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 .
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of the use of improper phrasing. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
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 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.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by
As for Claim 1, discloses an interlocking metasurfaces, comprising a first metasurface of a first material having a first array of mechanically interlocking surface features (20 having fasteners 30) that mate with a second metasurface of a second material having a second array of mechanically interlocking surface features (the other 20 having fasteners see also para [0041]).
Re: Claim 2. The interlocking metasurfaces of claim 1, wherein the interlocking metasurfaces are configured such that the first and second materials reach their respective yield stresses at the same time when a tensile load is applied to the interlocking metasurfaces (see para [0047-0049]).
Re: Claim 3. The interlocking metasurfaces of claim 1, wherein the mechanically interlocking surface features of at least one of the first or second metasurfaces comprise a polymer (see para 0047-0049]), ceramic, or metal.
Re: Claim 4. The interlocking metasurfaces of claim 1, wherein the first metasurface comprises a first array of interlocking T-shaped features (30/40) on a first supporting surface and the second metasurface comprises a second array of interlocking T-shaped features on a second supporting surface (30/40), wherein the interlocking T-shaped features are configured to provide a T-slot (see spacing between 40, see Fig. 1).
Re: Claim 5. The interlocking metasurfaces of claim 4, wherein the interlocking metasurfaces are configured to provide asymmetric interlocking metasurfaces, wherein at least one geometric component of the interlocking T-shaped features of the first and/or second array is modified such that the first and second materials reach their respective yield stresses at the same time when a tensile load is applied to the interlocking metasurfaces (see Fig. 1 and para [0047-0049]).
Re: Claim 6. The interlocking metasurfaces of claim 1, wherein the interlocking T-shaped features are configured to provide a snapping T-slot (see Fig. 1).
Re: Claim 7. The interlocking metasurfaces of claim 1, wherein at least one of the first or second array of the mechanically interlocking surface features comprises arrow-like features (40) off of a supporting surface (surface of 50, see Fig. 1).
Re: Claim 8. The interlocking metasurfaces of claim 7, wherein the arrow-like features comprise a split arrowhead (see 15 and 16, Fig. 7).
Re: Claim 9. The interlocking metasurfaces of claim 7, wherein the arrow-like features comprise a locked split arrowhead (see Fig. 7).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Adams et al. U.S. 2014/0283342.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID M UPCHURCH whose telephone number is (571)270-7957. The examiner can normally be reached 6AM-3PM EST M-F.
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, Jason San can be reached at (571)272-6531. 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.
/DAVID M UPCHURCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3677
Prosecution Insights