Appeal No. 2001-0096
Application 09/301,891
Other than the incorrect statement that “Alston does not have two elements, each
of which includes a plurality of plies” (Reply Brief, page 5, lines 12-13), Appellant has
not provided any arguments why this disclosure does not teach that it is conventional to
use elements which are multi-ply laminates having X-Y reinforcement in composite
bonded systems.
We therefore see no error in the Examiner’s utilization of Alston to show the
conventionality of using multi-ply laminates having X-Y reinforcement.
Likewise, Alston at column 3, lines 29-30, discloses the Z-pin areal density of
0.375-1.50%. The Appellant does not dispute this.
We therefore also see no error in the Examiner’s utilization of Alston to show the
conventionality of using Z-directional reinforcement at an areal density of 0.5-2.0% in
the bond line is not disclosed in the relevant prior art.
The Appellant asserts that Alston claims a patch for repairing a composite
structure and does not teach the elements of a precured strip; two composite elements
joined with a precured strip and pinned with Z-direction reinforcement; two elements,
each with a plurality of plies; X-Y reinforcement and Z direction reinforcement extending
from the strip into at least one element; and two bonds in an “element-strip-element
sandwich” (Main Brief, page 4, line 21 – page 5, line 9 and Reply Brief, page 5, lines 6-
18).
13
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007