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 on July 14, 2026 has been entered. Claim 9 has been canceled in the present application. Claims 1 and 13-15 have been amended in the present application. Claims 1-8 and 10-16 are pending in the present application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed April 22, 2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 14, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments on pages 7-9 that Awaki 1 and Awaki 2 fail to teach “wherein the carbon fiber reinforcing material is deposited in the form of filaments,” Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Applicant argues that the amended claims require that carbon fiber reinforcing material be deposited in the form of filaments and that Awaki 1 and Awaki 2 fail to disclose this feature since Awaki 1 and Awaki 2 use carbon fiber prepreg fabric. However, the claim language “deposited in the form of filaments” is broad and non-specific as to how the filaments are deposited, just merely stating that filaments are deposited. For example the filaments may be deposited individually, using a filament winding process, or deposited all at once so long as filaments are being deposited. The prepreg sheets taught by Awaki 1 and Awaki 2 are comprised of woven carbon fibers which are filaments. Thus Awaki 1 and Awaki 2 teach the carbon fiber reinforcing material is deposited in the form of filaments with the filaments being deposited at once in a fabric. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive and Examiner maintains the rejection of claims 1 and 13 over Awaki 1 and Awaki 2.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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, 3-4, 10, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Awaki et al. (New method to make a smooth surface on Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic (CFRP) substrate – cited by Applicant – hereinafter referred to as “Awaki 1”).
Regarding claim 1, Awaki 1 teaches a method for manufacturing a grazing incidence optical element (Abstract Wolter-1 optics), comprising the steps of: providing a mandrel (Figure 2 mold) having a surface with a profile complementary to the profile of an optical surface of the optical element to be made (2.1 processed into a Wolter I shape, 2.2 same mold used for glass sheets as was used for CFRP substrate); adhering at least one glass sheet to the mandrel to define the optical surface (2.2 thin sheet glass adhered to mold); and depositing a carbon fiber reinforcing material (Figure 2 CFRP substrate) on an outer surface of the glass sheet to create a shell solidly connected to the glass sheet (2.2 CFRP substrate adhered to thin glass sheet), wherein the reinforcing material is deposited in the form of filaments (2.1 CFRP substrate consists of fibers).
Regarding claim 3, Awaki 1 teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Awaki 1 further teaches the glass sheet has a thickness of less than 100 μm (2.2 thin glass sheet is 100 μm thick).
Regarding claim 4, Awaki 1 teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Awaki 1 further teaches the reinforcing material is a carbon fiber reinforced polymer (1. CFRP is carbon fiber reinforced plastic).
Regarding claim 10, Awaki 1 teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 9. Awaki 1 further teaches the filaments are impregnated with resin before being deposited (2.1 reinforcing fabric pre-impregnated with resin).
Regarding claim 13, Awaki 1 teaches an optical element (Abstract Wolter-1 optics) comprising at least one glass sheet (Figure 2, 2.2 thin sheet glass) and a shell of carbon fiber reinforcing material (Figure 2 CFRP substrate) solidly connected to an outer surface of the glass sheet (2.2 CFRP substrate adhered to thin glass sheet), wherein the reinforcing material is deposited in the form of filaments (2.1 CFRP substrate consists of fibers).
Regarding claim 14, Awaki 1 teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 13. Awaki 1 further teaches the glass sheet has a thickness of less than 100 μm (2.2 thin glass sheet is 100 μm thick).
Regarding claim 15, Awaki 1 teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 13. Awaki 1 further teaches the reinforcing material is CFRP (carbon fiber reinforced polymer) (1. CFRP is carbon fiber reinforced plastic).
Claims 1, 4, 7, 10-11, 13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Awaki et al. (Development of an X-ray telescope using the carbon fiber reinforced plastic – hereinafter referred to as “Awaki 2”).
Regarding claim 1, Awaki 2 teaches a method for manufacturing a grazing incidence optical element (Abstract Wolter-1 optics), comprising the steps of: providing a mandrel (2.2 mold) having a surface with a profile complementary to the profile of an optical surface of the optical element to be made (2.2 mold used to shape thin-glass sheets to the CFRP substrate); adhering at least one glass sheet to the mandrel to define the optical surface (2.2 thin sheet glass laminated to mold); and depositing a carbon fiber reinforcing material (2.1-2.2 CFRP substrate) on an outer surface of the glass sheet to create a shell solidly connected to the glass sheet (2.2 CFRP substrate adhered to thin glass sheet), wherein the reinforcing material is deposited in the form of filaments (2.1 CFRP substrate consists of fibers).
Regarding claim 4, Awaki 2 teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Awaki 2 further teaches the reinforcing material is a carbon fiber reinforced polymer (1. CFRP is carbon fiber reinforced plastic).
Regarding claim 7, Awaki teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Awaki further teaches the mandrel comprises at least two portions of different geometry matching along a plane orthogonal to an axis of the mandrel (2.2 paraboloid and hyperboloid geometries), and the optical surface is defined by at least two glass sheets disposed on the respective portions of the mandrel (2.2 replication procedure performed individually for the two stages of substrate).
Regarding claim 10, Awaki 2 teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 9. Awaki 2 further teaches the filaments are impregnated with resin before being deposited (2.1 reinforcing fabric pre-impregnated with epoxy resin).
Regarding claim 11, Awaki 2 teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 10. Awaki 2 further teaches a step of curing at ambient temperature (Table 2 Condition of Replication cured at 20°C).
Regarding claim 13, Awaki 2 teaches an optical element (Abstract Wolter-1 optics) comprising at least one glass sheet (2.2 thin sheet glass) and a shell of carbon fiber reinforcing material (2.1-2.2 CFRP substrate) solidly connected to an outer surface of the glass sheet (2.2 CFRP substrate adhered to thin glass sheet), wherein the reinforcing material is deposited in the form of filaments (2.1 CFRP substrate consists of fibers).
Regarding claim 15, Awaki 2 teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 13. Awaki 2 further teaches the reinforcing material is CFRP (carbon fiber reinforced polymer) (1. CFRP is carbon fiber reinforced plastic).
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 2 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Awaki 1 (New method to make a smooth surface on Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic (CFRP) substrate) as applied to claim 1 above and in view of O’Dell et al. (X-ray optics at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center – hereinafter referred to as “O’Dell”).
Regarding claim 2, Awaki 1 teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Awaki 1 fails to teach the mandrel is machined by diamond turning. However, O’Dell teaches a method for making grazing-incidence optics (1. Introduction) where the mandrel is machined by diamond turning (2.1 Mandrel fabrication). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the mandrel taught by Awaki 1 using diamond turning as taught by O’Dell since the method by which the mandrel is made does not affect its function and diamond turning is well-known in the art.
Regarding claim 16, Awaki 1 teaches the optical element as claimed in claim 13 (see claim 13 above) used in a telescope (1. Introduction). Awaki 1 fails to explicitly teach a plurality of optical elements coaxial and nested within one another. However, O’Dell teaches a common configuration for x-ray telescopes that uses coaxial and nested optical elements (Figure 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a plurality of the optical elements Awaki 1 in a coaxial and nested configuration as taught by O’Dell since coaxial, nested optical elements is a common configuration for x-ray telescopes.
Claims 5 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Awaki 1 (New method to make a smooth surface on Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic (CFRP) substrate) as applied to claim 1 above and in view of Egle et al. (International Publication No. WO 2006/050891 – cited by Applicant – hereinafter referred to as “Egle”).
Regarding claim 5, Awaki 1 teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Awaki 1 further teaches the step of adhering said at least one glass sheet to the mandrel comprises the steps of wrapping the glass sheet around the mandrel (2.2 thin sheet glass laminated to mold). Awaki 1 fails to teach holding the glass sheet in place by producing a vacuum between the mandrel and said at least one glass sheet. However, Egle teaches a method for producing an X-ray mirror system (Abstract) involving holding the glass sheet in place by producing a vacuum between the mandrel and said at least one glass sheet [0035]. Egle further teaches using a vacuum to aid in the shaping process of the glass sheet on the mandrel by sucking the glass to the mandrel ([0035]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Awaki 1 by using a vacuum as taught by Egle in order to aid in shaping the glass sheet to the mandrel (Egle [0035]).
Regarding claim 12, Awaki 1 teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Awaki 1 fails to teach a step of cooling the mandrel to separate the optical element from the mandrel. However, Egle teaches a step of cooling the mandrel to separate the optical element from the mandrel (Claim 1(e)). Egle further teaches cooling the mandrel and glass sheet to anneal the glass and reduce shape deviations in the glass ([0035]). Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Awaki 1 by cooling the mandrel to separate the optical element from the mandrel as taught by Egle in order to anneal the glass and reduce shape deviations in the glass (Egle [0035]).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Awaki 1 (New method to make a smooth surface on Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic (CFRP) substrate) as applied to claim 1 above and in view of Miyazawa et al. (The current status of reflector production and hard x-ray characterization of ASTRO-H/HXT – hereinafter referred to as “Miyazawa”).
Regarding claim 6, Awaki 1 teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Awaki 1 fails to teach the step of adhering the at least one glass sheet to the mandrel comprises the step of applying adhesive tape along opposite, mutually matching edges of the glass sheet. However, Miyazawa teaches a method for producing reflectors for X-rays with the step of adhering the at least one glass sheet to the mandrel comprises the step of applying adhesive tape along opposite, mutually matching edges of the glass sheet (2.1.2, Figure 6). Miyazawa further teaches adhering the glass sheet with tape in order to prevent the surface profile of the mandrel from transferring to the glass sheet (Figure 6, 2.1.2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Awaki 1 by including the step of adhering the glass sheet to the mandrel using adhesive tape as taught by Miyazawa in order adhere the glass sheet to the mandrel and prevent the surface profile of the mandrel from transferring to the glass sheet (Miyazawa Figure 6, 2.1.2).
Claims 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Awaki 2 (Development of an X-ray telescope using the carbon fiber reinforced plastic) as applied to claim 1 above and in view of Miyazawa (The current status of reflector production and hard x-ray characterization of ASTRO-H/HXT).
Regarding claim 6, Awaki 2 teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Awaki 2 fails to teach the step of adhering the at least one glass sheet to the mandrel comprises the step of applying adhesive tape along opposite, mutually matching edges of the glass sheet. However, Miyazawa teaches a method for producing reflectors for X-rays with the step of adhering the at least one glass sheet to the mandrel comprises the step of applying adhesive tape along opposite, mutually matching edges of the glass sheet (2.1.2, Figure 6). Miyazawa further teaches adhering the glass sheet with tape in order to prevent the surface profile of the mandrel from transferring to the glass sheet (Figure 6, 2.1.2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Awaki 2 by including the step of adhering the glass sheet to the mandrel using adhesive tape as taught by Miyazawa in order adhere the glass sheet to the mandrel and prevent the surface profile of the mandrel from transferring to the glass sheet (Miyazawa Figure 6, 2.1.2).
Regarding claim 8, Awaki 2 teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 7. Awaki 2 further teaches glass sheets are held together with adhesive applied to respective adjacent edges of the glass sheets matching along the plane orthogonal to the axis of the mandrel (Figure 3, 2.2) but fails to teach the glass sheets are joined together via an adhesive tape applied to respective adjacent edges of the glass sheets matching along the plane orthogonal to the axis of the mandrel. However, Miyazawa teaches using adhesive tape to secure glass sheets to a glass mandrel (Figure 6, 2.1.2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Awaki 2 by using the adhesive tape taught by Miyazawa to join adjacent glass sheets along their edges since using adhesive tape to attach objects together is well-known.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Basso et al. (International Publication No. WO 2016/166721) teaches method for forming glass sheets to produce grazing incidence optics for X-ray telescopes.
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 ALEX PARK RICKEL whose telephone number is (703)756-4561. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 a.m. - 6 p.m. ET.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571)272-2713. 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 Rickel
Examiner
Art Unit 2872
/A.P.R./Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BALRAM T PARBADIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights