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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 05/11/2026 has been entered. Claim 1 has been amended. Claims 1-10 are pending. Applicant’s amendment to the claims have overcome 112(b) rejections and Drawings objections previously set forth in the Non-Final Rejection mailed 02/26/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 5-6, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. (CN 104859267 A – of record), in view of Nagakura et al. (US 2014/0370245 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 10, Sun discloses a method of manufacturing a housing. The method to include fiber cloth prepreg material for preparing the shell has two or more layers and where the shell material is a carbon fiber, see page 9 paragraphs 1, 5 and 8 – (construed as providing a plurality of pieces of fiber cloth, wherein the fiber cloth is a pre-impregnated fiber cloth; and the fiber cloth is carbon fiber cloth. Also, as the reference uses housing, casing and shell interchangeably all instances thereof will be construed as a case).
While Sun discloses the use of a hot pressing technique to form the casing; it does not explicitly disclose the claimed laying and pressing steps to include having a quantity of pieces of fiber cloth with an opening is less than a quantity of pieces of fiber cloth without an opening.
Nagakura discloses a method for manufacturing a shaped product constituted by layering a plurality of prepregs including a reinforcing fiber, see [0001]. The method to include layering a plurality of prepreg layers in a specified manner. The layers constitute a P layer and a Q layer which contact with each other, and then pressing those layers in a mold to manufacture a shaped product, see [0011] – [0012]. The layering shape is not particularly limited and includes “forming an opening in a part of the plurality of pieces of fiber cloth; stacking the plurality of pieces of fiber cloth to form a stacked structure, wherein the part of the plurality of pieces of fiber cloth with the openings is arranged on top to form a concave region on an upper surface of the stacked structure;” as depicted in Fig. 2.
As to “a quantity of pieces of fiber cloth with an opening is less than a quantity of pieces of fiber cloth without an opening ”: Nagakura discloses the layering scheme includes a fiber cloth stack arrangement of having more P layers than Q layers, see [0029]. It being considered and readily seen that for using four P layers and two Q layers in the orientation depicted in depiction 1-1 that “a quantity of pieces of fiber cloth with an opening (Q layer) is less than a quantity of pieces of fiber cloth without an opening (P layer)” .
And as Nagakura substantially discloses the use of a mold and pressing technique, one of ordinary skill in the art would readily understand that for the layering orientation of depiction 1-1. Where the P layer is adjacent a “bottom or fixed” mold half with the Q layer concavity facing upwards that “pressing a mold against the stacked structure, to form a case, wherein the product/case comprises a concave structure at a position corresponding to the concave region”.
One of ordinary skill would appreciate Nagakura’s inventive stacking arrangement wherein its practice allows for using a wide variety of thermoplastic resins and having excellent productivity, see [0012].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sun’s method to include the claimed fiber cloth stacking arrangement and mold use as taught by Nagakura to provide the aforementioned benefits.
Regarding claims 5-6, modified Sun further discloses a step of stacking the plurality of pieces of fiber cloth to form the stacked structure comprises arranging the part of the fiber cloth with the opening on top of the stacked structure and aligning the openings with each other; and a quantity of the part of the plurality of pieces of fiber cloth with the opening is less than three, see at least Nagakura depiction 1-1 and [0028].
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. (CN 104859267 A – of record), in view of Nagakura et al. (US 2014/0370245 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sasaki et al. (US 2017/0185108 A1 – of record).
Regarding claim 2, modified Sun does not explicitly disclose the use of a mounting plate.
Sasaki discloses a laminate and integrally molded article suitable for use as a casing, see at least [0002]. And forms the molded article by layering sheets of carbon fiber cloths and bonding the stacked layers by press molding and contemplates the use of a nameplate formed in a recessed area – (construed as mounting a plate to the concave structure), see [0049]. One of ordinary skill would appreciate and envision using Sasaki’s technique as the reference suggests doing so contributes to forming an integrally molded article having reduced thickness and high rigidity and display of a nameplate with a logo depicted thereon, see [0016].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust modified’s Sun’s method to include the mounting a plate to the concave structure as taught by Sasaki to provide the aforementioned benefits.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. (CN 104859267 A – of record), in view of Nagakura et al. (US 2014/0370245 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yin et al. (CN 201936236 U – of record).
Regarding claims 3-4, modified Sun does not explicitly disclose performing surface machining on a side wall of the recess with a milling cutter.
Yin discloses a method and equipment for forming a shell. The is formed of carbon fiber cloth, see page 13 last two paragraphs. Yin further discloses a finishing process of after forming of the shell the “waste edge” is removed by milling, see page 16 paragraph 8. One of ordinary skill would appreciate and envision using Yin’s milling cutting technique as the reference suggests doing so allows for removing of bad edges after forming of the shell.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust modified Sun’s method to include a technique of performing surface machining on a side wall of the recess with a milling cutter as claimed and reasonably suggested by Yin to provide Sun’s method with a means for removing waste edges as taught by Yin.
Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. (CN 104859267 A – of record), in view of Nagakura et al. (US 2014/0370245 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hass et al. (US 5,573,622 – of record).
Regarding claims 7-9, to the extent modified Sun does not explicitly disclose the claimed mold features.
Hass discloses a method of fabricating a plurality of multilayer structure having a recess. The method to include a stack of layered material 12, 14, 16, prior to lamination and assembled within a pressing unit 34, 36. A top portion of the stack has a recess and as depicted in FIGS. 2-6 the assembly is laminated by pressing to form a multilayered article having a recess on its top side, see FIG. 1. Moreover, it is readily envisioned that the mold comprises an upper part and a lower part, and the upper part comprises a protruding portion at a position corresponding to the concave region; a protruding distance of the protruding portion is less than a sum of thicknesses of the part of the plurality of pieces of fiber cloth with the opening; the lower part is planar at a position corresponding to the concave region, see at least Hass FIGS 2-6
One of ordinary skill would appreciate and envision using Hass’s process as the reference suggests doing so allows for a one step pressing method for fabricating a plurality of multilayer structures which includes at least one recess defined by a nonplanar surface, see Col 2, lines 50-53.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust modified Sun’s method to include the claimed mold features as reasonably suggested by Hass to provide Sun’s method with a means for forming a recess in a multilayered structure as taught by Hass.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-10 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CEDRICK S WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571) 272-9776. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday 8:00am-5:00pm.
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, Katelyn Smith can be reached on (571) 270-5545. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571) 272-1000.
/CEDRICK S WILLIAMS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749
Prosecution Insights