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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-9 and 13 in the reply filed on 7/15/26 is acknowledged. Claims 10-12, 13 and 14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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 2-4, 7 and 8 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.
As to claim 2, it’s not clear if the “a reinforcing-fiber base material” and “reinforcing fibers” refer to the previously recited reinforcing-fiber base material and reinforcing fibers, respectively.
As to claim 3, the limitation “the reinforcing-fiber sheets” lacks proper antecedent basis.
As to claim 3, it’s not clear how the reinforcing fiber base material is both a uni-direction material (as required by claim 2) and a multiaxial base material.
As to claim 4, it’s not clear if the “a reinforcing-fiber base material” refers to the previously recited reinforcing-fiber base material.
As to claim 7, the limitation “the filaments” lacks proper antecedent basis.
As to claim 8, it’s not clear if the “a polyethersulfone fiber ” refers to the previously recited polyethersulfone fiber.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 3 is dependent upon claims 1 and 2. Claim 2 requires the reinforcing-fiber base material to be composed of a sheet of uni-directional fibers. Claim 3 expressly requires the material to be composed of fibers that are multi-axial, which expressly excludes a unidirectional material. Thus, claim 3 excludes the uni-directional reinforcing-fiber base material recited in claim 2 and therefore does not contain all the limitations of the previous claim. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, 8, 9 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Moser et al. (US 2015/0258712).
As to claims 1-2 and 13, Moser discloses a fiber-reinforced composite material comprising a stitched reinforcing-fiber base material comprising: a reinforcing-fiber base material sheet composed of unidirectional reinforcing fibers (para 75-77, unidirectional tows comprises the layer); and a stitching thread including a polyethersulfone fiber (para 37,-39, 77), wherein the reinforcing-fiber base material is stitched with the stitching thread (para 68-77, claim 1, figs 5,6), and a matrix resin impregnated into the stitched reinforcing-fiber base material (para 23, 60-67).
As to claim 3, Moser discloses the reinforcing-fiber base material can comprise multiple layers of the fiber material, wherein the fibers in each layer are oriented in different directions (i.e. multiaxial, para 74, 76).
As to claim 4, Moser discloses the reinforcing-fiber base material is a reinforcing-fiber base material formed by placed a resin material on a surface of the reinforcing-fiber base material and/or between layers composed of reinforcing fibers (para 23, 60-67).
As to claim 6, Moser discloses the fineness of the stitching thread is between 1 to 250 dtex (para 37).
As to claim 8, Moser discloses the polyethersulfone fiber having a glass transition point of 160 to 250° C - the stitching fiber is made from the same material as disclosed by applicant, and thus must have the same physical properties. MPEP 2112.
As to claim 9, Moser discloses a content ratio of the stitching thread is 0.1 to 30 mass % with respect to a mass of the stitched reinforcing-fiber base material (para 77).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moser et al.
As to claim 7, para 31-34 and 39-40 of Moser disclose the number of filaments of the stitching thread (density) can be varied to achieve optimal impregnation and support. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have 1 to 60 filaments per stitching thread as one of have achieved such by performing routine experimentation to achieve the optimal results
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moser et al., as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Goto et al. (Us 2006/0035548).
Moser discloses the dtex can be varied but does not disclose the claim dtex range. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Moser such that a single yarn fineness of the stitching thread is 1 to 10 dtex/filament as taught by Goto (para 39) as such increases mechanical strength by preventing deterioration (para 39).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER T SCHATZ whose telephone number is (571)272-6038. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 9-6.
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, Michael Orlando can be reached at 571-270-5038. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER T SCHATZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1746
Prosecution Insights