DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
This is in response to Application filed on July 3, 2025 in which claims 1-10 are presented for examination.
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 4-8 and 10 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “the fabric”, which is indefinite since it is unclear as to what “the fabric” is referring to. Claim 1 recites a first fabric and a second fabric, therefore is the fabric recited in claim 4 referring to the first fabric, the second fabric or a an additional fabric being introduced in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “the fabric”, which is indefinite since it is unclear as to what “the fabric” is referring to. Claim 1 recites a first fabric and a second fabric, therefore is the fabric recited in claim 4 referring to the first fabric, the second fabric or a an additional fabric being introduced in the claim.
Claim 8 recites “wherein the woven fabric is formed by weaving the first element and the second element with plain weave, satin weave, or twill weave”, which is indefinite since it is unclear as to how the second element is being woven with the first element, since the second element is recited in claim 1 as being “a dissolvable fiber”, in which the second element is dissolved. As recited, there is no additional structure recited for the second material, making it unclear as to how the dissolvable fiber, which appears to be a resin (based on applicant’s Specification) is woven with the first element. For purposes of examination, examiner is interpreting the limitation as best understood.
Claim 10 recites “wherein the first element and the second element are twisted to form the bundled wire”, which is indefinite since it is unclear as to how the second element is twisted with the first element, since the second element is recited in claim 1 as being “a dissolvable fiber”, in which the second element is dissolved. As recited, there is no additional structure recited for the second material, making it unclear as to how the dissolvable fiber, which appears to be a resin (based on applicant’s Specification) is twisted with the first element. For purposes of examination, examiner is interpreting the limitation as best understood.
All dependent claims are rejected for depending from a rejected base claim.
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 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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boan et al. (4,812,854)[Boan] in view of Alzeer et al. (2018/0343898)[Alzeer].
Regarding claim 1, teaches, A method for manufacturing a mesh structure for an antenna reflection mirror, an electromagnetic shield, or a waveguide tube comprising: providing a bundled wire that comprises a first element, and a second element, the first element being a wire material, or a combination of wire materials, and the second element being a dissolvable fiber; making a first fabric with the bundled wire; dissolving the second element to make a second fabric; and making the mesh structure for the antenna reflection mirror, the electromagnetic shield, or the waveguide tube with the second fabric (“In order to fully appreciate the improvement provided by the use of bundled graphite fibers in the tricot knit mesh configuration of FIG. 2, it is initially useful to examine the make-up of the metallic structure of the mesh material disclosed in the above-referenced Boan et al patent. Referring to FIG. 3, which shows a cross-sectional view of an individual gold-plated tungsten fiber employed in such a tricot knit mesh, each individual strand of the mesh is comprised of a tungsten center conductor 20 surrounded by a gold layer 22. The diameter of the tungsten center conductor 20 may be on the order of 0.4-1.5 mils. An understrike layer 21 of gold, copper, silver or a combination of these metals, having a thickness on the order 5 microinches, may be coated on the outer surface of the tungsten center conductor 20.”, Col. 3 ln. 35-49, “More particularly, with reference to FIG. 4, there is shown a cross-sectional illustration of a portion of a bundle of cladded graphite fibers 30, each fiber having a cladding layer 31 formed of a metallic or organic material, so as to provide elasticity to what is otherwise an extremely brittle filament. An individual graphite filament, regardless of its diameter, is inherently brittle and has only a limited bend radius. Coating each of the individual fibers with a material that has an elastic, stress-absorbing property, such as an organic layer of polyurethane, silicone, epoxy, or acryllic on the order of 5-250 microinches thickness, or a metallic layer of gold, silver, rhodium, platinum, palladium or alloys thereof having a thickness on the order of 5-100 microinches, permits the resulting cladded filament to be subjected to the radial bend stresses that the individual graphite filaments themselves cannot tolerate.”, Col. 4 ln. 6-22, “In its knitted form, the tricot antenna mesh has the same configuration as the metallic knitted mesh, corresponding to the multiple loop configuration illustrated in FIG. 2. However, unlike the individual gold-plated tungsten wires of which the tricot knit mesh antenna filaments describes in the abovereferenced patent are formed, the strand loops of the knit mesh of the present invention are comprised of multiple strands of extremely fine plated graphite filaments”, Col. 4 ln. 52-60, “After the tricot knit mesh antenna material has been knit, the cladding material that surrounds the individual graphite filaments may be removed by heat (e.g. burning) or by chemically dissolving the cladding. Removal of the cladding does not result in breakage of the graphite fibers, since the fibers have been bundled and woven to a new configuration without the application of destructive stress and shear forces to the filaments (absorbed by the cladding layers). The resulting knit mesh graphite antenna material is made up of bundled fibers which now possesses a configuration (multiple loops of the tricot knit mesh) that will behave physically with the intended displacement inherently possessed by the loops of a tricot knit mesh, so that the intended geometry of the antenna made with such material is retained, even in the presence of substantial thermal differential inputs.”, Col. 4-5 ln. 65-13, therefore, A method for manufacturing a mesh structure for an antenna reflection mirror, an electromagnetic shield, or a waveguide tube comprising: providing a bundled wire (“bundle of cladded graphite fibers 30”) that comprises a first element, and a second element, the first element being a wire material, or a combination of wire materials (see Col. 3 ln. 35-49), and the second element being a dissolvable fiber (31); making a first fabric with the bundled wire;dissolving the second element to make a second fabric; and making the mesh structure for the antenna reflection mirror, the electromagnetic shield, or the waveguide tube with the second fabric (“After the tricot knit mesh antenna material has been knit, the cladding material that surrounds the individual graphite filaments may be removed by heat (e.g. burning) or by chemically dissolving the cladding”), figures 1-4).
Boan fails to teach, the first element being a zirconium copper wire, a stainless steel wire, or a combination of zirconium copper wire and stainless steel wire.
Alzeer teaches, the first element being a zirconium copper wire, a stainless steel wire, or a combination of zirconium copper wire and stainless steel wire (“the conveyor belt, or portion thereof may be a metal having apertures or a metal net, mesh or woven screen material to allow UV light to pass therethrough. A metal conveyor belt may be steel, stainless steel, aluminum, copper, and may consists of or comprise a metal that is natural antimicrobial including, but not limited to, titanium, cobalt, nickel, copper, zinc, zirconium, molybdenum, tin, and lead.”, [0006]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide first element of Boan as a zirconium copper wire, a stainless steel wire, or a combination of zirconium copper wire and stainless steel wire as taught by Armstrong to in order to provide a metal mesh with a material that has high electrical and thermal conductivity with high mechanical strength, and resistance to wear, which are properties of zirconium copper.
Regarding claim 2, the combined references teach, wherein the dissolvable fiber is water soluble, and the dissolving step includes immersing the first fabric in water (Boan, “After the tricot knit mesh antenna material has been knit, the cladding material that surrounds the individual graphite filaments may be removed by heat (e.g. burning) or by chemically dissolving the cladding. Removal of the cladding does not result in breakage of the graphite fibers, since the fibers have been bundled and woven to a new configuration without the application of destructive stress and shear forces to the filaments (absorbed by the cladding layers). The resulting knit mesh graphite antenna material is made up of bundled fibers which now possesses a configuration (multiple loops of the tricot knit mesh) that will behave physically with the intended displacement inherently possessed by the loops of a tricot knit mesh, so that the intended geometry of the antenna made with such material is retained, even in the presence of substantial thermal differential inputs.”, Col. 4-5 ln. 65-13, therefore, wherein 31 is water soluble, and the dissolving step includes immersing the first fabric in water).
Regarding claim 3, the combined references teach, wherein the second element is made of a material (Boan, “each fiber having a cladding layer 31 formed of a metallic or organic material, so as to provide elasticity to what is otherwise an extremely brittle filament. An individual graphite filament, regardless of its diameter, is inherently brittle and has only a limited bend radius. Coating each of the individual fibers with a material that has an elastic, stress-absorbing property, such as an organic layer of polyurethane, silicone, epoxy, or acrylic”, Col. 4 ln. 9-16).
Regarding limitation “wherein the second element is made of a material selected from the group consisting of a resol-type phenol resin, a methylolated urea (urea) resin, a methylolated melamine resin, polyvinyl alcohol, polyethylene oxide, polyacrylamide, and carboxymethyl cellulose”, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select the second element of Boan as being selected from the group consisting of a resol-type phenol resin, a methylolated urea (urea) resin, a methylolated melamine resin, polyvinyl alcohol, polyethylene oxide, polyacrylamide, and carboxymethyl cellulose, as claimed, since it is within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a preferred material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. See MPEP 2144.07. In this case, Boan discloses the second element as being removed by being chemically dissolved, therefore, by selecting a material from the group of resol-type phenol resin, a methylolated urea (urea) resin, a methylolated melamine resin, polyvinyl alcohol, polyethylene oxide, polyacrylamide, and carboxymethyl cellulose, provides a material that is water soluble, maintains the ability of the second material of Boan to be chemically dissolved.
Regarding claim 4, the combined references teach, wherein the fabric is knitted fabric (Boan, “After the tricot knit mesh antenna material has been knit, the cladding material that surrounds the individual graphite filaments may be removed by heat (e.g. burning) or by chemically dissolving the cladding. Removal of the cladding does not result in breakage of the graphite fibers, since the fibers have been bundled and woven to a new configuration without the application of destructive stress and shear forces to the filaments (absorbed by the cladding layers). The resulting knit mesh graphite antenna material is made up of bundled fibers which now possesses a configuration (multiple loops of the tricot knit mesh) that will behave physically with the intended displacement inherently possessed by the loops of a tricot knit mesh, so that the intended geometry of the antenna made with such material is retained, even in the presence of substantial thermal differential inputs.”, Col. 4-5 ln. 65-13, therefore, the fabric is a knitted fabric).
Regarding claim 5, the combined references teach, wherein the knitted fabric is made with tricot stitch, knit stitch, stockinette stitch, double atlas stitch, or single satin stitch (Boan, “After the tricot knit mesh antenna material has been knit, the cladding material that surrounds the individual graphite filaments may be removed by heat (e.g. burning) or by chemically dissolving the cladding. Removal of the cladding does not result in breakage of the graphite fibers, since the fibers have been bundled and woven to a new configuration without the application of destructive stress and shear forces to the filaments (absorbed by the cladding layers). The resulting knit mesh graphite antenna material is made up of bundled fibers which now possesses a configuration (multiple loops of the tricot knit mesh) that will behave physically with the intended displacement inherently possessed by the loops of a tricot knit mesh, so that the intended geometry of the antenna made with such material is retained, even in the presence of substantial thermal differential inputs.”, Col. 4-5 ln. 65-13, therefore, wherein the knitted fabric is made with tricot stitch).
Regarding claim 6, the combined references teach, wherein the making the mesh structure for the antenna reflection mirror with the second fabric includes selecting a size of a knitting width of the first fabric according to the wavelength of the radio waves transmitted and received by the antenna reflection mirror (Boan, “After the tricot knit mesh antenna material has been knit, the cladding material that surrounds the individual graphite filaments may be removed by heat (e.g. burning) or by chemically dissolving the cladding. Removal of the cladding does not result in breakage of the graphite fibers, since the fibers have been bundled and woven to a new configuration without the application of destructive stress and shear forces to the filaments (absorbed by the cladding layers). The resulting knit mesh graphite antenna material is made up of bundled fibers which now possesses a configuration (multiple loops of the tricot knit mesh) that will behave physically with the intended displacement inherently possessed by the loops of a tricot knit mesh, so that the intended geometry of the antenna made with such material is retained, even in the presence of substantial thermal differential inputs.”, Col. 4-5 ln. 65-13, therefore, wherein the making the mesh structure for the antenna reflection mirror with the second fabric includes selecting a size of a knitting width of the first fabric according to the wavelength of the radio waves transmitted and received by the antenna reflection mirror).
Regarding claim 7, the combined references teach, wherein the fabric (Boan, “After the tricot knit mesh antenna material has been knit, the cladding material that surrounds the individual graphite filaments may be removed by heat (e.g. burning) or by chemically dissolving the cladding.”, Col. 4 ln. 65-68, therefore, while the fabric is disclosed as being a knit).
Regarding limitation “wherein the fabric is woven fabric”, Boan discloses, “Unfortunately, conventionally woven mesh structures suffer from a significant problem of high in-plane mechanical stiffness, that can manifest itself through a number of characteristics which can degrade antenna performance, including difficulty in holding surface contour manufacturing tolerances, difficulty in maintaining tension in the surface resulting from thermoelastic effects and distortion of structural support members upon which the antenna mesh is mounted (also resulting from thermoelastic effects on the mesh). As system operating frequencies continue to increase, the stiffness problem becomes more pronounced, since stiffness is inversely proportional to antenna mesh hole size which, in turn, must be made smaller to maintain RF gain.”, Col. 1 ln. 20-33, here, Boan discloses that the fabric is capable of being a woven fabric, in which the woven fabric is used for making a mesh radio wave antenna reflector. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the fabric of Boan as being a woven fabric, as claimed, since it is within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. See MPEP 2144.07. In this case, Boan discloses the use of a woven fabric for a mesh radio wave antenna reflector, therefore, by using a woven fabric for the mesh radio wave antenna reflector, maintains the use of the mesh structure if Boan.
Regarding claim 8, the combined references teach, the woven fabric (see above).
Regarding limitation “wherein the woven fabric is formed by weaving the first element and the second element with plain weave, satin weave, or twill weave”, Boan discloses, “Unfortunately, conventionally woven mesh structures suffer from a significant problem of high in-plane mechanical stiffness, that can manifest itself through a number of characteristics which can degrade antenna performance, including difficulty in holding surface contour manufacturing tolerances, difficulty in maintaining tension in the surface resulting from thermoelastic effects and distortion of structural support members upon which the antenna mesh is mounted (also resulting from thermoelastic effects on the mesh). As system operating frequencies continue to increase, the stiffness problem becomes more pronounced, since stiffness is inversely proportional to antenna mesh hole size which, in turn, must be made smaller to maintain RF gain.”, Col. 1 ln. 20-33, here, Boan discloses that the fabric is capable of being a woven fabric, in which the woven fabric is used for making a mesh radio wave antenna reflector. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the woven fabric of Boan as weaving the first element and the second element with plain weave, satin weave, or twill weave, as claimed, since it is within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a process of weaving on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. See MPEP 2144.07. In this case, Boan discloses the use of a woven fabric for a mesh radio wave antenna reflector, therefore, by using a weave of plain weave, satin weave, or twill weave for the woven fabric which is used to make the mesh radio wave antenna reflector, maintains the use of the mesh structure of Boan. Additionally, plain weave, satin weave, or twill weave are common weaving structures.
Regarding claim 9, the combined references teach, wherein the zirconium copper wire and the stainless steel wire are plated wires (Boan, “For purposes of the present invention, metal-plated graphite filaments, such as those commercially available in 6,000 tows or bundles from American Cyanamid Corporation may be employed. The 6,000 filaments per bundle size is, from a practical standpoint, too large to be successfully knitted in a commercial tricot knitting machine.”, Col. 4 ln. 23-29, Alzeer, “the conveyor belt, or portion thereof may be a metal having apertures or a metal net, mesh or woven screen material to allow UV light to pass therethrough. A metal conveyor belt may be steel, stainless steel, aluminum, copper, and may consists of or comprise a metal that is natural antimicrobial including, but not limited to, titanium, cobalt, nickel, copper, zinc, zirconium, molybdenum, tin, and lead.”, [0006], therefore, wherein the zirconium copper wire and the stainless steel wire are plated wires).
Regarding claim 10, the combined references teach, wherein the first element and the second element are twisted to form the bundled wire (Boan, “In order to fully appreciate the improvement provided by the use of bundled graphite fibers in the tricot knit mesh configuration of FIG. 2, it is initially useful to examine the make-up of the metallic structure of the mesh material disclosed in the above-referenced Boan et al patent.”, Col. 3 ln. 35-40, “In their commercially sold form, the 6,000 plated filament bundles are bunched together in the manner of a bird's nest, but with relative movement among individual fibers being afforded, are separated by gathering portions of the nested bundle together along the length of the bundle and removing a reduced number filament tow.”, Col. 4 ln. 31-35, “After the tricot knit mesh antenna material has been knit, the cladding material that surrounds the individual graphite filaments may be removed by heat (e.g. burning) or by chemically dissolving the cladding.”, Col. 4 ln. 65-68, therefore, wherein the first element and the second element are twisted to form the bundled wire).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
1. 3,855,598 by Keller discloses a mesh reflector for radio waves.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JILLIAN PIERORAZIO whose telephone number is (571)270-0553. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-4:30.
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, Clinton Ostrup can be reached at 571-272-5559. 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.
/Jillian K Pierorazio/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights