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 .
Applicant’s Submission of a Response
Applicant’s submission of response was received on 01/12/2026. Presently claims 1-11 are pending. Claims 12-16 are canceled.
Response to Arguments
Specification, and drawing objections have been withdrawn based upon applicant’s amendments. Newly submitted drawings are accepted.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 2-3, filed 01/12/2026, with respect to claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. However, a new 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection is made in light of Applicant’s amendments (see rejection below).
Applicant’s amendments necessitated a new ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 112(b) and this action has therefore been made final.
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.
Claim 4 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 4 is indefinite because the claim recites in lines 6-7 that the sleeve is affixed to and covers the back end surface of the core member. However, lines 16-17 of claim further recites that the peel ply layer is against the back end surface. It is unclear how both the sleeve and the peel ply layer (as distinguished in the claim language) can be against the back end surface of the core member because the claim language, as stated above, recites that each are affixed/against to the back end surface. It is unclear whether if one or the other of the sleeve or the peel layer are indeed against the back surface of the core member. Due to the ambiguity and lack of clarity of the limitation, the metes and bounds cannot be determined, which renders the claim indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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 and 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Feigl (U.S. 10,087,911).
Regarding claim 1, Feigl discloses a method of manufacturing a wind turbine rotor blade part (Col. 1, lines 5-10), the method comprising:
providing a placeholder (30, which is also equivalent to 300 in Fig. 5) including a core member (35) and a sleeve (32), wherein the core member (35) defines a longitudinal direction (longitudinal direction extending from left to right in Fig. 2a) and includes a circumferential surface (i.e., outer circumferential surface of 300 shown in Fig. 5), a front end (i.e., front end labeled “A” in Fig. 2a’ below), and a back end (“B”, Fig. 2a’), and the sleeve (32) includes a peel ply layer (42, Col. 4, lines 39-45), wherein the sleeve (32) covers the circumferential surface (as exemplarily shown in Fig. 5 and Fig. 2a) and the back end surface of the core member (i.e., the sleeve 32 extends to and covers the back end of the core member 35 as shown in Fig. 2a) and is affixed to the back end surface of the core member (as shown in Fig. 2a, the sleeve 32 is positioned and affixed to the back end surface at region “B” of the core member 35 as shown in Fig. 2a’);
PNG
media_image1.png
376
678
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2a’
arranging the placeholder together with reinforcing fibers and a matrix material in a mold (mold 100, Col. 4, lines 60-67, fibers with resin, Col. 4, lines 39-48); and,
curing of the matrix material (curing, Col. 4, lines 40-47), so that the placeholder is embedded in a fiber-reinforced composite material (inserts 300 embedded within the composite material blade structure as shown in Fig. 5, Col. 5, lines 10-28 and Col. 1, lines 15-25).
Regarding claim 3, Feigl discloses wherein providing the placeholder (30/300) includes wrapping the peel ply layer about the circumferential surface of the core member (the layer 42 surrounds and covers the circumferential surface of the core member 35 and is therein analogous to the wrapping the layer 42 about the circumferential surface of the core member 35, as shown in Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 4, Feigl discloses a method of manufacturing a wind turbine rotor blade part (Col. 1, lines 5-10), the method comprising:
providing a placeholder (30, which is also equivalent to 300 in Fig. 5) including a core member (35) and a sleeve (32), wherein the core member (35) defines a longitudinal direction (longitudinal direction extending from left to right in Fig. 2a) and includes a circumferential surface (i.e., outer circumferential surface of 300 shown in Fig. 5), a front end (i.e., front end labeled “A” in Fig. 2a’), and a back end (“B”, Fig. 2a’), and the sleeve (32) includes a peel ply layer (42, Col. 4, lines 39-45), wherein the sleeve (32) covers the circumferential surface (as exemplarily shown in Fig. 5 and Fig. 2a) and the back end surface of the core member (i.e., the sleeve 32 extends to and covers the back end of the core member 35 as shown in Fig. 2a) and is affixed to the back end surface of the core member (as shown in Fig. 2a, the sleeve 32 is positioned and affixed to the back end surface at region “B” of the core member 35 as shown in Fig. 2a’);
PNG
media_image1.png
376
678
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2a’
arranging the placeholder together with reinforcing fibers and a matrix material in a mold (mold 100, Col. 4, lines 60-67, fibers with resin, Col. 4, lines 39-48); and,
curing of the matrix material (curing, Col. 4, lines 40-47), so that the placeholder is embedded in a fiber-reinforced composite material (inserts 300 embedded within the composite material blade structure as shown in Fig. 5, Col. 5, lines 10-28 and Col. 1, lines 15-25);
wherein said providing the placeholder (30/300) includes wrapping the peel ply layer about the circumferential surface of the core member (the layer 42 surrounds and covers the circumferential surface of the core member 35 and is therein analogous to the wrapping the layer 42 about the circumferential surface of the core member 35, as shown in Fig. 5); and,
wherein said providing the placeholder further includes folding a section the peel ply layer that extends along the longitudinal direction beyond the back end of the core member and against the back end surface (as shown in Fig. 2a, the peel ply layer 42 includes a folded section (i.e., a corner) that extends along the longitudinal direction beyond the back end “B” of the core member 35 and the peel ply layer 42 along with the sleeve 32 are against the back end surface “B” of the core member 35).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 5, and 9-11 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.
Regarding claim 2, Feigl fails to disclose or suggest wherein providing the placeholder includes applying a release agent to at least the circumferential surface of the core member.
Regarding claim 5, Feigl fails to disclose or suggest of the process of inserting the core member into the sleeve. The core member 35 is covered with the sleeve 32 and the peel ply layer 42, and therein the core member 35 is not inserted into the sleeve (Col. 4, lines 35-47).
Claims 6-8 are allowable over the prior art of record.
Regarding claim 6, the prior art of record fails to disclose or suggest wherein the sleeve is affixed to the back end of the core member via a clamping element exerting a clamping force on the peel ply layer of the sleeve.
Claims 7-8 would be allowable due to their dependency on claim 6.
Regarding claim 9, Feigl fails to disclose or suggest of connecting a pulling tool to a fastening element of the core member.
Regarding claim 10, Feigl fails to disclose or suggest of pulling the core member out of the fiber-reinforced composite material along the longitudinal direction towards the front end surface, such that the sleeve is peeled off the fiber-reinforced composite material and a cavity is formed in the fiber-reinforced composite material.
Claim 11 would be allowable due to its dependency on claim 10.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC J ZAMORA ALVAREZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7928. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 am- 5:00 pm EST alternating Fridays off.
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, COURTNEY HEINLE can be reached at (571)270-3508. 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.
/ERIC J ZAMORA ALVAREZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745 02/13/2026