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 without traverse of Group I (Claims 1 – 3), in the reply filed on April 02, 2026, is acknowledged.
Claims 4 – 11 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on April 02, 2026.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Response to Amendment
Claims 1 – 11 remain. Claims 4 – 11 are withdrawn. Claims 1 – 3 are pending and under examination.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on October 10, 2024, is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim1 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 1 in line 4 recites “the flanges the profiles being pressed together in pairs”. It seems as if it was meant to mean “the flanges of the profiles being pressed together in pairs”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 2 is 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.
The term “a substantially sealed enclosure” in claim 2 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially sealed” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. In this case, “a substantially sealed enclosure” is interpreted as - - a sealed enclosure - -.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1 – 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2007/0175171 A1, to Delgado et al. (“Delgado”), and further in view of CN 110341212 B, to ZHAN et al. (“Zhan”), and further in view of FR 2720028 A1, to Guittard et al. (“Guittard”).
Regarding claim 1, Delgado teaches a method for manufacturing a stiffened panel (9) obtained from a plurality of profiles (e.g., “U-shaped profiles,” “U-shaped stiffening members 13” and “I-shaped stiffening members 17” [0029]), each profile (13) having a base and at least one flange (see the below annotated copy of Delgado’s FIG. 6), and a skin (11) having first and second faces (see FIG. 7b, the skin 11 having a first face facing and in contact with the shaping tool 33 [0033], and a second face facing and in contact with the surface of the curing tool 31 [0037]),
the bases of the profiles being pressed against the first face of the skin (11; see FIG. 7b), the flanges the profiles being pressed together in pairs (see FIG. 7b), the method comprising:
obtaining the profiles [0036];
positioning each of the profiles on a mandrel (i.e., shaping tool 33; FIG. 7a [0035-0037]); and,
polymerizing or consolidating the profiles and the skin to obtain a stiffened panel [0037-0038],
wherein before the polymerizing or consolidating, the skin (11) is laid on a laying surface of a mold (31) in which at least the skin is positioned (FIGs. 7a-7c), the second face of the skin being pressed against the laying surface (e.g., [0037] “The tool 41 is made to lower upon the assembly curing tool 31 on which the base laminate 11 has been made”), and
wherein before the polymerizing or consolidating, mandrels (33) are laid on the skin (11), the bases of the profiles being positioned against the skin (see FIGs. 7a-7c), wherein,
prior to laying the mandrels (33), the curing tool is delimited by a peripheral edge (centering means 39) and dimensioned to leave a gap between the skin (11) and the peripheral edge (FIG. 7b).
Delgado does not disclose, wherein the laying surface of the mold comprises a seat in which at least the skin is positioned, the seat is delimited by a peripheral edge and dimensioned to leave a gap between the skin and the peripheral edge, and wherein a packing shim is laid to fill the gap between the skin and the peripheral edge of the seat. Delgado [0037], however, discloses that “Both tools 41, 31 are coordinated by means of centering means 39 so that in the lowering the stiffening members 13, 17 occupy their final position on the skin 11,” and at [0046] that modifications comprised within the scope defined by the claims can be introduced in the preferred embodiment.
Like Delgado, Zhan teaches methods and a compression molding die assembly (FIGs. 4-6, lines 304-311) of a thermoplastic composite material I-shaped reinforcement member (e.g., “I-shaped stiffener and body panel” lines 293-294), wherein the flat plate prefabricated member die is used for pressing a thermoplastic composite material prepreg into a flat plate prefabricated member, a C-shaped prefabricated member die is used for pressing the flat plate prefabricated member into the C-shaped prefabricated member, the I-shaped reinforcement member die can be at least used for pressing an upper edge block, a lower edge block, an upper filling block, a lower filling block, a left side C-shaped prefabricated member and a right side C-shaped prefabricated member into an I-shaped reinforcement rib together (lines 68-81, lines 315-331) – analogous to the claimed “a stiffened panel obtained from a plurality of profiles.”
Zhan (lines 373-381), discloses, inter alia, that the pressure-bearing surface 311 of the base 31 (analogous to Delgado’s “curing tool 31”) is concavely provided with a groove 312 (analogous to the claimed “seat”) for placing part or all of the main body wall panels 7 (analogous to the claimed “a laying surface of a mold comprising a seat in which at least the skin is positioned”), the transverse dimension of the groove (seat) is not more than the transverse dimension of the left (32) and right (33) trapezoidal strips (analogous to the claimed “mandrels”), and “the depth of the groove is less than or equal to the thickness of the main body wall panel 7, so that the top surface of the main body wall panel placed in the groove (seat) is higher than or equal to the height of the pressure-bearing surface (311) of the base (31), thereby facilitating the integration of the main body wall panel (7) and the I-shaped reinforcing rib (profiles) in the molding process. The main body wall plate refers to a skin prefabricated member of a main body (the main body can be an airplane wing shell or other small-sized components) to be installed and served by an I-shaped reinforcing rib formed by pre-pressing a composite material prepreg.”
Zhan’s FIG. 4 shows the groove (seat) 312 of the base 31 being delimited by the pressure-bearing surface 311 (analogous to the claimed “peripheral edge”).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified, in the same way, the laying surface of the curing tool 31 in the method of Delgado, with a seat (e.g., Zhan’s groove 312) in which at least the skin is positioned (e.g., Zhan discloses “for placing part or all of the main body wall panels 7”) and having a depth being less than or equal to the thickness of the skin (e.g., Zhan’s main body wall panel 7), as suggested by the prior art, the seat being delimited by a peripheral edge (e.g., Zhan’s pressure-bearing surface 311) and capable of being dimensioned to leave a gap between the skin and the peripheral edge (e.g., Zhan discloses placing part or all of the main body), for the purpose of, as suggested by the prior art of Zhan lines 373-381, “so that the top surface of the main body wall panel (skin) placed in the groove (seat) is higher than or equal to the height of the pressure-bearing surface (311) of the base (31), thereby facilitating the integration of the main body wall panel (skin) and the I-shaped reinforcing rib (profiles) in the molding process.” See MPEP 2143 (I) (Rationale G).
As to the limitation “wherein a packing shim is laid to fill the gap between the skin and the peripheral edge of the seat.”
Guittard teaches a method for manufacturing a stiffened panel obtained from a plurality of profiles (“stiffeners”; lines 93-102, lines 140-149, lines 244-247, lines 261-), by a compacting operation having the effect of reducing a molding volume V, so as to reduce the thickness of the flat part (skin) of the molded panel as well as that of the stiffeners (profiles) (lines 287-292),
the method comprising, inter alia, obtaining the profiles and positioning each of the profiles (“stiffeners”) on a mandrel (e.g., indexing cores 22; see FIGs. 1-4) (e.g., see lines 140-149, lines 215-225), polymerizing or consolidating the profiles (stiffeners) and the skin (flat part of the panel) to obtain a stiffened panel (lines 255-256).
Guittard discloses that the mold 10 is equipped with means for varying the molding volume V, comprised between the plate 16 (analogous to Delgado’s curing tool 31 and/or Zhan’s base 31, having a laying surface) and the indexing cores 22 (mandrels) and delimited by the shims 30 and 34 (analogous to the claimed “packing shim”) (e.g., lines 150-162 “flat shims 30, these flat parts of the shims 34 define the outline of the molding volume V”), the mold 10 is internally equipped with movable walls making it possible to vary the thickness of the space formed between the indexing cores 22 and the plate 16 as well as the thickness of the spaces formed between the adjacent indexing cores 22 (mandrels) (lines 176-181),
the molding volume is delimited by a bottom part 12 comprising a rectangular flat plate 16, a cover 14, as well as a rectangular frame 18 “fixed in a sealed manner” on the face upper plane of the plate 16, along its peripheral edge (lines 128-133), which “then delimit between it an enclosed space in which are placed various accessories serving in particular to define in this space a molding volume V whose shape determines the geometry of the part to be manufactured” (lines 134-139); the “accessories” being, among others, e.g., shims comprised of different shapes and sizes (30, 32, 34; lines 150-162, lines 176-181, lines 259-260; FIGs. 1 – 5)
Guittard (lines 120-125), discloses that the method is capable of manufacturing a flat panel comprising stiffeners at right angles to one of its faces, however, that the method “can be used to manufacture parts of any shape (compact, elongated, non-developable, etc.), the molding tools then being adapted to the shape of the part while remaining in accordance with the principle of the invention.”
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify, in the same way, the method for manufacturing a stiffened panel obtained from a plurality of profiles of Delgado/Zhan, wherein a packing shim (e.g., Guittard’s shims 30, 34) is laid to fill a gap between the skin and the peripheral edge of the seat (i.e., Zhan’s 312), for the purpose of, as suggested by the prior art of Guittard (lines 150-162, lines 176-181), varying the size/volume of the skin, by defining the outline of the molding volume in the seat utilizing shims. See MPEP 2143 (I) (Rationale G).
Regarding claim 2, Delgado/Zhan/Guittard teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein before the polymerizing or consolidating, a sealing barrier is laid (e.g., see Zhan’s FIGs. 5 – 6, and Guittard FIGs. 1 – 5), the sealing barrier designed to form, with at least the mold, a substantially sealed enclosure in which the skin and the profiles are positioned (see Zhan’s FIGs. 5 – 6, and Guittard’s FIGs. 1 – 2, lines 128-139).
Regarding claim 3, Delgado/Zhan/Guittard teaches the method according to claim 2, further comprising: laying a frame (e.g., Zhan’s left and right wedges 34, 35, and/or Guittard’s frame 18) around the mandrels in order to immobilize the mandrels with respect to the mold, said frame (e.g., Zhan’s left and right wedges 34, 35, and/or Guittard’s frame 18) being sealingly connected to the mold (see Zhan’s FIGs. 5 – 6, and Guittard’s FIGs. 1 – 2 and lines 128-139); and laying a rigid plate (e.g., Zhan’s pressing block 36, and/or Guittard’s cover 14) sealingly connected to the frame to form the sealing barrier (see Zhan’s FIGs. 5 – 6, and Guittard’s FIGs. 1 – 2, lines 128-139).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2023/0182426 A1 (Pridie): [0001] a device for manufacturing a stiffened panel making it possible to control the geometry of the stiffened panel, and to a method for manufacturing a stiffened panel using the device. See FIGs. 3 – 8.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDGAREDMANUEL TROCHE whose telephone number is (571)272-9766. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:30.
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, Sam Zhao can be reached at 571-270-5343. 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.
/EDGAREDMANUEL TROCHE/Examiner, Art Unit 1744
/JEFFREY M WOLLSCHLAGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights