Appeal No. 2001-0096
Application 09/301,891
Next, we turn to the claims of Pannell. Claim 6 in particular describes a bonded
composite structure having at least two fiber-reinforced composite elements arranged to
define a bond line along the interface between the elements, a composite strip of cured
resin having X-Y fiber reinforcement and Z-pin reinforcement, the strip being positioned
along the bond line, and bonds between the elements and the strip along the interface,
the bonds including Z-pin reinforcement resulting from the penetration of the Z-pins in
the strip into each bond.
We agree with the Examiner’s analysis that this disclosure includes all the
elements of pending claim 13, save only the disclosure of each element being a
laminate having a plurality of plies, each ply having fiber reinforcement defining an X-Y
plane, and an areal density of Z-direction reinforcement of from 0.5% to 2.0% in the
bondline.1
We then turn to Alston. At column 5, lines 61-62, a simulated repair is made
using 16-ply K-III B thermoplastic polyimide flat composite coupons reinforced with
graphite fiber. Pins are inserted in the patterns of Figure 3 and Figure 6. See also
claim 5 of Alston (composite laminate), claim 14 (composite structure is a plurality of
plies of cured and consolidated fiber-reinforced resin matrix composite material), and
claims 15, 16, 17, 19, and 20, element (b).
1 Although not argued individually by the Appellant, we note claim 14’s subject matter (discrete fibers) is
disclosed by Pannell’s claim 9 (carbon fibers); claim 15’s extension of Z-direction reinforcement entirely
through the strip into both elements by Pannell’s claim 3, element (c); claim 16’s metal susceptor by
Pannell’s claim 6; and claim 17’s carbon fiber by Pannell’s claim 9. As previously noted, these claims
will stand or fall based upon the disposition of claim 13.
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007