DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 3-5 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.
In claim 3, line 3, it is unclear whether the, “at least two propellant charge molded bodies”, comprise the same propellant charge molded bodies as the, “at least two propellant charge molded bodies”, previously recited in claim 1, line 3?
In claim 3, line 5, it is unclear which layer is being referenced by the limitation, “this layer”?
In claim 4, lines 1-3, the language, “wherein each propellant charge molded body has a cross section and extends with this cross section along a molded body axis”, is not understood.
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 1- 7, 9 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DAICEL CHEM (JP 4520254 B2).
Regarding claim 1, DAICEL CHEM disclose a propellant charge (Fig. 5) for driving a projectile (bullet projectile – paragraph [0027] of the translation), the propellant charge comprising: a shell 60 that outwardly delimits a propellant chamber; and at least two propellant charge molded bodies 50’, which are arranged in the propellant chamber, each of the at least two propellant charge molded bodies 50’ having a plurality of holes 12 (perforations 12 – Figs 2, 6 ) extending next to one another, wherein at least one of the propellant charge molded bodies 50’ has 7, 19 or 37, etc. respective holes extending next to one another (paragraph [0012] of the translation). DAICEL CHEM disclose in paragraph [0011] that the number and size of the holes may be appropriately selected depending on the relationship with the combustion characteristics of the intended propellant.
DAICEL CHEM does not specifically suggest at least 60 respective holes extending next to one another. However, to provide at least 60 holes extending next to one another in at least one of the propellant charge molded bodies 50’, would have been obvious to a POSITA before the effective filing date of the invention, the motivation being to modify the burn rate of the intended propellant comprising the charge molded bodies 50’ in a desired manner.
Regarding claim 2, DAICEL CHEM does not specifically suggest at least 100, at least 200, at least 300 or at least 400, respective holes extending next to one another in the at least one propellant charge molded body. DAICEL CHEM disclose in paragraph [0011] that the number and size of the holes may be appropriately selected depending on the relationship with the combustion characteristics of the intended propellant. To provide any number between 100 to 400 holes extending next to one another in at least one of the propellant charge molded bodies 50’, would have been obvious to a POSITA before the effective filing date of the invention, the motivation being to modify the burn rate of the intended propellant comprising the charge molded bodies 50’ in a desired manner.
Regarding claim 3, DAICEL CHEM discloses that the propellant charge molded bodies 50’ are arranged on top of one another in the propellant chamber to form a plurality of layers (Fig. 5), wherein at least two propellant charge molded bodies 50’ each form a layer, wherein the propellant charge molded bodies 50’ forming each layer are designed such that they are adapted in their entirety to the shape of the propellant chamber (Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 4, DAICEL CHEM discloses that each propellant charge molded body has a cross section and extends along a molded body axis (Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 5, DAICEL CHEM does not clearly disclose that the propellant charge molded bodies have cross sections that differ in shape and/or size. However, to select propellant charge molded bodies that differ in shape and or size would have been obvious to a POSITA before the effective filing date of the invention, the motivation being to efficiently fill any gaps between a contained projectile and the chamber wall of an ammunition cartridge of barrel weapon.
Regarding claim 6, the DAICEL CHEM holes 12 read on the holes recited in this claim.
Regarding claim 7, to change or reduce the hole spacing of DAICAL CHEM holes 12 in a portion of the propellant charge molded body would have been obvious to a POSITA before the effective filing date of the invention, the motivation being to modify the burn rate of that portion of the propellant charge molded body as desired.
Regarding claim 9, DAICEL CHEM discloses a plurality of the propellant charges recited in claim 1 (see the layers of propellant charge molded bodies 50’ in Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 13, DAICEL CHEM disclose a propellant charge (Fig. 5) for driving a projectile (bullet projectile – paragraph [0027] of the translation) but does not discuss the specifics of the barrel weapon intended to be used for propelling the projectile with the propellant charge. Official notice is taken that the use of a plurality of propellant charges in the chamber of a barrel weapon to propel a projectile therefrom is old in the art.
Therefore, in view of the above official notice, it would have been obvious to a POSITA, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use the DAICEL CHEM propellant charge (Fig. 1-5) comprising at least two perforated propellant charge molded bodies, in a barrel weapon to propel a projectile therefrom, because the use of a plurality of propellant charges in such a manner is old in the art.
DAICAL CHEM discloses that at least one of the propellant charge molded bodies 50’ has 7, 19 or 37, etc. respective holes extending next to one another (paragraph [0012] of the translation). DAICEL CHEM disclose in paragraph [0011] that the number and size of the holes may be appropriately selected depending on the relationship with the combustion characteristics of the intended propellant. DAICEL CHEM does not specifically suggest at least 70 respective holes extending next to one another. However, to provide at least 70 holes extending next to one another in at least one of the propellant charge molded bodies 50’, would have been obvious to a POSITA before the effective filing date of the invention, the motivation being to modify the burn rate of the intended propellant comprising the charge molded bodies 50’ in a desired manner.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DAICEL CHEM (JP 4520254 B2) in view of JOHNSTON (WO 2019/213691 A1).
DAICEL CHEM disclose a propellant charge (Fig. 1-5) as discussed above with regard to claim 1. DAICEL CHEM does not specifically disclose that the propellant charge molded bodies are treated such that the holes are partially closed by a substance which reduces the temperature dependence of the combustion rate of the propellant charge molded body.
JOHNSTON (paragraph [0050]) discloses a propellant and a retardant layer 20 (paragraph [0050]) that acts to modify burning of the propellant and can be a burn inhibitor, or a burn rate modifier. In view of JOHNSTON, to treat the perforated propellant charge molded bodies of DAICEL CHEM with a retardant layer would have been obvious to a POSITA before the effective filing date of the invention, the motivation being to modify the burn rate of the propellant as desired.
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DAICEL CHEM (JP 4520254 B2) in view of HAAK et al. (US 6,820,558 B2).
DAICEL CHEM disclose a propellant charge (Fig. 1-5) as discussed above with regard to claim 1.
Regarding claims 10-12, the propellant charge assembly of DAICEL CHEM is intended to propel a bullet (paragraph [0027] of the translation).
HAAK et al. disclose an ammunition 1 comprising a sabot projectile 4 and a propellant charge 2 (Fig. 1) for propelling the sabot penetrator projectile 4, the propellant charge comprising modules 6 comprising 3000 perforations 13 (Fig. 4) to increase the progressiveness of the propellant charge.
In view of the teaching of HAAK et al., to use the DAICEL CHEM propellant charge unit (Fig. 5), comprising layers of perforated propellant charge molded bodies, as the propellant in an ammunition comprising a sabot projectile or penetrator, would have been obvious to a POSITA before the effective filing date of the invention, the motivation being that HAAK et al. teaches the use of perforated propellant modules in ammunition comprising a sabot penetrator.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See the attached PTO-FORM 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES S BERGIN whose telephone number is (571)272-6872. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 5am.
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, Troy Chambers can be reached at 571-272-6874. 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.
/JAMES S BERGIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3641
Prosecution Insights