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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of claims 13-22 in the reply filed on 3-27-26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no serious burden to examine all claims. This is not found persuasive because there is a serious burden to search in different classes and to apply different prior art for the different inventions.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 1-12 and 23-30 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 3-27-26.
Claim Objections
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: “spray back” should read “spray bank”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 13-14, 16-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US11458696) in view of Yang et al. (2007/0119215) and Paradis et al. (2013/0337709).
Regarding claim 13, Zhang et al. discloses a process for manufacturing a glass fiber mat with sizing, comprising:
Providing at least one glass fiber mat 4;
Providing at least one oven 5;
Operably advancing said glass fiber mat along a processing line;
Operably advancing said glass fiber mat with said sizing through said oven; and
Drying the glass fiber mat with said sizing within said oven to form said glass fiber mat with sizing (fig. 1, col. 8, line 45-col. 10, line 15).
Zhang et al. does not teach the glass fiber mat is a recycled glass fiber mat. However, Yang et al. teaches recycled glass fiber mat is used for forming an insulation mat 10 (see abstract, fig. 1, claim 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhang et al. with the teaching of Yang et al. since Yang et al. teaches that recycled glass fiber mat is known in the art.
Zhang et al. does not teach the step of applying sizing comprises providing at least one first sizing sprayer above said at least one recycled glass fiber mat; providing at least one second sizing sprayer below said at least one recycled glass fiber mat and spraying predetermined sizing from said at least one first and second sizing sprayers onto at least top and bottom surfaces of said recycled glass fiber mat. However, Paradis et al. teaches an air spraying apparatus utilized in coating the upper and lower surface of the at least one glass fiber mat 20. Glass fiber mat 20 can be fed between a first set of spaced part, spray nozzles 80a and a second set of spaced apart, spray nozzles 80b. The first set of spaced part, spray nozzles 80a face the upper surface of the glass fiber amt, while the second set of spaced apart, spray nozzles 80b face the lower surface of the glass fiber mat. The first set of spray nozzles 80a can emit the first binding composition onto the upper surface of the glass fiber at and the second set of spray nozzles 80b can emit the second binding composition onto the lower surface of the glass fiber mat 20 (see fig. 3, para 31). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhang et al. with the teaching of Paradis et al. since Paradis et al. teaches spraying is a method suitable for applying a binding composition or coating to a glass fiber mat (para 29).
Regarding claim 14, Zhang et al. discloses where said at least one recycled glass fiber mat is a non-woven fiberglass mat converted from chopped fiber glass (col. 6, line 24-54), said non-woven mat allowing easier application of said sizing (col. 5, line 1-12).
Regarding claim 16, Paradis et al. teaches wherein the first and second sizing sprayers 80a and 80b incorporate at least one top spray band and at least one bottom spray bank, wherein each spray bank includes a plurality of nozzles which are a fixed spray nozzle heads, dynamic spray nozzles heads or a combination of fixed and dynamic spray nozzle heads (fig. 3, para 31).
Regarding claim 17, Zhang et al. discloses providing at least one roll, wherein said recycled glass fiber mat is operably unwound from said at least one roll as said recycled glass fiber mat is advancing along said processing line (fig. 1, col. 9, line 30-36).
Regarding claim 18, Zhang et al. does not teach wherein said sizing forms about 0.2-1.0% by wight of said recycled glass flier mat with sizing. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the amount of sizing in order to optimize the bonding between the lightweight filler material or the fibers and the thermoplastic polymer (claim 15).
Regarding claim 19, Zhang et al. discloses the fiber sizing contains a mixture of silane coupling agents, polymeric film forms, and other additives that are designed to enhance the interfacial bonding between the chopped fibers and a polyamide-6 matrix (col. 9, line 56-64). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the amount of the individual ingredients in the sizing in order to optimize the interfacial bonding between the chopped fibers and the resin.
Regarding claim 20, Zhang et al. discloses wherein the sizing is a silane sizing (col. 7, line 8-25).
Regarding claim 21, Zhang et al. discloses wherein said oven is operable for drying said sizing for removing a predetermined amount of water and solvent (col. 9, line 65-col. 10, line 15). Regarding claim 22, Zhang et al. discloses wherein said recycled glass fiber mat with sizing is operably adapted for spray transfer molding (fig. 1-21, claim 1) in the production of an electric vehicle composite battery cover or plug-in hybrid electric vehicle composite battery cover (col. 30, line 21-51).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. in view of Yang et al. and Paradis et al. as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Watanabe et al (English translation of JP2008265159).
Regarding claim 15, Zhang et al. discloses said chopped fiber glass operably converted into said non-woven fiberglass mat ((col. 6, line 24-64 and col. 5, line 1-12). Zhang et al. does not teach wherein said non-woven fiberglass mat includes said chopped fiber glass converted from operably recycling windmills through pyrolysis or combustion. However, Watanabe et al. teaches FRP waste is pyrolyzed and oiled, and the remaining glass fibers are recovered and reused (para 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhang et al. with the teaching of Watanabe et al. since Watanabe et al. teaches that the recycling of FRP through pyrolysis is known for recovering glass fibers from FRP reuse (abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to recycle windmills since Zhang et al. teaches that the use of fiber-reinforced composites is growing in popularity with applications in wind energy (col. 1, line 24-35) such as wind turbine blade components (col. 30, line 21-43).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XUE H LIU whose telephone number is (571)270-5522. The examiner can normally be reached 1PM - 10PM.
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 5702721176. 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.
/X.H.L/Examiner, Art Unit 1742 /CHRISTINA A JOHNSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights