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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the claimed “second mold” in claim 49, “one or more loops in communication with the mold” in claim 46, and “heating the mold by inductively heating” in claim 45 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it is not a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent. In this case, the claims are directed to a method; however, the abstract does not recite steps of the claimed method. 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).
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 38 and 49 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 38, “comprises an aluminum” should be changed to --comprises aluminum--.
Claim 49, “a second elevated temperature” should be changed to --the second elevated temperature-- because the second elevated temperature is introduced in claim 29.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 49 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Newly added claim 49 recites “heating to the first elevated temperature occurs in a first mold and heating to a second elevated temperature occurs in a second mold” which fails to comply with the written description requirement. Applicant has not pointed out where the amended claim is supported, nor does there appear to be a written description of the claim limitation “heating to the first elevated temperature occurs in a first mold and heating to a second elevated temperature occurs in a second mold” in the application as filed (see MPEP §§ 2163.04 and 2163.06).
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) 35, 44-46 and 48 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 35 recites the limitation “the plurality of inorganic fibers are selected from glass fibers, ceramic fibers, carbon fibers, or some combination thereof” which is indefinite.
Claim 48 recites the limitation “an acetate (e.g., EVA or EMA)” which is indefinite. The phrase " e.g.," renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Claim 48 has been examined below as if the exemplary limitation was not part of the claim.
Claims 44-46 recite the limitations “rapidly heating” and “rapidly cooling” which are indefinite. The term “rapidly” is a relative term which renders the limitations indefinite. The term “rapidly" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The limitations have been examined below as best understood.
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) 29, 38, 43, 45, and 48 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker (US 20140083596) in view of Walker (US 20080265516).
Regarding claim 29, Walker ‘596 discloses a method of forming a heat shield (a method of forming a foam core composite comprising face sheets of different material and having heat shield functionality: Abstract, P0012-0014, 0017) comprising:
(i) layering a second foamable material layer onto a fiber-containing first layer (implicit teaching as the foamable material is the core/middle layer located in a mold and one of the face sheets can be a fibrous material sheet or a pre-preg sheet: P0012-0014, 0017);
(ii) heating the second foamable material layer at a first elevated temperature to cause initial foaming (P0018); …
(iv) arranging a third heat-reflecting material layer into contact with the second foamable material layer so that the heat-reflecting material layer is adapted to be adjacent to a heat source (implicit teaching as the foamable material is the core/middle layer located in the mold and the other face sheet can be an aluminum sheet capable of providing heat shield functionality via its inherent heat-reflecting properties and heat-reflecting layers are adapted in the art to be adjacent to a heat source to improve heat-reflecting and heat shielding: P0012-0014, 0017, 0032).
Walker ‘596 fails to disclose heating the second foamable material layer at a second elevated temperature to cause secondary foaming.
In an analogous art, foaming of foamable material to achieve foaming, adhesion, and forming (P0010-0011), Walker ‘516 discloses the technique of heating a foamable material at a first elevated temperature to cause initial foaming and heating the foamable material at a second elevated temperature to cause secondary foaming for the benefit(s) of providing self-supporting characteristic to the foamable material before the secondary foaming (P0004, claim 1).
Since Walker ‘596 teaches that the splitting of a step into two steps in his method is an obvious variant (P0037), it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Walker ‘596 in view of Walker ‘516 by splitting the heating step into two steps and heating the second foamable material layer at a second elevated temperature to cause secondary foaming for the benefit(s) of providing self-supporting characteristic to the second foamable material layer before the secondary foaming and improving foaming as suggested by Walker ‘516. See MPEP §§ 2143 I D, 2143 I G, 2144.04 IV C, and/or 2144 II.
Regarding claim 38, Walker ‘596 further teaches wherein the heat-reflecting layer comprises aluminum (P0017, 0032).
Regarding claim 43, Walker ‘596 further teaches wherein the heating steps occur in a mold (P0018).
Regarding claim 45, Walker ‘596 further teaches including rapidly heating the mold by inductively heating (P0018).
Regarding claim 48, Walker ‘596 further teaches wherein the second foamable material layer comprises an epoxy resin, an acetate, an acrylate or any combination thereof (P0021, 0026).
Claim(s) 30-31 and 34-36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker (US 20140083596) in view of Walker (US 20080265516) as applied to claim 29 above, and further in view of Burgin (US 20140124972).
Regarding claims 30-31 and 34-36, Walker ‘596 further teaches to provide acoustic attenuation via face sheet selection (P0017), but the commination fails to disclose a step of layering an acoustic attenuation composite onto the heat shield located thereon.
In the same field of endeavor, methods for forming composite structures yielding heat insulation/shielding and sound insulation/attenuation (P0001-0002), Burgin discloses the technique of including an acoustic fibrous reinforcement layer (this reads on the claimed acoustic attenuation composite), heating and molding the acoustic fibrous reinforcement layer to form a shape that is complimentary with and in direct contact with heat shield layers, and applying/bonding the acoustic fibrous reinforcement layer to the heat shield layers (P0050-0071, 0095-0097, Figs. 1-2), wherein the acoustic fibrous reinforcement layer comprises an acoustic fibrous layer comprising a plurality of inorganic fibers selected from the group consisting of glass fibers, ceramic fibers, or carbon fibers (P0050-0051) for yielding the predictable benefit(s) of increasing sound absorbing/attenuating properties (P0001-0002, 0050). Burgin further teaches wherein the heat-reflecting layer comprises an aluminum (P0056).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Walker ‘596 in view of Burgin by
including an acoustic attenuating composite comprising glass/inorganic fibers in direct contact with the heat shield for yielding the predictable benefit(s) of increasing sound absorbing/attenuating properties as suggested Burgin. See MPEP §§ 2143 I C, 2143 I G, and/or 2144 II.
Claim(s) 32 and 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker (US 20140083596) in view of Walker (US 20080265516) and Burgin (US 20140124972) as applied to claims 31 above, and further in view of Mok (US 20220165242).
Regarding claims 32 and 33, the combination, as applied above, fails to disclose the acoustic attenuation composite comprising a perforated facing sheet located in direct planar contact with the fibrous acoustic layer.
In the same field of endeavor, methods for forming composite structures yielding heat insulation/shielding and sound insulation/attenuation (P0001, 0105), Mok discloses an acoustic attenuation composite comprising a perforated facing sheet (1002) located in direct planar contact with a fibrous acoustic layer (1004: P0086, Fig. 10) as a suitable material for reducing noise and/or enhancing acoustic behavior (P0001, 0086).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further have modified the method of Walker ‘596 in view of Mok by using a perforated facing sheet located in direct planar contact with a fibrous acoustic layer as the acoustic attenuation composite for yielding the predictable benefit(s) of reducing noise and/or enhancing acoustic behavior as suggested Mok. See MPEP §§ 2143 I C, 2143 I G, and/or 2144 II.
Claim(s) 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker (US 20140083596) in view of Walker (US 20080265516) as applied to claim 38 above, and further in view of PARIPOVIC (US 20240018327).
Regarding claim 39, the combination, as applied above, fails to disclose wherein the foamable material comprises a plurality of expandable microspheres.
In the same field of endeavor, methods for forming composite structures yielding heat insulation, PARIPOVIC discloses the technique of including a plurality of expandable microspheres in a foamable material for yielding the predictable benefit(s) of improving thermal insulation properties (abstract, P0001).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further have modified the method of Walker ‘596 in view of PARIPOVIC by including a plurality of expandable microspheres in the foamable material for yielding the predictable benefit(s) of improving thermal insulation properties as suggested PARIPOVIC. See MPEP §§ 2143 I C, 2143 I G, and/or 2144 II.
Claim(s) 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker (US 20140083596) in view of Walker (US 20080265516) as applied to claim 29 above, and further in view of Kutluoglu (US 20150024187).
Regarding claim 40, the combination, as applied above, fails to disclose a step of recycling any of the heat-reflecting layer that does not receive the foamable material.
In the same field of endeavor, methods for forming composite structures yielding heat insulation,
Kutluoglu teaches the technique of recycling waste/trimmed materials (P0546-0548).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further have modified the method of Walker ‘596 in view of Kutluoglu by including a step of recycling waste/trimmed materials including any of the heat-reflecting layer that does not receive the foamable material for yielding the predictable benefit(s) of allowing recycling and improving cost as suggested Kutluoglu. See MPEP §§ 2143 I C, 2143 I G, and/or 2144 II.
Claim(s) 41, 42, and 47 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker (US 20140083596) in view of Walker (US 20080265516) as applied to claim 29 above, and further in view of Dodworth (US 20210023830).
Regarding claims 41, 42 and 47, Walker ‘596 is silent about the materials for the pre-preg sheet (P0017).
In the same field of endeavor, methods for forming composite structures yielding heat insulation (P0171), Dodworth discloses using a polyurethane resin matrix material or an epoxy resin matrix material and glass fibers or carbon fibers as a suitable fiber reinforced material for facing sheets (claim 28, P0099) for the benefit(s) of structures yielding high heat insulation, high sound absorption, and high energy absorption (P0171).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further have modified the method of Walker ‘596 in view of Dodworth by using a polyurethane resin matrix material or an epoxy resin matrix material and glass fibers or carbon fibers as the fiber reinforced material for the pre-preg facing sheet for yielding the predictable benefit(s) of obtaining high heat insulation, high sound absorption, and high energy absorption as suggested Dodworth. See MPEP §§ 2143 I C, 2143 I G, and/or 2144 II.
Claim(s) 44 and 46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker (US 20140083596) in view of Walker (US 20080265516) as applied to claim 43 above, and further in view of Yokokita (US 20190382548).
Regarding claims 44 and 46, Walker ‘596 further discloses heating the mold (P0018), but the combination does not disclose rapidly cooling the mold.
In the same field of endeavor, methods for forming composite structures yielding heat insulation (P0003), Yokokita teaches the technique of rapidly heating and rapidly cooling the mold by flowing water through one or more loops in communication with the mold for yielding the predictable benefit(s) of shortening the molding cycle (P0091, 0094-0095, 0100, Figs. 6-7).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further have modified the method of Walker ‘596 in view of Yokokita by rapidly heating and rapidly cooling the mold by flowing water through one or more loops in communication with the mold for yielding the predictable benefit(s) of shortening the molding cycle as suggested Yokokita. See MPEP §§ 2143 I C, 2143 I G, and/or 2144 II.
Claim(s) 49 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker (US 20140083596) in view of Walker (US 20080265516) as applied to claim 29 above, and further in view of Kuo (US 20110193254).
Regarding claim 49, the combination does not disclose wherein heating to the first elevated temperature occurs in a first mold and heating to the second elevated temperature occurs in a second mold.
In analogous art, foaming of materials in stages, Kuo discloses the technique of heating a foamable material to a first elevated temperature in a first mold and heating to a second elevated temperature in a second mold (Abstract, Fig. 1, and corresponding description) for yielding the predictable benefit(s) of controlling foaming degree and improving shaping results (P0009-0010, 0023).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further have modified the method of Walker ‘596 in view of Kuo by performing the heating to the first elevated temperature in a first mold and performing heating to the second elevated temperature in a second mold for yielding the predictable benefit(s) of controlling foaming degree and improving shaping results as suggested Kuo. See MPEP §§ 2143 I C, 2143 I G, and/or 2144 II.
Conclusion
Additional prior art made of record and not relied upon that is considered to be pertinent to
Applicant’s disclosure.
Lotti (US 20150204065) discloses a relevant method (Abstract, Fig. 1, and corresponding description).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERZI H MORENO HERNANDEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-0625. The examiner can normally be reached 1:00-10:00 PM PT.
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, Galen Hauth can be reached at 571-270-5516. 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.
/JERZI H MORENO HERNANDEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1743
