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 use of the term KAPTON and MYLAR which are trade names or a marks used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 13 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.
Regarding Claim 13, the claim contains the trademark/trade name KAPTON and MYLAR. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe polyimide (KAPTON) and biaxially-oriented polyethylene terephthalate (MYLAR) and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 11, 13, 14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Keller (US 5,030,518 A)
Regarding Claim 1, Keller teaches a multi-layer thermal insulation (Abstract) comprising a hot zone portion, a mid-temperature zone, and a low temperature zone. (Fig. 3). Keller teaches refractory metal foil layers in the hot zone portion (Item 12, 12’), an insulating transition layer separating the hot zone portion and the mid-temperature zone portion (Item 11c, 11d), and non-metal substrate layers in the mid-temperature zone portion and the low temperature zone portion. (Item 11e, 13).
Regarding Claim 11, Keller teaches the metal foil layers can be molybdenum foils. (Column 3, Lines 30-45).
Regarding Claim 13, Keller teaches the non-metal substrate layer comprise polyimide. (Column 4, Lines 1-30).
Regarding Claim 14, Keller teaches a multilayer insulation (Abstract) comprising refractory metal foil layers, (Item 12, 12’) non-metal substrate layers, and an insulating transition layer (Item 11c, 11d), separating the refractory metal foil layers and the non metal substrate layers. (Item 11e, 13).
Regarding Claim 20, Keller teaches the metal foil layers can be molybdenum foils. (Column 3, Lines 30-45).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 6-8 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keller in view of Hamling (US 3,861,947 A).
Regarding Claim 6 and 8, Keller teaches the ceramic fibers, such as alumina-silica, layers between the refractory metal foil layers. (Abstract; Fig. 2-3; Column 3, Lines 60-65) Keller does not specifically teach the ceramic fiber layers are zirconia felt.
Hamling teaches that zirconia felt layers can be used a ceramic fiber layers for insulating purposes and are able to operate at a higher temperature than alumina -silica fibers and have improved properties, such as resistance to shrinkage, sagging and thermal shock. (Abstract; Column 1, Lines 20-40). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to substitute the alumina silica layers of Keller with the zirconia felt taught by Hamling for improved operating temperatures and resistances.
Regarding Claim 7, Keller teaches forming cavities/apertures in the zirconia felt layer, which will reduce the mass of the felt layer. (Column 4, Lines 10-17).
Regarding Claim 19, Keller teaches the ceramic fibers, such as alumina-silica, layers between the refractory metal foil layers. (Abstract; Fig. 2-3; Column 3, Lines 60-65) Keller does not specifically teach the ceramic fiber layers are zirconia felt.
Hamling teaches that zirconia felt layers can be used a ceramic fiber layers for insulating purposes and are able to operate at a higher temperature than alumina -silica fibers and have improved properties, such as resistance to shrinkage, sagging and thermal shock. (Abstract; Column 1, Lines 20-40). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to substitute the alumina silica layers of Keller with the zirconia felt taught by Hamling for improved operating temperatures and resistances.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keller
Regarding Claim 12, as Keller teaches the claimed components in the insulation, then it would be reasonable to one with ordinary skill in the art to expect the insulation of Keller to have zones operable in claimed ranges recited in Claim 12.
Claims 1, 9, 10 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colignon (US 3,799,056 A) in view of Blair (US 4,918,281 A).
Regarding Claims 1, 9 and 10, Colignon teaches a thermal insulation comprising a hot zone portion, a mid-temperature zone portion, and a low temperature zone portion. (Fig. 1). Colignon teaches a refractory foil layer in the hot zone (Item 2), an insulating transition layer separating the mid temperature zone portion (Item 3) and a non-metal substrate layers in the mid-temperature zone portion and the lower temperature zone portion. (Item 6; Column 2, Lines 60-67,Column 3, Lines 1-10).
Colignon does not teach multiple refractory metal foil layers, where the foil layers are embossed and spot-welded to one another.
Blair teaches a metal refractory structure for insulation (Abstract), where refractory metal foils are bossed and spot-welded together. (Fig. 1; Column 2, Lines 1-5). Blair teaches this structure for the refractory metal allow for further isolating heat transfer from entering into the insulation material (Column 1-2). Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to use a multiple layer refractory metal foil with the claimed structure taught by Blair in Colignon to reduce heat transfer.
Claim 1, 2, 4, 14, 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lemont et al. (US 3,948,295 A).
Regarding Claim 1, Lemont teaches an insulation structure comprising a hot zone portion, a mid-temperature zone portion, and a low temperature zone portion. (Fig. 4, 6; Abstract). Lemont teaches refractory metal foil layers (Abstract; Column 4, 15) and an insulating transition layer separating the hot zone portion and the mid-temperature portion, and non-metal substrate layers in the mid-temperature zone portion and the low temperature zone portion. (Item 17, 29).
Regarding Claim 2 and 4, Lemont teaches molybdenum thread can be used to penetrate some of the refractory metal foil layers and hold the refractory metal foil layers together. (Column 8, Lines 60-67)
Regarding Claim 14, Lemont teaches a multilayer insulation comprising refractory metal foil layers, non-metal substrate layers, and an insulating transition layer separating the refractory metal foil layers and the non metal substrate layers. (Abstract; Fig 4, 6; Column 4, 15).
Regarding Claims 15 and 17, Lemont teaches molybdenum thread can be used to penetrate some of the refractory metal foil layers and hold the refractory metal foil layers together. (Column 8, Lines 60-67).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5, 16 and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-0358. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday: 9:30am-3:30pm, 8:30PM-10:30PM.
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, Frank Vineis can be reached at (571) 270-1547. 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.
/Michael Zhang/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781
