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 § 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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2,5-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by US 20120098212 (212’).
212’ discloses all of the limitations in the claims below:
1. A vapor seal element comprising: at least one substantially planar base body 13 having a first surface and second surface and at least one reinforcing member (para 11, 12) installed as a first layer, and at least one seal 37 arranged on the first surface of the base body in axial alignment with the at least one reinforcing member as a second layer on the base body (Clearly understood from Fig. 3), wherein the base body with the at least one reinforcing member and the at least one seal positioned thereon is configured as a one-piece (sheet like material Para 10), self-supporting panel with the base body, the reinforcing member and the seal being formed from a thermoplastic material (para 11, elastomer bonding para 44).
2. The vapor seal element according to claim 1, wherein the thermoplastic material is configured as a fiber-reinforced thermoplastic material (abstract and Para 11-12).
5. The vapor seal element according to claim 1, wherein the reinforcing member and the seal are materially connected to the base body by one of a thermoplastic welding, an adhesive bonding, or a co-consolidating thermoforming (disclosed in para 47, 48, 52).
6-7. The vapor seal element according to claim 1, wherein the base body has at least one perforation and the at least one reinforcing member is arranged in a region of the perforation wherein the at least one reinforcing member is arranged fully or partially enclosing the perforation (Drill holes with reinforcement – Para 46-53).
8. The vapor seal element according to claim 1, wherein the reinforcing member is configured as a rail- or bar-shaped fastening means having a longitudinal extension with respect to a surface of the base body (Para 45-47 – perimeter holding or counter-holding profiles are elongated fastening rails).
9. The vapor seal element according to claim 1, wherein the base body is provided as a pre-formed or pre-shaped base body (Sheet like material is pre-manufactured before installation.
10. The vapor seal assembly comprising a plurality of vapor seal elements according to claim 1, wherein the vapor seal elements are interconnected or connectable to form a self-supporting panel-like assembly structure (inherent in 212, as the reference uses multiple hose connected segments and multiple regions).
11. A vehicle comprising at least one vapor seal element according to claim 1 (Para 1-4 – aircraft wingbox).
12. A vehicle comprising at least one vapor seal assembly according to claim 8. (Para 1-4 – aircraft wingbox).
13. The vehicle according to claim 12, wherein the vapor seal assembly is formed from a plurality of vapor seal elements prior to or during an installation in the vehicle. (Para 1-4 – aircraft wingbox).
14. The vehicle according to claim 12, wherein the vehicle is an aircraft. (Para 1-4 – aircraft wingbox).
15. The vehicle according to claim 14, wherein the vapor seal assembly is positioned below a center wing box of the aircraft. (Para 1-4 – aircraft wingbox).
16-20. The rejections above are applied mutatis mutandis to the limitations of the claims 16-20 as the method claims each step is inherent from manufacturing implied by 212’
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) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20120098212 (212’).
3. 212’ does not explicitly teach the thermoplastic families of claim 3. The vapor seal element according to claim 1, wherein the thermoplastic material is selected from the group consisting of polyphenylene sulfide (PPS), polyetherimide (PEI), polyaryl ether ketone (PAEK), low-melt polyaryl ether ketone (LM-PAEK), polyether ether ketone (PEEK) or polyether ketone ketone (PEKK). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use the materials in claim 3, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In this case it would be obvious to optimize for temperature and fuel resistance.
4. 212’ discloses thermoplastic materials but is silent to having the same material The vapor seal element according to claim 3, wherein the reinforcing member, the seal and the base body each are comprised of the same thermoplastic material or of compatible thermoplastic materials. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use the same material in claim 4, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In this case it would be obvious for bonding purposes and aircraft flammability certification.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 2/2/2026, with respect to claims 1 and 16 have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the reference does not teach the reinforcing member on a side of the base 13. The examiner respectfully disagrees and notes the disclosure discloses that reinforcing member to be bonded in and/or on the sheet-like material 13. Applicant further argues that the seal is not in axial alignment with the reinforcing member. The Examiner also respectfully disagrees with the applicant and believes that axial alignment is a broad term and the reference clearly shows elements in line using the broadest reasonable interpretation, wherein the elements are in the same corresponding axial region (in alignment).
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 JUSTIN M BENEDIK whose telephone number is (571)270-7824. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00-3:00.
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, Joshua Huson can be reached at 571-270-5301. 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.
/JUSTIN M. BENEDIK/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3642
/JUSTIN M BENEDIK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642