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 .
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.
Claims 1-20 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.
Claim 1 is rejected because it recites limitations “a braided carbon preform” … “a cured thermoset resin infused through the axial tows and the braid tows, wherein the axial tows and braid tows are flattened”. The limitations are vague since the last class claimed about the finish product not the preform, but the pre-amble is all about the preform.
Claim 1 is also rejected because it recites limitations “a cured thermoset resin infused through the axial tows and the braid tows, wherein the axial tows and braid tows are flattened”. It is not clear how the cured thermoset resin can infuse through the tows. In the specification, the thermoset is softened then infuse through the tows then the tows are cured to have the needed shape.
Claims 10 and 17 are also rejected because it recites limitations “a cured thermoset resin matrix infused through the axial tows”. It is not clear how the cured thermoset resin can infuse through the tows. In the specification, the thermoset is softened then infuse through the tows then the tows are cured to have the needed shaped.
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) 1 and 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rossi et al. (2015/0217506) in view of Hyson (2017/0066209).
Regarding claim 1, Rossi teaches a braided carbon preform (figs 19-20) that comprises:
axial tows (i.e. tri-axial braiding and uni-axial fibers, para 0078) that comprise carbon filaments partially coated with a thermoplastic material (para 0075 and 0079 to 0080); and
braid tows (i.e. tri-axial braiding and cross fibers, para 0078) at a braid angle relative to the axial tows, wherein the braid tows comprise carbon filaments partially coated with a thermoplastic material (para 0075 and 0079 to 0080), and
a cured thermoset resin infused through the axial tows and the braid tows (para 0006 and 0080), wherein the axial tows and braid tows are flattened (figs 10-12).
Rossi does not teach thermoplastic filaments within at least one of: the axial tows or the braid tows, wherein the thermoplastic filament makes up less than 40% by volume of each of the at least one of: the axial tows or the braid tows.
Hyson teaches a carbon fiber reinforce braided structure (figs 3-4) having tows (member 16) having thermoplastic filament makes up less than 40% by volume of the carbon fiber reinforce braided structure (para 0041, the carbon fibers can be up to 100%).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the structure of Rossi by using the percentage relationship between the carbon fiber and thermoplastic material, as taught by Hyson, in order to provide different bending properties for the braided structure.
Regarding claim 6, the modified structure Rossi-Hyson discloses the braided carbon preform (Rossi, para 0075 and 0082) and the thermoplastic material comprises thermoplastic material compressed (i.e. compacting, Rossi, para 0077 and 0082) into at least one of: the axial tows or the braid tows.
Regarding claim 7, the modified structure Rossi-Hyson discloses the braided carbon preform forms one of: a sleeve (Rossi, fig 19, para 0114), a sheet, or an overbraid.
Regarding claim 8, the modified structure Rossi-Hyson teaches all limitations and Hyson further teaches the thermoplastic filaments makes up 10% by volume or less of each of the at least one of the axial tows or the braid tows (para 0041, the carbon fibers can be up to 100%).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the structure of Rossi by using the percentage relationship between the carbon fiber and thermoplastic material, as taught by Hyson, in order to provide different bending properties for the braided structure. 10.
Claim(s) 2-5 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rossi et al. (2015/0217506) and Hyson (2017/0066209) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Melsheimer (2012/0277729).
Regarding claim 2, the modified structure Rossi-Hyson teaches all limitations except the thermoplastic filaments comprise a cross- section dimension of 200 microns or less.
Melsheimer teaches a braided structure having 200 microns or less thermoplastic filaments cross-section (i.e. diameter, para 0032).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the structure of Rossi by using the thermoplastic filaments dimension of Melsheimer in order to provide varying flexibility.
Regarding claim 3, the modified structure Rossi-Hyson-Melsheimen discloses a distribution of the thermoplastic filament is random within at least one of the axial tows or the braid tows (Rossi, fig 9, middle section).
Regarding claim 4, the modified structure Rossi-Hyson-Melsheimen discloses thermoplastic filament comprise flat shape (Rossi, fig 9), a distribution of the thermoplastic filaments amongst carbon filaments within at least one of the axial tows or the braid tows is in a desired pattern (Rossie, fig 9 outside section).
Regarding claim 5, the modified structure Rossi-Hyson-Melsheimen discloses the thermoplastic filaments are distributed around a periphery of at least one of the axial tows or the braid tows (Rossi, fig 13, para 0075 discloses that the thermoplastic covers the carbon fiber from the outside).
Regarding claim 9, the modified structure Rossi-Hyson teaches all limitations except the axial tows comprise thermoplastic filaments, wherein each of the thermoplastic filament comprises, respectively, a cross sectional dimension of less than 2 millimeters.
Melsheimer teaches a braided structure having 2 millimeters or less thermoplastic filaments cross-section (i.e. diameter, para 0032).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the structure of Rossi by using the thermoplastic filaments dimension of Melsheimer in order to provide varying flexibility.
Claim(s) 10-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rossi et al. (2015/0217506) in view of Hyson (2017/0066209) and Melsheimer (2012/0277729).
Regarding claim 10, Rossi teaches a braided carbon product (figs 19-20) that comprises:
axial tows, each axial tow formed of a respective thin thermoplastic filament (i.e. tri-axial braiding and uni-axial fibers, para 0078),
a first set of braid tows (i.e. first set of the bi-axial) at a braid angle relative to the axial tows, wherein the braid tows comprise carbon filaments partially coated in a thermoplastic material (para 0075 and 0078 to 0080);
a second set of braid tows (i.e. second set of the bi-axial) at an angle relative to the first set of braid tows (para 0075 and 0078 to 0080), wherein the second set of braid tows comprises carbon filaments braided and compressed into the thermoplastic material of the first set of braid tows (i.e. compacting by melting and fusing, para 0077 and 0082);
thermoplastic fiber within at least one of the first set of tows or the second set of tows (i.e. thermoplastic fiber to form a core, para 0080), and some portion of the tiny thermoplastic fibers mixed into a cured thermoplastic resin matrix that retains the axial tows, the first set of braid tows, and the second set of braid tows (para 0080 showing the thermoplastic is melting the fusing together),
some portion of the tiny thermoplastic fiber mixed into a cured thermoset resin matrix that retains infused through the axial tows, the first set of braid tows(para 0006 and 0080), and the second set of braid tows that are all are flattened (figs 10-12).
Rossi does not teach the thermoplastic material is filament and the thermoplastic filaments having a cross-sectional dimension of less than or equal to 200 microns or less than or equal to 2 millimeters and the tiny thermoplastic filaments make up less than 40% by volume of each of the at least one of the first set of braid tows or the second set of braid tows.
Hyson teaches a carbon fiber reinforce braided structure (figs 3-4) having twos (member 16) having thermoplastic filament makes up less than 40% by volume of the carbon fiber reinforce braided structure (para 0041, the carbon fibers can be up to 100%).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the structure of Rossi by using the percentage relationship between the carbon fiber and thermoplastic material, as taught by Hyson, in order to provide different bending properties for the braided structure.
While the modified structure Rossi-Hyson teaches all limitations of the claim and Melsheimer teaches a braided structure having 200 microns or less or less than or equal to 2 millimeters thermoplastic fiber cross-section (i.e. diameter, para 0032).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the structure of Rossi by using the thermoplastic filaments dimension of Melsheimer in order to provide varying flexibility.
Regarding claim 11, the modified structure Rossi-Hyson-Melsheimer teaches all limitations of the claim and Hyson further teaches the tiny thermoplastic fibers make up 10% by volume or less of each of the at least one of the first set of tows or the second set of tows (para 0041, the carbon fibers can be up to 100%).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the structure of Rossi by using the percentage relationship between the carbon fiber and thermoplastic material, as taught by Hyson, in order to provide different bending properties for the braided structure.
Regarding claim 12, the modified structure Rossi-Hyson-Melsheimer discloses a distribution of the tiny thermoplastic filaments is random (Rossi, fig 9, middle section).
Regarding claim 13, the modified structure Rossi-Hyson-Melsheimen discloses thermoplastic filament comprise flat shape (Rossi, fig 9), a distribution of the thermoplastic filaments amongst carbon filaments within at least one of the axial tows or the braid tows is in a desired pattern (Rossie, fig 9 outside section).
Regarding claim 14, the modified structure Rossi-Hyson-Melsheimen discloses the tiny thermoplastic filaments are distributed around a periphery of at least one of the axial tows or the braid tows (Rossi, fig 13, para 0075 discloses that the thermoplastic covers the carbon fiber from the outside).
Regarding claim 15, the modified structure Rossi-Hyson-Melsheimen discloses the axial tows further comprise tiny thermoplastic filaments (Rossi, para 00078).
Regarding claim 16, the modified structure Rossi-Hyson-Melsheimer discloses the braided carbon product takes the form of one of: a sleeve (Rossi, fig 19, para 0114), a sheet, or an overbraid.
Regarding claim 17, Rossi teaches a braided carbon product (figs 19-20) that comprises:
a first set of tows (i.e. first set of the bi-axial) that comprises carbon filaments partially coated with a thermoplastic material (para 0075 and 0078 to 0080);
a second set of tows (i.e. second set of the bi-axial) at an angle relative to the first set of tows, wherein the second set of tows comprises carbon filaments braided and compressed into the thermoplastic material of the first set of tows (i.e. compacting, para 0075 to 0082);
tiny thermoplastic fibers within at least one of the first set of tows or the second set of tows wherein the fibers are flat shape (fig 9); and some portion of the tiny thermoplastic fibers mixed into a cured thermoplastic resin matrix that retains the first set of tows and the second set of tows (para 0080, the thermoplastic melting and fusing together), the first set of tows and the second set of tows that are all flattened (figs 10-12).
Rossi does not teach the thermoplastic material is filament and the thermoplastic fibers make up less than 40% by volume of each of the at least one of the first set of tows or the second set of tows and thermoplastic fibers is defined by a cross-sectional dimension less than or equal to 200 microns.
Hyson teaches a carbon fiber reinforce braided structure (figs 3-4) having tows (member 16) having thermoplastic material makes up less than 40% by volume of the carbon fiber reinforce braided structure (para 0041, the carbon fibers can be up to 100%).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the structure of Rossi by using the percentage relationship between the carbon fiber and thermoplastic material, as taught by Hyson, in order to provide different bending properties for the braided structure.
While the modified structure Rossi-Hyson teaches all limitations of the claim and Melsheimer teaches a braided structure having 200 microns or less thermoplastic fiber cross-section (i.e. diameter, para 0032).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the structure of Rossi by using the thermoplastic filaments dimension of Melsheimer in order to provide varying flexibility.
Regarding claim 18, the modified structure Rossi-Hyson-Melsheimer discloses the second set of tows further comprises the carbon filaments partially coated with a thermoplastic material configured to stabilize the first set of tows and second set of tows relative to each other (para 0079 to 0080 shows that the thermoplastic coating, by melting and fusing, to reinforce the fiber and therefore it stabilizes the tow).
It is noted that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987). In this instant case, Rossi teaches an product, as presently claimed, that would be capable of stabilized the braided. Also, Rossi has the same product structure with comprising all of the limitations as claimed, therefore it would come up with the same produce as claimed.
Regarding claim 19, the modified structure Rossi-Hyson-Melsheimen teaches all limitations of the claim and Hyson further teaches the tiny thermoplastic filaments make up 10% by volume or less of each of the at least one of the first set of tows or the second set of tows (para 0041, the carbon fibers can be up to 100%).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the structure of Rossi by using the percentage relationship between the carbon fiber and thermoplastic material, as taught by Hyson, in order to provide different bending properties for the braided structure.
Regarding claim 20, the modified structure Rossi-Hyson-Melsheimen teaches all limitations of the claim and Rossi further teaches a third set of carbon fibers tows combined with thin thermoplastic filaments (i.e. tri-axial braiding and uni-axial fibers, para 0078).
Melsheimer further teaches thermoplastic filaments having a cross-sectional dimension of less than or equal to 2 millimeters (para 0041, the carbon fibers can be up to 100%).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the structure of Rossi by using the percentage relationship between the carbon fiber and thermoplastic material, as taught by Hyson, in order to provide different bending properties for the braided structure.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, dated 02-26-2026, with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C §112(a) and §112(b) have been fully considered, and are persuasive. The rejection to the claims has been withdrawn due to the amendments to the claims. However, another 112b was made as analyzed above.
Applicant's arguments, date 02-26-2026, with respect to the rejections of claims under 35 U.S.C §103 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive because applicant argues that the prior art does not teach the amended limitations. However, this argument is not commensurate with the rejected claims, as the limitations have not been previously presented and they have been address as analyzed above.
Conclusion
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 BAO-THIEU L NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-0476. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am-3pm.
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, KHOA D. HUYNH can be reached at (571)272-4888. 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.
BAO-THIEU L. NGUYEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3732
/BAO-THIEU L NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732