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 .
Response to Amendment
Amendment to claims filed 5-22-26 is acknowledged. Currently, claims 41-51 and 61-68 are pending. Claims 1-40 and 52-60 are canceled.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of clams 41-51 and 61-68 in the reply filed on 5-22-26 is acknowledged.
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.
Claim(s) 41-51 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weisenberg (20220412511) in view of Weisenberg (2024/0066812).
Regarding claim 41, Weisenberg ‘511 discloses a method for manufacturing a cylindrical tube for storing and/or transporting a gas (para 2), comprising:
Providing a feedstock having first and second long ends extending in a longitudinal direction (para 108, fig. 3);
Forming a circular leading end of the cylindrical tube from the feedstock on a surface of a forming mandrel at a fist location near a first end of the forming mandrel (para 220);
Advancing the circular leading end towards a second end of the forming mandrel (para 221);
Progressively draping the feedstock onto the surface of the forming mandrel behind the advancing circular leading end (para 225, 413); and
Progressively forming a seam between the first and second long ends along the longitudinal axis while the feedstock is draped onto the surface of the forming mandrel (para 410).
Weisenberg ‘511 does not each the feedstock is a composite sheet stock comprising: a base layer comprising a base material, a permeation resistant layer comprising a permeation resistant material for providing resistance to leakage of gas through the composite sheet stock, and a sacrificial/protective layer comprising a sacrificial material; wherein the permeation resistant layer is located between the base layer and the sacrificial/protective layer, and that the base layer is oriented on an exterior of the draped composite feed stock. However, Weisenberg ‘812 teaches a similar method for forming a vessel for storing and/or transporting a gas (para 2, 45), comprising: a composite stock forming a tube structure (para 2, 45) comprising: a base layer including a base material (abstract, para 14, 74), a permeation resistant layer including a permeation resistant material for providing resistance to leakage of gas through the sheet stock (abstract, para 14, 83-84), and a sacrificial/protective layer including a sacrificial material (para 14, 97-98), wherein the permeation resistant layer is located between the base layer and the sacrificial/protective layer (claim 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Weisenberg ‘511 with the teaching of Weisenberg ‘812 in order to provide a tube that is resistant to gas leaking through it during storage and transportation (see Weisenberg ‘812, para 9, 46).
Regarding claim 42, Weisenberg ‘511 as modified teaches progressively welding the seam, thereby providing a growing cylindrical tube (para 41); severing the growing cylindrical tube to form a finished cylindrical tube (para 227); and separating the finished cylindrical tube from the second end of the forming mandrel (para 228, claim 46).
Regarding claim 43, Weisenberg ‘511 as modified does not teach wherein a width of the base layer perpendicular to longitudinal direction is large than width of the permeation resistant layer perpendicular to longitudinal direction and a width of the sacrificial/protective layer perpendicular to longitudinal direction such that a channel is formed between the permeation resistant layer and the permeation resistant layer along the longitudinal axis. However, Weisenberg ‘511 teaches that the base sealing layer may be slightly over-sized 9para 398), wherein the structure may comprise an annulus filled with a tape material (para 188), and wherein fiber-reinforced filaments that extend in the longitudinal direction may be utilized for structural support (para 96). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill int eh art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the relative dimension of each layer of the composite sheet stock in order to provide the vessel with additional structural support.
Regarding claim 44, Weisenberg ‘511 discloses applying a tape in the channel (para 188). Weisenberg ‘511 does not teach the tape is a viscous filler material. However, Weisenberg ‘511 teaches the incorporation of a carbon fiber graphene two (para 185). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a viscous filler material such as graphene through routine experimentation.
Regarding claim 45, Weisenberg ‘511 discloses wherein the tape comprises a material chosen from beta-silicon carbide, Al2O3, Al, Au, graphene, and Cu (para 185).
Regarding claim 46, Weisenberg ‘511 discloses wherein the forming mandrel is cantilevered (para 221).
Regarding claim 47, Weisenberg ‘511 discloses wherein the first end of the forming mandrel is fixed and the second end of the forming mandrel is cantilevered (para 220-221).
Regarding claim 48 and 51, Weisenberg ‘511 as modified teaches heating the composite feed stock during the advancing, the progressively draping, and the progressively forming (para 72, 409, 434).
Regarding claim 49, Weisenberg ‘511 discloses a method for manufacturing a cylindrical tube for storing and/or transporting a gas (para 2), comprising:
Providing a feedstock having first and second long ends extending in a longitudinal direction (para 108, fig, 3),
Forming a circular leading end of the cylindrical tube form the feedstock on a surface of a forming mandrel at a first location near a first end of the forming mandrel (para 20);
Advancing the circular leading end towards a second end of the forming mandrel (para 221);
Progressively draping the feedstock onto the surface of the forming mandrel behind the advancing circular leading end (para 225, 413); and
Progressively forming a seam between the first and second long ends along the longitudinal axis while the feedstock is draped onto the surface of the forming mandrel to form a cylindrical shape (para 410).
Weisenberg ‘511 does not teach the feedstock is a composite sheet stock comprising: a base layer comprising a base material, a permeation resistant layer comprising a permeation resistant material for providing resistance to leakage of gas through the composite sheet stock, the base layer is oriented on an exterior of the draped composite feed stock, and wherein the permeation resistant layer is positioned inside the cylindrical shape. However, Weisenberg ‘812 teaches a similar method for forming a vessel for storing and/or transporting a gas (para 2, 45), comprising: a composite stock forming a tube structure (para 2, 45) comprising: a base layer including a base material (abstract, para 14, 74), and a permeation resistant layer including a permeation resistant material for providing resistance to leakage of gas through the sheet stock (abstract, para 14, 83-84). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Weisenberg ‘511 with the teaching of Weisenberg ‘812 in order to provide a tube that is resistant to gas leaking through it during storage and transportation (see Weisenberg ‘812, para 9, 46).
Regarding claim 50, Weisenberg ‘511 discloses progressively welding the same, thereby providing a growing cylindrical tube (para 410);
Severing the growing cylindrical tube to from a finished cylindrical tube (para 227, claim 46); and
Separating the finished cylindrical tube from the second end of the forming mandrel, wherein the permeation resistant layer is positioned inside the finished cylindrical tube (para 228, claim 46).
Claim(s) 61-62, 67-68 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weisenberg (2024/0066812) in view of Nishiyama et al. (2014/0079913).
Regarding claim 61, Weisenberg discloses a method of forming a vessel for storing and/or transporting a gas (para 2), comprising:
Creating a composite sheet stock (para 74, 83) including a base layer including a base material, wherein the base material is a polyolefin (abstract, para 14, 74), and a permeation resistant layer including a permeation resistant material for providing resistant to leakage of gas through the sheet stock coupled to the base layer (abstract, para 14, para 83-84);
Forming the composite sheet stock into a tube structure (para 2, 45).
Weisenberg does not teach wherein the permeation resistant material includes a metal foil or a metal oxide foil, heating the composite sheet stock, wherein the base material is located on an outer surface of the tube structure; and cooling the tube structure. However, Nishiyama teaches a similar method for processing a multi-layer sheet (abstract, para 1), wherein the sheet may further comprise an aluminum, gold, and/or copper foil (para 263-264, 309, 314), and wherein the sheet may be heated, pressed, and inherently cooled in order to be further processed (para 235, fig. 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Weisenberg with the teaching of Nishiyama in order to provide the sheet stock with improved permeation-resistant and conductive properties (Nishiyama, para 263, 384).
Regarding claim 62, Weisenberg discloses wherein the creating comprises co-extruding the base layer and the permeation resistant layer (abstract, para 14, 83-84).
Regarding claim 67, Weisenberg does not teach wherein a thickness of the permeation resistant layer is between 0.005 inches and 0.125 inches, inclusive. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the thickness of the permeation resistant layer in order to optimize the permeation-resistant property.
Regarding claim 68, Weisenberg does not teach wherein a thickness of the permeation resistant layer is 0.0075 inches. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the thickness of the permeation resistant layer in order to optimize the permeation-resistant property.
Claim(s) 63-65 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weisenberg in view of Nishiyama as applied to claim 61 above, and further in view of Hatakeyama et al.(2020/0307296).
Regarding claim 63, Nishiyama teaches wherein the foil is a metal foil (para 263-264, 309 314). Weisenberg as modified does not teach wherein the polyolefin is MDPE. However, Hatakeyama et al. teaches a similar polymer-sheet (para 1, 7), wherein the sheet(s) may comprise medium-density polyethylene (para 141, 161). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Weisenberg with the teaching of Hatakeyama et al. in order to provide the sheets with additional elastomeric capabilities (Hatakeyama et al., para 143-144).
Regarding claim 64, Nishiyama teaches wherein the metal foil is an aluminum foil, a copper foil, a gold foil, a molybdenum foil, or a mixture thereof (para 263-264, 309, 314).
Regarding claim 65, Weisenberg as modified does not teach wherein the polyolefin is MDPE and the foil is a metal oxide foil. However, Weisenberg teaches the incorporation of alumina (para 12, claim 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a metal oxide foil in order to provide additional permeation resistance. Hatakeyama et al. teaches a similar polymer-sheet (para 1, 7), wherein the sheet(s) may comprise medium-density PETE (para 141, 161). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Weisenberg with the teaching of Hatakeyama et al. in order to provide the sheets with additional elastomeric capabilities (Hatakeyama et al., para 143-144).
Regarding claim 66, Weisenberg does not teach wherein the metal oxide foil is alumna. However, Weisenberg teaches the incorporation of alumina (para 12). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select alumina as the metal oxide foil in order to provide additional permeation resistance.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XUE H LIU whose telephone number is (571)270-5522. The examiner can normally be reached 1PM - 10PM.
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 5702721176. 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.
/X.H.L/Examiner, Art Unit 1742 /CHRISTINA A JOHNSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights