon, and G.S. Frankel. "Effects of Pretreatments on the Adhesion of Acetoacetate to AA2024-T3 Using the Blister Test." Corrosion 70.5 (2014): 483-495, hereinafter Troconis.
With respect to Claim 1, Troconis discloses an apparatus [see fig 1 on page 484 unless otherwise noted] comprising:
a fixture [sample holder] comprising first opening and a channel [fluid fills the channel and exits at the top via the first opening];
a substrate comprising a second opening [through-hole];
a coating bonded to the substrate, wherein the second opening is covered by the coating;
a pump [syringe pump] in fluid communication with the channel, the first opening, and the second opening;
a fluid in the channel;
a pressure transducer configured to measure a pressure of the fluid;
an imaging system [stereoscopic microscope] configured to capture imaging data of the coating; and
a data analysis system, wherein: operation of the pump exerts a force against the coating via an increase in a pressure of the fluid and causes a deformation of the coating over the second opening in the substrate; the imaging system is configured to capture imaging data of the deformation of the coating; and the pressure transducer is configured to measure pressure data of the fluid [page 484 under “experimental procedures”].
With respect to Claim 2, Troconis discloses that the data analysis system comprises: a computer processor [fig 1]; and a computer readable medium, wherein: the computer readable medium comprises instructions that when performed by the computer processor perform steps to analyze interfacial debonding of the coating from the substrate [page 484 under “experimental procedures” and note that “complete delamination” is interfacial debonding].
With respect to Claim 3, Troconis discloses that the computer readable medium comprises instructions that when performed by the computer processor utilize full triaxial displacement evolution of the deformation of the coating correlated with a history of the pressure of the fluid [page 484 under “experimental procedure” describes tracking the coating blister deformation over time compared to pressure. Note that a stereoscopic image would capture full triaxial displacement].
With respect to Claim 11, Troconis discloses a method of measuring interfacial debonding of an adhesive interface, the method comprising:
forming a deformation [growing blister] of a coating, wherein:
the coating is bonded to a substrate comprising an opening [through hole]; the coating covers the opening; and the deformation is formed by increasing a pressure [via syringe pump] of a fluid in contact with the coating; acquiring imaging data [via stereoscopic microscope] of the deformation while forming the deformation; acquiring pressure data [via the pressure transducer] of the fluid while forming the deformation of the coating; and performing an analysis of an interfacial debonding of the coating from the substrate, wherein the analysis utilizes the imaging data and the pressure data. See page 484, under “experimental procedures”.
With respect to Claim 12, Troconis discloses that the analysis of the interfacial debonding of the coating from the substrate utilizes full triaxial displacement evolution of the deformation of the coating correlated with a history of the pressure of the fluid [page 484 under “experimental procedure” describes tracking the coating blister deformation over time compared to pressure. Note that a stereoscopic image would capture full triaxial displacement].
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 4, 6-8, 10, 13, 15-17, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Troconis in view of applicant cited Ramirez-Tamayo, Daniel, et al. "A complex-variable cohesive finite element subroutine to
enable efficient determination of interfacial cohesive material parameters." Engineering
Fracture Mechanics 247 (2021): 107638, hereinafter Ramirez.
With respect to Claim 4, Troconis doesn’t provide details into the math used to analyze the blister.
Ramirez discloses mathematical techniques to analyze interfacial cohesion between surfaces including using Digital Image Correlation (DIC) and inverse Finite Element Method (FEM) simulations using Cohesive Zone Modeling (CZM). See page 1, under introduction.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Troconis such that the computer readable medium comprises instructions that when performed by the computer processor combines Digital Image Correlation (DIC) and inverse Finite Element Method (FEM) simulations using Cohesive Zone Modeling (CZM) for the benefit of more accurately analyzing interfacial debonding of a coating.
With respect to Claim 6, Ramirez discloses that the CZM follows a Park-Paulino-Roesler (PPR) formulation [see abstract.].
With respect to Claim 7, Ramirez discloses that the CZM utilizes a plurality of parameters of the deformation including four fracture parameters in a normal and a tangential direction [see page 5, para 2].
With respect to Claim 8, Ramirez discloses that the plurality of parameters comprise adhesion fracture energies, cohesive strength, shape parameters, and initial slope indicators [see page 5, paragraph following equation 2].
With respect to Claim 10, Ramirez discloses that the cohesive strength corresponds to maximum tractions in a normal direction and a shear direction [page 5, table 1].
With respect to Claim 13, Ramirez discloses mathematical techniques to analyze interfacial cohesion between surfaces including using Digital Image Correlation (DIC) and inverse Finite Element Method (FEM) simulations using Cohesive Zone Modeling (CZM). See page 1, under introduction.
With respect to Claim 15, Ramirez discloses that the CZM follows a Park-Paulino-Roesler (PPR) formulation [see abstract].
With respect to Claim 16, Ramirez discloses that the CZM utilizes a plurality of parameters of the deformation including four fracture parameters in a normal and a tangential direction [page 5, para 2].
With respect to Claim 17, Ramirez discloses that the plurality of parameters comprise adhesion fracture energies, cohesive strength, shape parameters, and initial slope indicators [page 5, two sentences following equation 2].
With respect to Claim 19, Ramirez discloses that the cohesive strength corresponds to maximum tractions in a normal direction and a shear direction [page 5, table 1].
With respect to Claim 20, Troconis discloses that the substrate and the coating are coupled to a fixture [sample holder] comprising first opening [at top of channel] and a channel; the opening in the substrate is a second opening; the second opening is covered by the coating; the fluid in contact with the coating extends from the coating, through the channel, and to a pump [syringe pump]; and increasing the pressure of the fluid in contact with the coating is performed by activating the pump [see page 484 under experimental procedure].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 9, 14 and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With respect to Claims 5 and 14, no prior art models CZM using zero-thickness elements.
With respect to Claims 9 and 18, no prior art has that the initial slope indicators are defined by a ratio of an instantaneous crack opening displacement and a final crack displacement.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX T DEVITO whose telephone number is (571)270-7551. The examiner can normally be reached 12pm- 8 pm EST M-S.
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, John Breene can be reached at 571-272-4107. 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.
/ALEX T DEVITO/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/JOHN E BREENE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights