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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Randall (US 9683545).
Regarding claims 1 and 15, Randall discloses a method of manufacturing a half shell of a wind turbine rotor blade, the method comprising: providing a mold for the half shell (Col. 1, lines 14-23); placing a fiber layer into the mold (Col. 4, Lines 44-53); placing a stack of prefabricated pultruded planks and a core element on top of the fiber layer (Col. 1, lines 14-32 and Col. 4, Lines 44-53), wherein the core element has an end face, the end face having at least two projections being integrally formed with the core element (Edge of foam layer 4 abutting stack 3, the foam lands above and below the mid-thickness void 11 (integral to foam layer 4)), and wherein the core element is arranged with the end face on a lateral side of the stack such that via the at least two projections a gap is formed between the core element and the stack (foam side edges abut stack 3 and the gap is the void 11 at the abutment; two flanking lands bound the void so that the gap exists therein); and, supplying resin into the mold during a vacuum infusion process (Col. 4, Line 54 – Col. 5, Line 5). Randall discloses two half shells bonded together to form the wind turbine rotor blade; and, each of said two half shells being manufactured by the method recited above(“this arrangement, each half-shell can be formed separately and cured by heating, and then the two cured shell halves are joined together with adhesive”).
Regarding claim 3, Randall discloses the method according to claim 1 above. Randall further discloses in said placing a stack of prefabricated pultruded planks and a core element on top of the fiber layer, the stack of planks is provided as a plurality of individual planks stacked on top of each other (Col. 3, Lines 40-43).
Regarding claim 14, Randall discloses a core element for a half shell of a wind turbine rotor blade, the core element comprising an end face, the end face being configured to be arranged at a lateral side of a stack of prefabricated pultruded planks, and the end face having at least two projections (Col. 3, lines 57-62, Col. 4, lines 33-53, Col. 5, Lines 52-54; the foam layer is a core element and side edge is arranged abutting the pultruded stack 3 and that edge presents two projecting lands flanking the mid-thickness void 11).
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Randall (US 9683545) in view of Livingston (US 20180372065).
Randall discloses the method according to claim 1 above. Randall discloses a spar cap formed of a stack of pultruded strips (Col. 3, lines 40-43).
Randall fails to explicitly teach in said placing a stack of prefabricated pultruded planks and a core element on top of the fiber layer, the stack of planks is provided as a prefabricated, single component.
Livingston teaches consolidating the pultruded planks into a single prefabricated spar-cap component (Paragraphs 4 and 44; the plates are co-bonded in a “single process”).
Because Randall discloses the spar cap is formed of a stack of pultruded strips, and because Livingston teaches that the spar cap can be provided as a stack of planks be provided as a prefabricated single component, it therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Randall to placing a stack of prefabricated pultruded planks and a core element on top of the fiber layer, the stack of planks is provided as a prefabricated, single component as taught by Livingston for the purposes of simplifying handling and improving placement accuracy of the stack in the mold.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Randall (US 9683545) in view of Smith (GB 2530072).
Randall discloses the method according to claim 1 above. Randall further discloses the core layers and stacks are placed into the mold on the fiber layer.
Randall fails to teach the stack of planks and the core element together form a prefabricated component being placed into the mold onto the fiber layer.
Smith teaches pre-assembling the fiber layer and the foam core panels into a single handling unit (“kit”) that is placed into the mold as one component (Page 8, lines 13-19, Page 7, lines 15-22).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Randall such that the stack of planks and the core element together form a prefabricated component being placed into the mold onto the fiber layer as taught by Smith for the purposes of reducing the number of in-mold placement steps and maintaining relative alignment of the components.
Claims 5-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Randall (US 9683545) in view of Fagerstrom (US 11884046).
Randall discloses the method according to claim 1 above.
Randall fails to teach each of the at least two projections has a thickness between 1 mm to 2 mm from the end face, the thickness being measured in a direction normal to the end face, each of the at least two projections has a thickness between 1.3 millimeters to 2 millimeters from the end face, the thickness being measured in a direction normal to the end face, and wherein each of the at least two projections has a thickness of 1.5 millimeters from the end face, the thickness being measured in a direction normal to the end face, the at least two projections has a width along a spanwise direction of the core element of at least 15, 20, or 25 millimeters, at least one of the at least two projections has a trapezoidal-shaped cross section, viewed in a plane running parallel to a main extension direction of the core element, the at least two projections each have an edge; and said edges of said at least two projections are rounded, and the at least two projections have a length corresponding to a height of the end face of the core element.
Fagerstrom teaches the geometry of resin flow channels formed in a structural foam sandwich core consolidated by resin infusion, expressly to distribute resin and reduce waste and weight. The grooves (115, 116, 215, 216) are cut into the core surfaces and each foam land between two adjacent grooves stands out of the groove floor by the groove depth. Each of the at least two projections has a thickness between 1 mm to 2 mm from the end face, the thickness being measured in a direction normal to the end face, each of the at least two projections has a thickness between 1.3 millimeters to 2 millimeters from the end face, the thickness being measured in a direction normal to the end face, and wherein each of the at least two projections has a thickness of 1.5 millimeters from the end face (Col. 9, lines 33-37). The at least two projections has a width along a spanwise direction of the core element of at least 15, 20, or 25 millimeters (Col. 9, Lines 38-45). Fagerstrom further teaches that the grooves can include a triangular, rectangular, rounded, or combination of a rectangular and a rounded groove profile, and a combination of a rectangular and a triangular groove profile (Col. 9, Lines 16-31), said edges of said at least two projections are rounded (Col. 9, Lines 16-31), and the at least two projections have a length corresponding to a height of the end face of the core element (Col. 6, Line 48 to Col. 7, Line 3; additionally, the geometry can be tuned and optimized depending on materials and requirements of the components).
Because Randall and Fagerstrom both are directed to resin infusion of structural foam sandwich cores with similar materials, and both Randall and Fagerstrom form a resin gap are the core stack seam and Fagerstrom teaches that the dimensions can be adjusted in terms of different shapes and combinations thereof, and the range of dimensions overlaps with the claimed range(s), it therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Randall such that the at least two projections has a thickness between 1 mm to 2 mm from the end face, the thickness being measured in a direction normal to the end face, each of the at least two projections has a thickness between 1.3 millimeters to 2 millimeters from the end face, the thickness being measured in a direction normal to the end face, and wherein each of the at least two projections has a thickness of 1.5 millimeters from the end face, the thickness being measured in a direction normal to the end face, the at least two projections has a width along a spanwise direction of the core element of at least 15, 20, or 25 millimeters, at least one of the at least two projections has a trapezoidal-shaped cross section, viewed in a plane running parallel to a main extension direction of the core element, the at least two projections each have an edge; and said edges of said at least two projections are rounded, and the at least two projections have a length corresponding to a height of the end face of the core element as taught by Fagerstrom for the purposes of controlling resin flow through the core/stack seam to avoid dry spots while limiting resin-rich weight.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN D SEABE whose telephone number is (571)272-4961. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00-5:30.
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, Nathaniel Wiehe can be reached at 571-272-8648. 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 D SEABE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights