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 .
Claims 1-19 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS submitted on 1/17/2025, 5/8/2025, and 5/15/2025 have been reviewed and signed. The IDS of 1/17/2025 and 5/8/2025 appear to be duplicates and wherein, the second duplicate entries have been crossed out.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-9, and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by PREBIL (US 10232532 B1).
See in PREBIL Col. 3, lines 61-64, Col. 7, lines 30-37, Col. 8, lines 54-67, Col. 11, line 44 to Col. 12, line 28, Col. 13, lines 20-36. See Figs. 4, 9, 13, 45.
Re 1, PREBIL teaches of a method (see Fig. 45) for producing a composite material component, the method comprising:
a process of arranging (400) a prepreg (398) in a movable (see Claim 13) mold (see Fig. 13, dies 256, sleeves and shim 258, 260, Col. 13, lines 20-36);
a process of molding (402) the prepreg (398);
a process of conveying (404) the prepreg (398) together with the movable (Claim 13) mold (Fig. 13, see dies 256, and also sleeves and shim 258, 260, Col. 13, lines 20-36) from upstream to downstream (78, see Col. 7, lines 30-37, Col. 8, lines 54-67); and
a process of separating (406) a composite material component (Col. 3, lines 61-64) formed of the prepreg (398) from the movable mold (see Fig. 13, see dies 256, and sleeves and shims 258, 260, Col. 13, lines 20-36), wherein the process of arranging (400) the prepreg (398) includes arranging the prepreg between a first movable mold (right sleeve 258) and a second movable mold (left sleeve 258), wherein the process of molding (402) the prepreg (398) includes having pressure (Col. 8, lines 61-67) applied on the prepreg (398) from a molding mold (256) via the movable mold (see sleeves 258, 260, Col. 13, lines 20-36); and
having heat (Col. 8, lines 57-60) transmitted from the movable mold to the prepreg, and wherein the process of separating (406) the composite material component (Col. 3, lines 61-64) from the movable mold includes separating the composite material component from both the first movable mold (Fig. 13, right sleeve 258) and the second movable mold (Fig. 13, left sleeve 258).
Wherein, see part 212 that is formed via the tooling sleeves and in the conventional machine dies 256 with the shims 260 and tooling sleeves 258, see Col. 13, lines 20-30, and wherein, the parts are formed via load of plies, see Fig. 6, see Fig. 7A-7F, see also Col. 10, line 18 to Col. 11, line 35. Whereby, the plies to form the part being the composite component for the prepreg.
Re 2 (upon 1), wherein the prepreg has a three-dimensional shape, and wherein at least one of the first movable mold and the second movable mold includes a thin plate having a three-dimensional shape.
(see PREBIL, see Fig. 13, dies 256, sleeves and shim 258, 260, Col. 13, lines 20-36)
Re 4 (upon 2), wherein the thin plate is formed of a metal material.
(see PREBIL, see Fig. 13, dies 256, sleeves and shim 258, 260, Col. 13, lines 20-36)
Re 5 (upon 2), wherein the process of molding the prepreg includes the thin plate being deformed by the thin plate being pressed by the molding mold, and the deformed thin plate having pressure applied on the prepreg.
(see PREBIL, Fig. 9, 228-234, Col. 11, line 50, see “flexible” term which encompasses the claimed deformed).
Re 6 (upon 2), wherein the thin plate has a trough shape.
(PREBIL, see Fig. 13)
Re 7 (upon 2), wherein the thin plate has a curved area, and wherein a longitudinal axis line of the thin plate is curved in the curved area.
(see PREBIL, Fig. 9, 228-234, Col 11, line 44 to Col. 12, line 28)
Re 9 (upon 8), wherein the movable mold includes a block attached to one of the first thin plate and the second thin plate, and wherein the process of molding the prepreg is executed in a state where the block and the other of the first thin plate and the second thin plate are in contact with the prepreg.
(see PREBIL of the teaching of the dies 256 that act as the blocks for movable molds, that engages the prepreg for shaping, see Fig. 13 and in relation to the shims that are the thin plates)
Re 14, PREBIL teaches of an apparatus (Fig. 4, see 78) for producing a composite material component (Col. 3, lines 61-64) comprising:
a movable (see Claim 13) mold (Fig. 13, see dies 256, sleeves and shim 258, 260, Col. 13, lines 20-36) configured to accommodate a prepreg (398);
a conveying device (106, Col. 8, lines 54-57) configured to convey the movable mold (see dies 256, sleeves and shim 258, 260) in which the prepreg (398) is accommodated from upstream to downstream (Fig. 4, upstream to downstream of 78, Col. 7, lines 30-37, Col. 8, lines 54-67);
a molding mold (256) configured to have pressure and heat (Col. 8, lines 57-67) applied via the movable mold (258-260) to the prepreg (398);
a pressing device (112) configured to have a pressing force applied from the molding mold (256) to the movable mold (258-260); and
a heating device (108) configured to heat the molding mold (256), wherein the movable mold (258-260) includes a first movable mold (right sleeve 258), and a second movable mold (left sleeve 258) that is arranged opposite to the first movable mold (right sleeve 258) via the prepreg (398).
Re 15 (upon 14), wherein the first movable mold includes a first thin plate having a three-dimensional shape, wherein the second movable mold includes a second thin plate having a three-dimensional shape, wherein the first thin plate has a first inner surface opposed to the second movable mold via the prepreg, wherein the second thin plate has a second outer surface opposed to the first movable mold via the prepreg, and wherein the movable mold includes a block attached to at least one of the first thin plate and the second thin plate.
(see PREBIL of the teaching of the dies 256 that act as the blocks for movable molds, that engages the prepreg for shaping, see Fig. 13 and in relation to the shims that are the thin plates)
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.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PREBIL as applied to claim 2 above.
Re 3 (upon 2), wherein a thickness of the thin plate is 1.5 mm or less.
In which the teaching of shim by PREBIL being of a shim, which is thin plate that it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the shim of PREBIL with the desired thickness as a change in shape.
Claim(s) 8, 11, 12, 16, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PREBIL as applied to claims 1, 2, 5, and 9 above, and further in view of HARADA (US 2022/009178 A1).
See in HARADA, [0051-0053, 0057, 0086, 0088, 0090, 0094, 0100-0101], Figs. 2a, 2c, 3c, 4a, 5a, 5b.
Re 8 (upon 2), wherein the first movable mold includes a first thin plate having a three-dimensional shape, wherein the first thin plate has a first inner surface opposed to the second movable mold via the prepreg, wherein the second movable mold includes a second thin plate having a three-dimensional shape, and wherein the second thin plate includes a second outer surface opposed to the first movable mold via the prepreg.
Wherein, the opposing sides of the shims 260 of PREBIL, see Fig. 13, wherein, the shims do not have a second thin plate having a three-dimensional shape.
However, see in HARADA [0053], see Fig. 2a, elements 12a, 10b), with the thin plates having the shapes, see
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified PREBIL with the use of dam features that are arranged between the molds, as taught by HARADA, see KSR rationale, MPEP 2143, as combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Re 11 (upon 1), wherein the process of molding the prepreg includes having pressure and heat applied from the molding mold via a first portion of the movable mold to a first region of the prepreg, and after executing a process of moving the prepreg together with the movable mold, having pressure and heat applied from the molding mold via a second portion of the movable mold to a second region of the prepreg.
Wherein PREBIL does not specifically teach of the process. However, the operation feature is taught in HARADA, see [0088, 0094], see Fig. 5b.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified PREBIL with the transfer and operation of the molds upon the prepreg as taught by HARADA, see KSR rationale, MPEP 2143, as combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Re 12 (upon 11), wherein a transverse cross-sectional shape of the second portion of the movable mold differs from a transverse cross-sectional shape of the first portion of the movable mold.
See teaching by HARADA, Fig.2c, 3c, see area 11b.
Re 16 (upon 5), the limitations being similar to claim 11, see teaching above.
Re 17 (upon 9), the limitations being similar to claim 11, see teaching above.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PREBIL as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of MORTENSEN (US 2022/0055269 A1).
Re 10 (upon 9), wherein the block is composed of a metal material whose thermal conductivity at a molding temperature of the prepreg is 100 W/m-K or greater, or wherein the process of molding the prepreg is executed in a state where the block is in contact with a heater that immediately heats the block.
The use of the block being of a particular material having a thermal conductivity is noted and known in the molding arts. In this case, the teaching by MORTENSEN of molds having of various thermal conductivity, see [0052], and of at least 10, 20, 30, 50 W/m-K, and further teaching molds that can be of aluminum alloy with one or more metals, with the thermal conductivity of 50 to more than 100 W/m-K, and further can be above 200 W/m-K.
Wherein, see teaching concept of high thermal conductivity of mold to improve heat transfer, see [0048], to heat up to affect curing the material. Which one skilled in the art would recognize as applicable to the heating in the PREBIL reference.
Claim(s) 13, 18, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PREBIL as applied to claims 5 and 9 above, and further in view of OKAMOTO (US 20200180243 A1).
Re 13 (upon 1), wherein the process of molding the prepreg is executed in a state where a dam for preventing softened material from flowing out through a gap between the first movable mold and the second movable mold is arranged between the first movable mold and the second movable mold.
Regarding the claimed dam to prevent the prepreg to flow through the gap between the first and second molds, the teaching in OKAMOTO, see Fig. 2B, see molds 21-1 and 21-2 that engages with each other, and wherein, the dams can be considered at 21-3, 21-4 that would prevent flow from the sides, as these are arranged between the molds.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified PREBIL with the use of dam features that are arranged between the molds, as taught by OKAMOTO, see KSR rationale, MPEP 2143, as combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Re 18 (upon 5), the limitations being similar to claim 13, see teaching above.
Re 19 (upon 9), the limitations being similar to claim 13, see teaching above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892 form.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EMMANUEL S LUK whose telephone number is (571)272-1134. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 to 5.
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, Xiao S 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.
/EMMANUEL S LUK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights