DETAILED ACTION
Claim Status
Claims 1-16 is/are pending.
Claims 1-16 is/are rejected.
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 .
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.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Claims 1-16 have an effective filing date of at least 12/04/2017.
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(s) 13 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 13 is vague and indefinite because it is unclear whether the claim requires the selection of a single mineral filler (as opposed to a combination of mineral fillers). If the claim is intended to allow for multiple mineral fillers, the claim is not further limiting and subject to rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) as not being further limiting.
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(s) 13 is/are 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.
If claim 13 is intended to allow for selection of multiple mineral fillers, the claim is not further limiting the subject matter of claim 1.
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.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claim(s) 1-16 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over:
• claims 1-10 of U.S. Patent No. 11,008,438 (GLEASON, SR.); or
• claims 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 11,760,862 (GLEASON, SR.); or
• claims 1-12 of U.S. Patent No. 12,221,522 (GLEASON, SR.).
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
U.S. Patent No. 11,008,438 claims methods of forming a multilayer composite core material article, wherein:
• the first layer comprised of gel coat in the above Patent claims corresponds to the recited “gel coat” layer of the present application claims;
• the second layer of a laminate composition in the above Patent claims corresponds to the recited “first layer of a laminate” of the present application claims;
• the plurality of reinforcing blocks made from the cured composite core material in the above Patent claims corresponds to the recited “plurality of pieces of a composite material”;
• the third layer of the same laminate composition of the second layer in the above Patent claims corresponds to the recited “cured second layer of the laminate” of the present application claims.
U.S. Patent No. 11,760,862 claims methods of forming a multilayer composite core material article, wherein:
• the “gel coat” in the above Patent claims corresponds to the recited “gel coat” layer of the present application claims;
• the first layer of a laminate composition in the above Patent claims corresponds to the recited “first layer of a laminate” of the present application claims;
• the plurality of reinforcing blocks made from the cured composite core material in the above Patent claims corresponds to the recited “plurality of pieces of a composite material”;
• the second layer of the same laminate composition of the second layer in the above Patent claims corresponds to the recited “cured second layer of the laminate” of the present application claims.
U.S. Patent No. 12,221,522 claims methods of forming a multilayer composite core material article, wherein:
• the “gel coat” in the above Patent claims corresponds to the recited “gel coat” layer of the present application claims;
• the first layer of a laminate made from a second mixture in the above Patent claims corresponds to the recited “first layer of a laminate” of a “first mixture” of the present application claims;
• the plurality of pieces made from the polymerized composite material in the above Patent claims corresponds to the recited “plurality of pieces of a composite material”;
• the second layer of the same laminate composition of the second layer in the above Patent claims corresponds to the recited “cured second layer of the laminate” of the present application claims.
Features not explicitly claimed in the above Patents are known in the art and/or obvious material selections and/or modifications and/or design choices.
Regarding claim 8, one of ordinary skill in the art would have incorporated known additives (e.g., colorants, etc.) in the gel coat in the above Patents to produce desired aesthetic and/or decorative effects.
Regarding claim 16, one of ordinary skill in the art would have selected the width and length of the plurality of pieces or reinforcing blocks in the above Patents in order to tailor the reinforcement for specific applications.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Vivian Chen (Vivian.chen@uspto.gov) whose telephone number is (571) 272-1506. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Thursday from 8:30 AM to 6 PM. The examiner can also be reached on alternate Fridays.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Callie Shosho, can be reached on (571) 272-1123. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
The General Information telephone number for Technology Center 1700 is (571) 272-1700.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
September 29, 2026
/Vivian Chen/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1787
