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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1, and 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Selter (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0158789). Regarding Claim 1, Selter shows that it is known to carry out a method of method for making single lap shear test samples from rigid substrates (Abstract) comprising: providing a mold having a base plate extending along a horizontal plane and having a pair of two opposite long side edges and a first and second end, a pair of sidewalls attached perpendicularly to the base plate at each long side edge, first and second end blocks joined to the base plate on the first and second ends thereof wherein each end block has sample receiver slots formed therein and positioned to face complimentary sample receiver slots formed in the other end block (0006-0007); applying adhesive to an overlap region of at least one of the rigid substrates (0008, 0042); inserting the rigid substrate into the end block sample receiver slots (0008, 0042); inserting spacer pieces into the mold between adjacent rigid substrates and in between sidewalls and rigid substrates (0008, 0042); allowing the adhesive applied to the overlap region between the rigid substrates to cure (0041, 0052); and removing spacer pieces and cured rigid substrate from the mold, the cured rigid substrate being joined as a single lap shear sample (0041, 0052). Selter does not show forming multiple single lap shear samples, wherein each end block has a plurality of sample receiver slots. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form multiple single lap shear samples in a mold having a plurality of sample receiver slots because duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new or unexpected result is produced (MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(B)).
Regarding Claim 4, Selter shows the method of claim 1 above, including one wherein the spacer pieces are provided before the step of inserting, the spacer pieces conforming to a space between adjacent inserted rigid substrates and a space between the inserted rigid substrate and the sidewall (0007).
Regarding Claim 5, Selter shows the method of claim 1 above, including one wherein the step of removing spacer pieces and cured rigid substrates from the mold comprises disassembling the mold (0041, 0052: pieces would be required to be unscrewed/disassembled).
Regarding Claim 6, Selter shows that it is known to carry out a method of method for making single lap shear test samples from rigid substrates (Abstract) comprising: providing a mold having a pair of sidewalls joined between a first end block and a second end block, each of said first and second end blocks having a plurality of sample receiver slots formed therein and positioned to face complimentary sample receiver slots formed in the other end block (0006-0007); applying adhesive to an overlap region of at least one of the rigid substrates (0008, 0042); inserting the rigid substrate into the end block sample receiver slots (0008, 0042); inserting spacer pieces into the mold between adjacent rigid substrates and in between sidewalls and rigid substrates (0008, 0042); aligning the rigid substrate and spacer pieces in the mold by leveling (0032: spacer pieces are the same height to yield level/uniform thickness); allowing the adhesive applied to the overlap region between the rigid substrates to cure (0041, 0052); and removing spacer pieces and cured rigid substrate from the mold, the cured rigid substrate being joined as a single lap shear sample (0041, 0052). Selter does not show forming multiple single lap shear samples, wherein each end block has a plurality of sample receiver slots. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form multiple single lap shear samples in a mold having a plurality of sample receiver slots because duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new or unexpected result is produced (MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(B)).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Selter, in view of Ghetzler et al. (U.S. Patent 6,289,741). Selter shows the method of claim 1 above, but he does not show using a mold release agent. Ghetzler et al., hereafter “Ghetzler,” show that it is known to carry out a method of molding and measuring bonding strength of two materials, comprising the step of spraying the mold with a release agent before the molding process (Column 3, lines 47-51). It would have been obvious to include Gehtzler’s spraying step ahead of Selter’s inserting/bonding step in order to facilitate separation of the cured body from the mold cavity (Selter, Column 3, lines 49-51).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MONICA HUSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1198. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8a-4p.
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, Christina Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1176. 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.
MONICA ANNE HUSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1742
/MONICA A HUSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights