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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1, 3, 7-19, 21, and 24-45 are as previously presented. Claims 2, 4-6, 20 and 22-23 are cancelled. Claims 46-49 are newly added. Therefore, claims 1, 3, 7-19, 21, and 24-49 are currently pending and have been considered below.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on November 07, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 11/07/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the combination of Umeyama and Umeyama 2018 would not arrive at the disclosed sub-power region of the laser beam located on both sides of the main power region, where the sub-power regions are perpendicular to the sweeping direction of the laser beam. Applicant argues that there are two laser beams located on different workpieces for Umeyama and that all the laser beams in the array of Umeyama 2018 have the same intensity.
It is the Examiner’s position that applicant’s argument is not persuasive. Applicant’s independent claims disclose that “a power density of a main power region is equal to or higher than a power density of a sub-power region”.
Examiner notes that the main and sub-power regions can have the same power density. Therefore, applicant’s argument against Umeyama 2018 having an array of laser beams with all the same intensity acknowledges that the limitation in the applicant’s independent claims are met. Umeyama 2018 discloses where the amount of lasers within the linear array of lasers can be controlled to achieve a desired welding area shape.
It is the Examiner’s position that regarding when the sub-power regions have a lower power density compared to the main power region that applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
Regarding Umeyama, it is true that there are two laser beams located on two different workpieces. However, applicant’s independent claims do not limit the workpiece being welded to a singular or multiple workpieces.
Regarding Umeyama 2018, the laser array can have all the same intensity. However, Umeyama 2018 also states that the individual laser beams within the array can be individually and independently controlled for intensity depending on a desired shape of the welding portion 70, Page 9, Para. 2, “The shape of the welding portion 70 can be controlled by changing the number of laser beams, the distance of the laser beam, the output intensity of the laser beam, the timing of laser irradiation, the irradiation diameter of the laser beam, have.”.
For applicant’s independent claims, the Examiner uses the advantage of Umeyama, Para. 0007, “Regarding the thinner second member, the heat conduction second molten pool can be formed by the second laser light having a relatively low strength (low brightness) and generation of a void, which can decrease welding strength, in a thin portion can be suppressed.”, in combination with the individual laser intensity control from Umeyama 2018. Examiner duplicates the lower powered laser located on a side of the main power laser from Umeyama for the laser array of Umeyama 2018. As a result, there would be a duplicated lower powered laser located on each side of the main power laser, where all the lasers are lined up from Umeyama 2018.
Duplication of parts has been held as an obvious modification to make. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). It is the Examiner’s position that duplicating the lower powered laser from Umeyama would serve to provide the same advantage on both sides of the main power laser.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claims 1, 7-9, 11-19, 24-26, 28-36, 38-41, 43-44, 46, and 48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumazawa et al. (JP 2012110905 A, hereinafter Kumazawa) in view of Olsen (US 9044824 B2) and Umeyama et al. (WO 2015114445 A2, hereinafter Umeyama) and Umeyama et al. (KR 101838382 B1, hereinafter Umeyama 2018).
Regarding claim 1, Kumazawa discloses a welding method (Abstract, “a method and an apparatus for welding”) comprising: while irradiating a laser beam (Fig. 1, Ref. 101) toward a workpiece (Fig. 1, Ref. 102), moving the laser beam relative to the workpiece (Page 2, Para. 5 from end, “A laser beam 101 is irradiated on the surface of the member 102. The surface of the member 102 is scanned with the laser beam 101 in the direction of the arrow.”; Fig. 19, Ref. 122); and,
while sweeping the laser beam on the workpiece (Page 22, Para. 7 from end, “control unit controls the movement of the diffractive optical element so that the spot of the second beam portion swings with respect to the scanning direction of the welding target portion.”), melting the workpiece in an irradiated portion to perform welding (Page 3, Para. 3, “melting point” implies the material melted), wherein
the laser beam is configured with a main power (Fig. 1, 101b) region and a sub-power region (Fig. 1, 101a), at least a part of the sub-power region is present on a sweeping direction side of the main power region (Fig. 1, where 101a the sub power region is shown to be in the sweeping direction side of the main power region), a power density of the main power region is equal to or higher than a power density of the sub-power region (Page 5, Para. 6, “The beam portions 201b and 201c are portions that exist inside the beam portion 201a and have a higher power density than the beam portion 201a.”), the power density of the main power region is at least a power density that can generate a keyhole (Page 2, Para .5 from end, “Accordingly, a keyhole 105 is formed in the members 102 and 103 immediately below the portion irradiated with the laser beam 101 (hereinafter referred to as an irradiation point).”).
Kumazawa does not disclose:
the laser beam includes the sub-power region only on a rear of the main power region and both sides of the main power region,
the sub-power region on the rear of the main power region faces the main power region in a sweeping direction of the laser beam, and
the sub-power region on the both sides of the main power region faces the main power region in a direction perpendicular to the sweeping direction of the laser beam.
However, Olsen discloses, in the similar field of laser welding (Page 30, Section 1, lies 21-22, “Laser processing, such as laser cutting and laser welding, is widely used for processing a variety of materials.”), where there is a rear sub region located behind the main region, where the rear sub region faces the main region in a sweeping direction of the laser beam (Fig. 4, where the sweeping direction is shown by the arrow, where the main power region is 2 and the sub-power region is 60-61; Page 37, Section 16, lines 15-16, “The melting beam 2 generates a melt at the cut front 4 which is established in front of the melting beam 2”, and Page 37, Section 16, lines 29-31, “In the configuration shown in FIG. 4, the melt ejection beam 6 is a V-shape arrangement of eight overlapping subbeams 60, 61”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the main and sub-power regions in Kumazawa to be in a configuration as taught by Olsen, where the sub-power regions would correspond to the sub beam locations.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to have greater flexibility in the welding process through adjusting process parameters, as stated by Olsen, Page 37, Section 16, lines 37-43, “The advantage of composing the melt flow barrier from a plurality of melt ejection sub-beams 60, 61 is that a large variety of melt ejection beam profiles can be generated with a maximum of flexibility with respect to adjusting processing parameters, such as for processing different kinds of materials, varying work piece thicknesses, varying processing speeds or alike.”
Umeyama discloses, in the similar field of laser welding (Abstract, “A welding method disclosed herein is a method for laser-welding”), where a sub-power region is located on a side of the main power region (Fig. 1, where the main power region is Lw1 and there is a side sub power region Lw2; Para. 0023, “The first laser light 1 is emitted to the laser irradiation surface ( wide surface) . of the first member 10 along the first bonding surface 12 and travels in the welding progress direction G. Lwi in FIG. 1 illustrates an example of a-trajectory of the first laser light”, and the regions have different power densities, Para. 0030, “Accordingly, with the first laser light 1 realizing the high output density and the second laser light ·2 realizing the low output density”), where that region faces the main power region in a perpendicular direction to the sweeping direction of the laser beam (Fig. 1, where the sweeping direction is shown by the arrow G, where the sub power region Lw2 is located on the side of the main power region Lw1). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the main and sub-power regions in modified Kumazawa to have the configuration as taught by Umeyama.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to prevent the formation of voids within the material through a secondary sub power region on the side, as stated by Umeyama, Para. 0007, “Regarding the thinner second member, the heat conduction second molten pool can be formed by the second laser light having a relatively low strength (low brightness) and generation of a void, which can decrease welding strength, in a thin portion can be suppressed.”.
Regarding the combined rear and side configuration, it is the Examiner’s position that such a configuration would be able to combine the advantages taught by Olsen and Umeyama to both benefit the welding method in Kumazawa.
Further, Umeyama 2018 discloses, in the similar field of laser welding (Page 8, Para. 3, “The welding can be typically performed by laser welding using various kinds of laser light”), where the sub-power regions can be located on both sides of the main power region (Page 8, last Para., “Here, the welding is typically carried out by irradiating three or more (for example, four or more) mutually independent laser beams (reference numerals 1 to 4 in the figure) at a laser irradiation site And aligned in a line orthogonal to the welding direction. That is, three or more laser beams are welded to each other in a welding direction.”, where Fig. 5 and 6 show that multiple laser beams aligned perpendicular to the welding direction can be used, where the power of each laser beam can be controlled, Page 9, Para. 2, “The shape of the welding portion 70 can be controlled by changing the number of laser beams, the distance of the laser beam, the output intensity of the laser beam, the timing of laser irradiation, the irradiation diameter of the laser beam, have.”, where a user can control the laser beam output intensity depending on the desired shape 70). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the laser beam system in modified Kumazawa to include the linear laser beam configuration as taught by Umeyama 2018,
where Umeyama teaches that lower energy laser beams located on the side of a main laser beam can assist the main laser beam in melting material, Para. 0026, “The second laser light 2 is low-brightness (low output density) laser light with which the side surface portion of the second member 20 is irradiated and is used mainly to melt the second member 20 and assist in the melting by the first laser light 1. The second laser light 2 has a laser strength that is lower than a laser strength”, where it is the Examiner’s position that having both sides of the main laser beam be configured to have lower energy in the Umeyama 2018 system would allow for an additional increase in the assistance provided to the melting of the main laser beam.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of splitting the laser beam into multiple independently controlled laser beams in a line orthogonal to the welding direction to allow shaping of a welded portion to a user’s desired characteristics, as stated by Umeyama 2018, Page 9, Para. 2, “The shape of the welding portion 70 can be controlled by changing the number of laser beams, the distance of the laser beam, the output intensity of the laser beam, the timing of laser irradiation, the irradiation diameter of the laser beam, have.”, where Umeyama shows that having lower power laser beams on the side of a main laser beam can assist with the main laser beam’s melting capabilities, as stated by Umeyama, Para. 0026, “The second laser light 2 is low-brightness (low output density) laser light with which the side surface portion of the second member 20 is irradiated and is used mainly to melt the second member 20 and assist in the melting by the first laser light 1. The second laser light 2 has a laser strength that is lower than a laser strength”.
Regarding claim 7, modified Kumazawa teaches the method according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein a molten pool is formed by the main power region and the sub-power region of the laser beam (Kumazawa, Fig. 1, Refs. 104 and 105; Page 13, Para. 6 from end, “Thereby, the temperature difference until the molten metal solidifies can be reduced, and high-quality welding without solidification cracking can be realized.”, where the metal is molten, meaning that a molten pool is formed by both 104 and 105).
Regarding claim 8, modified Kumazawa teaches the method according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein the main power region and the sub-power region of the laser beam are formed such that at least parts of a molten pool formed by the main power region and a molten pool formed by the sub-power region overlap (Kumazawa, Fig. 1, Refs. 104 and 105, where the molten pool created by 104 and 105 overlap).
Regarding claim 9, modified Kumazawa teaches the method according to claim 1, as set forth above.
Modified Kumazawa does not disclose:
wherein the sub-power region of the laser beam is configured with a plurality of sub-beams,
the main power region of the laser beam is configured with a main beam, and at least a part of the main beam includes a region which is not overlapping with respective sub-beams.
However, Olsen discloses the sub-power region (Fig. 4, Refs. 60 and 61) of the laser beam is configured by a plurality of sub-beams (Fig. 4, Refs. 60 and 61), the main power region (Fig. 4, Ref. 2) of the laser beam is configured by a main beam, and at least a part of the main beam includes a region which is not overlapping the respective sub-beams (Fig. 4). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the laser system in modified Kumazawa to include the features as taught by Olsen.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of creating a high pressure within the Knudsen area and provide a steady flow of melt out in the processing region, as stated by Olsen, Page 30, Section 2, lines 35-43, “laser processing using multiple laser beams, wherein at least one first laser beam, the so-called melting beam, is coupled into the work piece material to generate a melt and to form a keyhole, and at least one second laser beam, the so-called melt ejection beam…evaporate material from the melt surface and provide a high pressure in a Knudsen-layer forcing at least part of the melt out of the processing region, thereby forming a kerf having a cut front and sidewalls.”.
Regarding claim 11, modified Kumazawa teaches the method according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein a wavelength of laser beam forming the main power region is same as a wavelength of laser beam forming the sub-power region (Kumazawa, Fig. 19, wherein the main and sub-power beams are produced by the same oscillator would result in the same wavelength).
Regarding claim 12, modified Kumazawa teaches the method according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein the main power region and the sub-power region are configured with laser beams emitted from a same laser system (Kumazawa, Fig. 19, Refs. 114 and 101, where the laser beams come from the same unified system or laser oscillator 114).
Regarding claim 13, modified Kumazawa teaches the method according to claim 1, as set forth above.
Modified Kumazawa does not disclose:
wherein a laser system emitting a first laser beam to form the main power region is different from a laser system emitting a second laser beam to form the sub-power region.
However, Olsen discloses wherein a laser system emitting laser beam to form the main power region (Fig. 25, Ref. 2) is different from a laser system emitting laser beam to form the sub-power region (Fig. 25, Refs. 12a and 12b). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the laser system in modified Kumazawa to include the features as taught by Olsen.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to polarize the beam, then trim the edges as desired, and combine to focus the collectively projected beam onto the workpiece, as stated by Olsen, Page 38, Section 18, lines 26-32, “intensity, focus and the exact direction of the melt control beams 65a, 65b may be adjusted independent of the melt ejection beam 6 in order to provide for an optimum melt collection from the solid-liquid interface, thereby reducing the melt leakage around the tips of the melt ejection beam 6 barrier, and/or in order to trim the sidewalls 10.”.
Regarding claim 14, modified Kumazawa teaches the method according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein the main power region and the sub-power region are formed by a beam shaper (Kumazawa, Fig. 19, Ref. 117; Page 16, Para. 2, “diffractive optical element 117”).
Regarding claim 15, modified Kumazawa teaches the method according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein the beam shaper is a diffractive optical element (Kumazawa, Fig. 19, Ref. 117; Page 16, Para. 2, “diffractive optical element 117”).
Regarding claim 16, modified Kumazawa teaches the method according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein the workpiece is at least two members to be welded (Kumazawa, Fig. 1, Ref. 102 and 103), the welding method further comprising disposing the workpiece in a region where laser beam is irradiated by disposing the at least two members to be placed one on top of another (Kumazawa, Fig. 1, Ref. 102 and 103, where the workpiece are placed on top of one another and are in contact), in contact with each other, or adjacent to each other.
Regarding claim 17, modified Kumazawa teaches the method according to claim 1, as set forth above.
Modified Kumazawa does not disclose:
wherein an area of the sub-power region is equal to or larger than an area of the main power region.
However, Olsen discloses wherein an area of the sub-power region is substantially equal to or larger than an area of the main power region (Fig. 1, wherein Ref. 2 shows the smaller region of the main power region and Ref. 6 shows the larger region of the sub-power region). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the laser system in modified Kumazawa to include the features as taught by Olsen.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to create a larger melt surface that when the main power laser interacts with it, the excess material will be forced to flow out of the workpiece, as stated by Olsen, Claim 1, “evaporating material from the melt using the second laser beam, thereby forming a shaped melt flow barrier with a controlled high pressure in a Knudsen layer such that at least a part of the melt is forced out of the processing region in a way that forms a kerf having a cut front and sidewalls”.
Regarding claim 18, Kumazawa discloses a welding apparatus (Abstract, “apparatus for welding”) comprising:
a laser system (Abstract, “apparatus for welding…laser beam 101”); and
an optical head (Fig. 19, Ref. 123) that receives a laser beam (Fig. 19, Ref. 101) oscillated (Fig. 19, Ref. 115) by the laser system to generate a laser beam, irradiates the generated laser beam toward a workpiece (Fig. 19, Ref. 101), and melts the workpiece in an irradiated portion to perform welding (Fig. 1, Refs. 104 and 105), wherein
the optical head is configured such that the laser beam and the workpiece are capable of relatively moving (Page 2, Para. 5 from end, “A laser beam 101 is irradiated on the surface of the member 102. The surface of the member 102 is scanned with the laser beam 101 in the direction of the arrow.”), the optical head performing the melting to perform welding while sweeping the laser beam on the workpiece (Page 22, Para. 7 from end, “control unit controls the movement of the diffractive optical element so that the spot of the second beam portion swings with respect to the scanning direction of the welding target portion.”, where the optical head sweeps the laser beam on the workpiece in order to perform welding after melting, where the laser beam can melt the workpieces, Page 2, Para. 5 from end, “Accordingly, a keyhole 105 is formed in the members 102 and 103 immediately below the portion irradiated with the laser beam 101 (hereinafter referred to as an irradiation point). Around the keyhole 105, a melted portion 104 in which the members 102 and 103 are melted is formed.”),
the laser beam is configured with a main power region (Fig. 1, 101b) and a sub-power region (Fig. 1, 101a), at least a part of the sub-power region is present on a sweeping direction side (Fig. 1, where 101a the sub power region is shown to be in the sweeping direction side of the main power region), and a power density of a main power region is equal to or higher than a power density of a sub-power region (Page 5, Para. 6, “The beam portions 201b and 201c are portions that exist inside the beam portion 201a and have a higher power density than the beam portion 201a.”).
Kumazawa does not disclose:
the laser beam includes the sub-power region only on a rear of the main power region and both sides of the main power region,
the sub-power region on the rear of the main power region faces the main power region in a sweeping direction of the laser beam, and
the sub-power region on the both sides of the main power region faces the main power region in a direction perpendicular to the sweeping direction of the laser beam.
However, Olsen discloses, in the similar field of laser welding (Page 30, Section 1, lies 21-22, “Laser processing, such as laser cutting and laser welding, is widely used for processing a variety of materials.”), where there is a rear sub region located behind the main region, where the rear sub region faces the main region in a sweeping direction of the laser beam (Fig. 4, where the sweeping direction is shown by the arrow, where the main power region is 2 and the sub-power region is 60-61; Page 37, Section 16, lines 15-16, “The melting beam 2 generates a melt at the cut front 4 which is established in front of the melting beam 2”, and Page 37, Section 16, lines 29-31, “In the configuration shown in FIG. 4, the melt ejection beam 6 is a V-shape arrangement of eight overlapping subbeams 60, 61”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the main and sub-power regions in Kumazawa to be in a configuration as taught by Olsen, where the sub-power regions would correspond to the sub beam locations.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to have greater flexibility in the welding process through adjusting process parameters, as stated by Olsen, Page 37, Section 16, lines 37-43, “The advantage of composing the melt flow barrier from a plurality of melt ejection sub-beams 60, 61 is that a large variety of melt ejection beam profiles can be generated with a maximum of flexibility with respect to adjusting processing parameters, such as for processing different kinds of materials, varying work piece thicknesses, varying processing speeds or alike.”
Umeyama discloses, in the similar field of laser welding (Abstract, “A welding method disclosed herein is a method for laser-welding”), where a sub-power region is located on a side of the main power region (Fig. 1, where the main power region is Lw1 and there is a side sub power region Lw2; Para. 0023, “The first laser light 1 is emitted to the laser irradiation surface ( wide surface) . of the first member 10 along the first bonding surface 12 and travels in the welding progress direction G. Lwi in FIG. 1 illustrates an example of a-trajectory of the first laser light”, and the regions have different power densities, Para. 0030, “Accordingly, with the first laser light 1 realizing the high output density and the second laser light ·2 realizing the low output density”), where that region faces the main power region in a perpendicular direction to the sweeping direction of the laser beam (Fig. 1, where the sweeping direction is shown by the arrow G, where the sub power region Lw2 is located on the side of the main power region Lw1). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the main and sub-power regions in modified Kumazawa to have the configuration as taught by Umeyama.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to prevent the formation of voids within the material through a secondary sub power region on the side, as stated by Umeyama, Para. 0007, “Regarding the thinner second member, the heat conduction second molten pool can be formed by the second laser light having a relatively low strength (low brightness) and generation of a void, which can decrease welding strength, in a thin portion can be suppressed.”.
Regarding the combined rear and side configuration, it is the Examiner’s position that such a configuration would be able to combine the advantages taught by Olsen and Umeyama to both benefit the welding method in Kumazawa.
Further, Umeyama 2018 discloses, in the similar field of laser welding (Page 8, Para. 3, “The welding can be typically performed by laser welding using various kinds of laser light”), where the sub-power regions can be located on both sides of the main power region (Page 8, last Para., “Here, the welding is typically carried out by irradiating three or more (for example, four or more) mutually independent laser beams (reference numerals 1 to 4 in the figure) at a laser irradiation site And aligned in a line orthogonal to the welding direction. That is, three or more laser beams are welded to each other in a welding direction.”, where Fig. 5 and 6 show that multiple laser beams aligned perpendicular to the welding direction can be used, where the power of each laser beam can be controlled, Page 9, Para. 2, “The shape of the welding portion 70 can be controlled by changing the number of laser beams, the distance of the laser beam, the output intensity of the laser beam, the timing of laser irradiation, the irradiation diameter of the laser beam, have.”, where a user can control the laser beam output intensity depending on the desired shape 70). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the laser beam system in modified Kumazawa to include the linear laser beam configuration as taught by Umeyama 2018,
where Umeyama teaches that lower energy laser beams located on the side of a main laser beam can assist the main laser beam in melting material, Para. 0026, “The second laser light 2 is low-brightness (low output density) laser light with which the side surface portion of the second member 20 is irradiated and is used mainly to melt the second member 20 and assist in the melting by the first laser light 1. The second laser light 2 has a laser strength that is lower than a laser strength”, where it is the Examiner’s position that having both sides of the main laser beam be configured to have lower energy in the Umeyama 2018 system would allow for an additional increase in the assistance provided to the melting of the main laser beam.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of splitting the laser beam into multiple independently controlled laser beams in a line orthogonal to the welding direction to allow shaping of a welded portion to a user’s desired characteristics, as stated by Umeyama 2018, Page 9, Para. 2, “The shape of the welding portion 70 can be controlled by changing the number of laser beams, the distance of the laser beam, the output intensity of the laser beam, the timing of laser irradiation, the irradiation diameter of the laser beam, have.”, where Umeyama shows that having lower power laser beams on the side of a main laser beam can assist with the main laser beam’s melting capabilities, as stated by Umeyama, Para. 0026, “The second laser light 2 is low-brightness (low output density) laser light with which the side surface portion of the second member 20 is irradiated and is used mainly to melt the second member 20 and assist in the melting by the first laser light 1. The second laser light 2 has a laser strength that is lower than a laser strength”.
Regarding claim 19, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 18, as set forth above, discloses wherein the power density of the sub-power region is at least the power density than can melt the workpiece (Kumazawa, Fig. 1, Refs. 104 and 105; Page 3, Para. 3, “melting point” implies the material melted).
Regarding claim 24, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 18, as set forth above.
Modified Kumazawa does not disclose:
wherein the sub-power region has an arcuate shape, which is a part of a ring shape surrounding a circumference of the main power region.
However, Olsen discloses the sub-power region has an arcuate shape (Fig. 7, Ref. 6), which is a part of a substantial ring shape surrounding a circumference of the main power region. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the laser system in modified Kumazawa to include the features as taught by Olsen.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to create a high pressure in the Knudsen area and provide a steady flow of the melt out in of the processing region, as stated by Olsen, Page 30, Section 2, lines 35-43, “laser processing using multiple laser beams, wherein at least one first laser beam, the so-called melting beam, is coupled into the work piece material to generate a melt and to form a keyhole, and at least one second laser beam, the so-called melt ejection beam…evaporate material from the melt surface and provide a high pressure in a Knudsen-layer forcing at least part of the melt out of the processing region, thereby forming a kerf having a cut front and sidewalls.”.
Regarding claim 25, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 18, as set forth above, discloses wherein the main power region and the sub-power region of the laser beam are configured to respectively form molten pools (Kumazawa, Fig. 1, Refs. 104 and 105; Page 13, Para. 6 from end, “Thereby, the temperature difference until the molten metal solidifies can be reduced, and high-quality welding without solidification cracking can be realized.”, where the metal is molten, meaning that a molten pool is formed by both 104 and 105).
Regarding claim 26, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 18, as set forth above, discloses wherein the main power region and the sub-power region of the laser beam are formed such that at least parts of a molten pool formed by the main power region and a molten pool formed by the sub-power region overlap with each other (Kumazawa, Fig. 1, Refs. 104 and 105, where the molten pool created by 104 and 105 overlap).
Regarding claim 28, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 18, as set forth above, discloses wherein a wavelength of laser beam forming the main power region is a same as a wavelength of laser beam forming the sub-power region (Kumazawa, Fig. 19 wherein the main and sub-power beams are produced by the same oscillator would result in the same wavelength).
Regarding claim 29, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 18, as set forth above, discloses wherein the optical head generates, from light oscillated by a single laser system (Kumazawa, Fig. 19, Refs. 114 and 115, where the laser beams come from the same unified system or laser oscillator 114), the laser beam including the main power region and the sub-power region (Kumazawa, Fig. 1, Refs. 101a and 101b).
Regarding claim 30, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 29, as set forth above, discloses wherein the optical head includes a beam shaper disposed between the laser system and the workpiece (Kumazawa, Fig. 19, Ref. 117; Page 16, Para. 2, “diffractive optical element 117”), and the beam shaper forms the main power region (Kumazawa, Fig. 19, Ref. 101b) and the sub-power region (Kumazawa, Fig. 19, Ref. 101a) from the laser beam oscillated by the single laser system (Kumazawa, Fig. 19, Refs. 114 and 101, where the laser beams come from the same unified system or laser oscillator 114).
Regarding claim 31, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 30, as set forth above, discloses wherein the beam shaper is a diffractive optical element (Kumazawa, Fig. 19, Ref. 117; Page 16, Para. 2, “diffractive optical element 117”).
Regarding claim 32, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 18, as set forth above.
Modified Kumazawa does not disclose:
wherein the laser system is configured from different two laser systems, the main power region and the sub-power region are respectively configured with laser beams emitted from the different two laser systems.
However, Olsen discloses the laser system is configured from different two laser systems, and the main power region (Fig. 25, Ref. 2) and the sub-power region are respectively configured by laser beam emitted from the different two laser systems (Fig. 25, Refs. 12a and 12b). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the laser system in modified Kumazawa to include the features as taught by Olsen.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to polarize the beam, then trim the edges as desired, and combine to focus the collectively projected beam onto the workpiece, as stated by Olsen, Page 38, Section 18, lines 26-32, “intensity, focus and the exact direction of the melt control beams 65a, 65b may be adjusted independent of the melt ejection beam 6 in order to provide for an optimum melt collection from the solid-liquid interface, thereby reducing the melt leakage around the tips of the melt ejection beam 6 barrier, and/or in order to trim the sidewalls 10.”.
Regarding claim 33, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 18, as set forth above, discloses wherein the workpiece is at least two members to be welded (Kumazawa, Fig. 1, Ref. 102 and 103).
Regarding claim 34, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 18, as set forth above.
Modified Kumazawa does not disclose:
wherein an area of the sub-power region is equal to or larger than an area of the main power region.
However, Olsen discloses wherein an area of the sub-power region is substantially equal to or larger than an area of the main power region (Fig. 1, wherein Ref. 2 shows the smaller region of the main power region and Ref. 6 shows the larger region of the sub-power region). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the laser system in modified Kumazawa to include the features as taught by Olsen.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to create a larger melt surface that when the main power laser interacts with it, the excess material will be forced to flow out of the workpiece, as stated by Olsen, Claim 1, “evaporating material from the melt using the second laser beam, thereby forming a shaped melt flow barrier with a controlled high pressure in a Knudsen layer such that at least a part of the melt is forced out of the processing region in a way that forms a kerf having a cut front and sidewalls”.
Regarding claim 35, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 30, as set forth above.
Modified Kumazawa does not disclose:
wherein the beam shaper is rotatably provided.
However, Olsen discloses wherein the beam shaper is rotatably provided (Page 36, Section 13, Lines 29-32). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the laser system in modified Kumazawa to include the features as taught by Olsen.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of allowing the apparatus to process curved workpieces and maintain the optical unit as perpendicular to the surface, as stated by Olsen, Page 36, Section 13, lines 34-38, In particular when laser processing is performed along curves, this embodiment has the advantage that the same arrangement of the beams is maintained with respect to the processing direction.”.
Regarding claim 36, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 18, as set forth above.
Modified Kumazawa does not disclose:
wherein the welding apparatus includes a plurality of laser systems as the laser system, the optical head combines laser beams emitted from the plurality of laser systems to generate the laser beam.
However, Olsen discloses the welding apparatus includes a plurality of laser systems as the laser system (Fig. 20, Ref. 20), and the optical head combines the laser beams emitted from the plurality of laser systems to generate the laser beam (Fig. 20, Ref. 21). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the laser system in modified Kumazawa to include the features as taught by Olsen.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to polarize the beam, then trim the edges as desired, and combine to focus the collectively projected beam onto the workpiece, as stated by Olsen, Page 38, Section 18, lines 26-32, “intensity, focus and the exact direction of the melt control beams 65a, 65b may be adjusted independent of the melt ejection beam 6 in order to provide for an optimum melt collection from the solid-liquid interface, thereby reducing the melt leakage around the tips of the melt ejection beam 6 barrier, and/or in order to trim the sidewalls 10.”.
Regarding claim 38, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 18, as set forth above, discloses wherein the optical head is configured to be capable of sweeping the laser beam on a fixed workpiece (Kumazawa, Page 2, Para. 5 from end, “A laser beam 101 is irradiated on the surface of the member 102. The surface of the member 102 is scanned with the laser beam 101 in the direction of the arrow.”).
Regarding claim 39, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 18, as set forth above, discloses wherein an irradiation position of the laser beam from the optical head is fixed, and the workpiece is held to be moveable with respect to the fixed irradiation position of the laser beam (Kumazawa, Fig. 19, Ref. 122; Page 15, last Para., “The members 102 and 103 are held by a holding jig 121 during welding. The holding jig 121 is fixed to a pedestal unit 122 that is movable in the horizontal direction.”).
Regarding claim 40, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein a sub-beam forming the sub-power region on the both sides of the main power region has a shape extending in the sweeping direction of the main power region (Teaching from Umeyama 2018, Page 8, last Para., “Here, the welding is typically carried out by irradiating three or more (for example, four or more) mutually independent laser beams (reference numerals 1 to 4 in the figure) at a laser irradiation site And aligned in a line orthogonal to the welding direction. That is, three or more laser beams are welded to each other in a welding direction.”, where the mutually independent laser beams have irradiation areas that appear to be the same and are circular from Fig. 5 and 6, where the circular shape in the sub-power region would extend in the sweeping direction or vertical).
Regarding claim 41, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein a sub-beam forming the sub-power region on the rear side of the main power region has a shape extending in a direction perpendicular to the sweeping direction of the main power region (Teaching from Olsen, Fig. 4, where the sweeping direction is shown by the arrow, where the main power region is 2 and the sub-power region is 60-61; Page 37, Section 16, lines 15-16, “The melting beam 2 generates a melt at the cut front 4 which is established in front of the melting beam 2”, and Page 37, Section 16, lines 29-31, “In the configuration shown in FIG. 4, the melt ejection beam 6 is a V-shape arrangement of eight overlapping subbeams 60, 61”, where the subbeams 60 and 61 in the rear portion extend perpendicular to the sweeping direction or vertically in Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 43, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 18, as set forth above, discloses wherein a sub-beam forming the sub-power region on the both sides of the main power region has a shape extending in the sweeping direction of the main power region (Teaching from Umeyama 2018, Page 8, last Para., “Here, the welding is typically carried out by irradiating three or more (for example, four or more) mutually independent laser beams (reference numerals 1 to 4 in the figure) at a laser irradiation site And aligned in a line orthogonal to the welding direction. That is, three or more laser beams are welded to each other in a welding direction.”, where the mutually independent laser beams have irradiation areas that appear to be the same and are circular from Fig. 5 and 6, where the circular shape in the sub-power region would extend in the sweeping direction or vertical).
Regarding claim 44, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 18, as set forth above, discloses wherein a sub-beam forming the sub-power region on the rear sides of the main power region has a shape extending in a direction perpendicular to the sweeping direction of the main power region (Teaching from Olsen, Fig. 4, where the sweeping direction is shown by the arrow, where the main power region is 2 and the sub-power region is 60-61; Page 37, Section 16, lines 15-16, “The melting beam 2 generates a melt at the cut front 4 which is established in front of the melting beam 2”, and Page 37, Section 16, lines 29-31, “In the configuration shown in FIG. 4, the melt ejection beam 6 is a V-shape arrangement of eight overlapping subbeams 60, 61”, where the subbeams 60 and 61 in the rear portion extend perpendicular to the sweeping direction or vertically in Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 46, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein the sub-power region on the both sides of the main power region are composed solely of a pair of single beams of the laser beam (Teaching from Umeyama 2018, Page 8, last Para., “Here, the welding is typically carried out by irradiating three or more (for example, four or more) mutually independent laser beams (reference numerals 1 to 4 in the figure) at a laser irradiation site And aligned in a line orthogonal to the welding direction. That is, three or more laser beams are welded to each other in a welding direction.”, where amount of laser beams can be controlled depending on a user’s need for the welding area shape, where the amount of laser beams is disclosed to typically be three).
Regarding claim 48, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 18, as set forth above, discloses wherein the sub-power region on the both sides of the main power region are composed solely of a pair of single beams of the laser beam (Teaching from Umeyama 2018, Page 8, last Para., “Here, the welding is typically carried out by irradiating three or more (for example, four or more) mutually independent laser beams (reference numerals 1 to 4 in the figure) at a laser irradiation site And aligned in a line orthogonal to the welding direction. That is, three or more laser beams are welded to each other in a welding direction.”, where amount of laser beams can be controlled depending on a user’s need for the welding area shape, where the amount of laser beams is disclosed to typically be three).
Claims 3, 21, 42, 45, 47, and 49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumazawa et al. (JP 2012110905 A, hereinafter Kumazawa) in view of Umeyama et al. (WO 2015114445 A2, hereinafter Umeyama) and Umeyama et al. (KR 101838382 B1, hereinafter Umeyama 2018).
Regarding claim 3, Kumazawa discloses a welding method (Abstract, “a method and an apparatus for welding”), comprising moving a laser beam (Para. 12, movement of the optical element; Fig. 19, Ref. 122; Page 2, Para. 5 from end, “A laser beam 101 is irradiated on the surface of the member 102. The surface of the member 102 is scanned with the laser beam 101 in the direction of the arrow.”; Fig. 19, Ref. 122) relative to a workpiece (Fig. 1, Ref. 102) while irradiating the laser beam toward the workpiece (Fig. 1, Ref. 101, where the laser beam is shown to be irradiated onto the workpiece); and
melting the workpiece in an irradiated portion (Page 3, Para. 3, “melting point” implies the material melted) to perform welding while sweeping the laser beam on the workpiece (Page 22, Para. 7 from end, “control unit controls the movement of the diffractive optical element so that the spot of the second beam portion swings with respect to the scanning direction of the welding target portion.”),
where the laser beam is configured with a main power region (Fig. 1, 101b) and a sub-power region (Fig. 1, 101a), at least a part of the sub-power region is present on a sweeping direction side of the main power region (Fig. 1, where 101a the sub power region is shown to be in the sweeping direction side of the main power region),
a power density of the main power region is equal to or higher than a power density of the sub-power region (Page 5, Para. 6, “The beam portions 201b and 201c are portions that exist inside the beam portion 201a and have a higher power density than the beam portion 201a.”), the power density of the main power region is at least a power density that can generate a keyhole (Page 2, Para .5 from end, “Accordingly, a keyhole 105 is formed in the members 102 and 103 immediately below the portion irradiated with the laser beam 101 (hereinafter referred to as an irradiation point).”).
Kumazawa does not disclose:
the laser beam further includes, only on both sides of the main power region, the sub-power region having the power density lower than the power density of the main power region, and
the sub-power region on the both sides of the main power region faces the main power region in a direction perpendicular to a sweeping direction of the laser beam.
However, Umeyama discloses, in the similar field of laser welding (Abstract, “A welding method disclosed herein is a method for laser-welding”), where a sub-power region is located on a side of the main power region (Fig. 1, where the main power region is Lw1 and there is a side sub power region Lw2; Para. 0023, “The first laser light 1 is emitted to the laser irradiation surface ( wide surface) . of the first member 10 along the first bonding surface 12 and travels in the welding progress direction G. Lwi in FIG. 1 illustrates an example of a-trajectory of the first laser light”, and the regions have different power densities, Para. 0030, “Accordingly, with the first laser light 1 realizing the high output density and the second laser light ·2 realizing the low output density”), where that region faces the main power region in a perpendicular direction to the sweeping direction of the laser beam (Fig. 1, where the sweeping direction is shown by the arrow G, where the sub power region Lw2 is located on the side of the main power region Lw1). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the main and sub-power regions in Kumazawa to have the configuration as taught by Umeyama.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to prevent the formation of voids within the material through a secondary sub power region on the side, as stated by Umeyama, Para. 0007, “Regarding the thinner second member, the heat conduction second molten pool can be formed by the second laser light having a relatively low strength (low brightness) and generation of a void, which can decrease welding strength, in a thin portion can be suppressed.”.
Further, Umeyama 2018 discloses, in the similar field of laser welding (Page 8, Para. 3, “The welding can be typically performed by laser welding using various kinds of laser light”), where the sub-power regions can be located on both sides of the main power region (Page 8, last Para., “Here, the welding is typically carried out by irradiating three or more (for example, four or more) mutually independent laser beams (reference numerals 1 to 4 in the figure) at a laser irradiation site And aligned in a line orthogonal to the welding direction. That is, three or more laser beams are welded to each other in a welding direction.”, where Fig. 5 and 6 show that multiple laser beams aligned perpendicular to the welding direction can be used, where the power of each laser beam can be controlled, Page 9, Para. 2, “The shape of the welding portion 70 can be controlled by changing the number of laser beams, the distance of the laser beam, the output intensity of the laser beam, the timing of laser irradiation, the irradiation diameter of the laser beam, have.”, where a user can control the laser beam output intensity depending on the desired shape 70). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the laser beam system in modified Kumazawa to include the linear laser beam configuration as taught by Umeyama 2018,
where Umeyama teaches that lower energy laser beams located on the side of a main laser beam can assist the main laser beam in melting material, Para. 0026, “The second laser light 2 is low-brightness (low output density) laser light with which the side surface portion of the second member 20 is irradiated and is used mainly to melt the second member 20 and assist in the melting by the first laser light 1. The second laser light 2 has a laser strength that is lower than a laser strength”, where it is the Examiner’s position that having both sides of the main laser beam be configured to have lower energy in the Umeyama 2018 system would allow for an additional increase in the assistance provided to the melting of the main laser beam.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of splitting the laser beam into multiple independently controlled laser beams in a line orthogonal to the welding direction to allow shaping of a welded portion to a user’s desired characteristics, as stated by Umeyama 2018, Page 9, Para. 2, “The shape of the welding portion 70 can be controlled by changing the number of laser beams, the distance of the laser beam, the output intensity of the laser beam, the timing of laser irradiation, the irradiation diameter of the laser beam, have.”, where Umeyama shows that having lower power laser beams on the side of a main laser beam can assist with the main laser beam’s melting capabilities, as stated by Umeyama, Para. 0026, “The second laser light 2 is low-brightness (low output density) laser light with which the side surface portion of the second member 20 is irradiated and is used mainly to melt the second member 20 and assist in the melting by the first laser light 1. The second laser light 2 has a laser strength that is lower than a laser strength”.
Regarding claim 21, Kumazawa discloses a welding apparatus (Abstract, “apparatus for welding”) comprising:
a laser system (Abstract, “apparatus for welding…laser beam 101”); and
an optical head (Fig. 19, Ref. 123) configured to receive a laser beam (Fig. 19, Ref. 101) oscillated (Fig. 19, Ref. 115) by the laser system to generate a laser beam, irradiate the generated laser beam toward a workpiece (Fig. 19, Ref. 101), and melt the workpiece at an irradiated portion to perform welding (Fig. 1, Refs. 104 and 105), wherein
the optical head is configured such that the laser beam and the workpiece are capable of relatively moving (Page 2, Para. 5 from end, “A laser beam 101 is irradiated on the surface of the member 102. The surface of the member 102 is scanned with the laser beam 101 in the direction of the arrow.”), the optical head performing the melting to perform welding while sweeping the laser beam on the workpiece (Page 22, Para. 7 from end, “control unit controls the movement of the diffractive optical element so that the spot of the second beam portion swings with respect to the scanning direction of the welding target portion.”, where the optical head sweeps the laser beam on the workpiece in order to perform welding after melting, where the laser beam can melt the workpieces, Page 2, Para. 5 from end, “Accordingly, a keyhole 105 is formed in the members 102 and 103 immediately below the portion irradiated with the laser beam 101 (hereinafter referred to as an irradiation point). Around the keyhole 105, a melted portion 104 in which the members 102 and 103 are melted is formed.”),
the laser beam is configured with a main power region (Fig. 1, 101b) and a sub-power region (Fig. 1, 101a), at least a part of the sub-power region is present on a sweeping direction side (Fig. 1, where 101a the sub power region is shown to be in the sweeping direction side of the main power region), and a power density of a main power region is equal to or higher than a power density of the sub-power region (Page 5, Para. 6, “The beam portions 201b and 201c are portions that exist inside the beam portion 201a and have a higher power density than the beam portion 201a.”).
Kumazawa does not disclose:
the laser beam further includes the sub-power region only on both sides of the main power region, and
the sub-power region on the both sides of the main power region faces the main power region in a direction perpendicular to a sweeping direction of the laser beam.
However, Umeyama discloses, in the similar field of laser welding (Abstract, “A welding method disclosed herein is a method for laser-welding”), where a sub-power region is located on a side of the main power region (Fig. 1, where the main power region is Lw1 and there is a side sub power region Lw2; Para. 0023, “The first laser light 1 is emitted to the laser irradiation surface ( wide surface) . of the first member 10 along the first bonding surface 12 and travels in the welding progress direction G. Lwi in FIG. 1 illustrates an example of a-trajectory of the first laser light”, and the regions have different power densities, Para. 0030, “Accordingly, with the first laser light 1 realizing the high output density and the second laser light ·2 realizing the low output density”), where that region faces the main power region in a perpendicular direction to the sweeping direction of the laser beam (Fig. 1, where the sweeping direction is shown by the arrow G, where the sub power region Lw2 is located on the side of the main power region Lw1). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the main and sub-power regions in Kumazawa to have the configuration as taught by Umeyama.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to prevent the formation of voids within the material through a secondary sub power region on the side, as stated by Umeyama, Para. 0007, “Regarding the thinner second member, the heat conduction second molten pool can be formed by the second laser light having a relatively low strength (low brightness) and generation of a void, which can decrease welding strength, in a thin portion can be suppressed.”.
Further, Umeyama 2018 discloses, in the similar field of laser welding (Page 8, Para. 3, “The welding can be typically performed by laser welding using various kinds of laser light”), where the sub-power regions can be located on both sides of the main power region (Page 8, last Para., “Here, the welding is typically carried out by irradiating three or more (for example, four or more) mutually independent laser beams (reference numerals 1 to 4 in the figure) at a laser irradiation site And aligned in a line orthogonal to the welding direction. That is, three or more laser beams are welded to each other in a welding direction.”, where Fig. 5 and 6 show that multiple laser beams aligned perpendicular to the welding direction can be used, where the power of each laser beam can be controlled, Page 9, Para. 2, “The shape of the welding portion 70 can be controlled by changing the number of laser beams, the distance of the laser beam, the output intensity of the laser beam, the timing of laser irradiation, the irradiation diameter of the laser beam, have.”, where a user can control the laser beam output intensity depending on the desired shape 70). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the laser beam system in modified Kumazawa to include the linear laser beam configuration as taught by Umeyama 2018,
where Umeyama teaches that lower energy laser beams located on the side of a main laser beam can assist the main laser beam in melting material, Para. 0026, “The second laser light 2 is low-brightness (low output density) laser light with which the side surface portion of the second member 20 is irradiated and is used mainly to melt the second member 20 and assist in the melting by the first laser light 1. The second laser light 2 has a laser strength that is lower than a laser strength”, where it is the Examiner’s position that having both sides of the main laser beam be configured to have lower energy in the Umeyama 2018 system would allow for an additional increase in the assistance provided to the melting of the main laser beam.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of splitting the laser beam into multiple independently controlled laser beams in a line orthogonal to the welding direction to allow shaping of a welded portion to a user’s desired characteristics, as stated by Umeyama 2018, Page 9, Para. 2, “The shape of the welding portion 70 can be controlled by changing the number of laser beams, the distance of the laser beam, the output intensity of the laser beam, the timing of laser irradiation, the irradiation diameter of the laser beam, have.”, where Umeyama shows that having lower power laser beams on the side of a main laser beam can assist with the main laser beam’s melting capabilities, as stated by Umeyama, Para. 0026, “The second laser light 2 is low-brightness (low output density) laser light with which the side surface portion of the second member 20 is irradiated and is used mainly to melt the second member 20 and assist in the melting by the first laser light 1. The second laser light 2 has a laser strength that is lower than a laser strength”.
Regarding claim 42, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 3, as set forth above, discloses wherein a sub-beam forming the sub-power region has a shape extending in the sweeping direction of the main power region (Teaching from Umeyama 2018, Page 8, last Para., “Here, the welding is typically carried out by irradiating three or more (for example, four or more) mutually independent laser beams (reference numerals 1 to 4 in the figure) at a laser irradiation site And aligned in a line orthogonal to the welding direction. That is, three or more laser beams are welded to each other in a welding direction.”, where the mutually independent laser beams have irradiation areas that appear to be the same and are circular from Fig. 5 and 6, where the circular shape in the sub-power region would extend in the sweeping direction or vertical).
Regarding claim 45, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 21, as set forth above, discloses wherein a sub-beam forming the sub-power region has a shape extending in the sweeping direction of the main power region (Teaching from Umeyama 2018, Page 8, last Para., “Here, the welding is typically carried out by irradiating three or more (for example, four or more) mutually independent laser beams (reference numerals 1 to 4 in the figure) at a laser irradiation site And aligned in a line orthogonal to the welding direction. That is, three or more laser beams are welded to each other in a welding direction.”, where the mutually independent laser beams have irradiation areas that appear to be the same and are circular from Fig. 5 and 6, where the circular shape in the sub-power region would extend in the sweeping direction or vertical).
Regarding claim 47, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 3, as set forth above, discloses wherein the sub-power region on the both sides of the main power region are composed solely of a pair of single beams of the laser beam (Teaching from Umeyama 2018, Page 8, last Para., “Here, the welding is typically carried out by irradiating three or more (for example, four or more) mutually independent laser beams (reference numerals 1 to 4 in the figure) at a laser irradiation site And aligned in a line orthogonal to the welding direction. That is, three or more laser beams are welded to each other in a welding direction.”, where amount of laser beams can be controlled depending on a user’s need for the welding area shape, where the amount of laser beams is disclosed to typically be three).
Regarding claim 49, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 21, as set forth above, discloses wherein the sub-power region on the both sides of the main power region are composed solely of a pair of single beams of the laser beam (Teaching from Umeyama 2018, Page 8, last Para., “Here, the welding is typically carried out by irradiating three or more (for example, four or more) mutually independent laser beams (reference numerals 1 to 4 in the figure) at a laser irradiation site And aligned in a line orthogonal to the welding direction. That is, three or more laser beams are welded to each other in a welding direction.”, where amount of laser beams can be controlled depending on a user’s need for the welding area shape, where the amount of laser beams is disclosed to typically be three).
Claims 10 and 27 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumazawa et al. (JP 2012110905 A, hereinafter Kumazawa) in view of Olsen (US 9044824 B2) and Umeyama et al. (WO 2015114445 A2, hereinafter Umeyama) and Umeyama et al. (KR 101838382 B1, hereinafter Umeyama 2018) in further view of Zhou et al. (CN 107971631 A, hereinafter Zhou).
Regarding claim 10, modified Kumazawa teaches the method according to claim 1, as set forth above.
Modified Kumazawa does not disclose:
wherein a wavelength of laser beam forming at least the sub-power region from among the main power region and the sub-power region is a wavelength having reflectivity lower than reflectivity of an infrared region of the workpiece.
However, Zhou discloses, in the similar field of laser beams, a wavelength of laser beam forming at least the sub-power region from among the main power region and the sub-power region is a wavelength having reflectivity lower than reflectivity of an infrared region of the workpiece (ABSTRACT teaches a short wavelength laser welding a high reflectivity workpiece wherein the relationship between reflectivity is that as the wavelength becomes shorter, the reflectivity decreases). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the laser system in modified Kumazawa to include the feature as taught by Zhou.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to reduce laser energy used while processing the workpiece and increase weld quality, as stated by Zhou, Example 4, “the reflective metal (silver, copper, nickel, gold, rhodium, platinum) low reflectivity to laser, laser absorption is good, the welding part can obtain the expected penetration, meets the welding requirement and effectively improves the energy utilization rate and welding efficiency of the laser and reduce the energy consumption.”.
Regarding claim 27, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 18, as set forth above.
Modified Kumazawa does not disclose:
wherein a wavelength of laser beam forming at least the sub-power region from among the main power region and the sub-power region is a wavelength having reflectivity lower than reflectivity of an infrared region of the workpiece.
However, Zhou discloses, in the similar field of laser beams, a wavelength of laser beam forming at least the sub-power region from among the main power region and the sub-power region is a wavelength having reflectivity lower than reflectivity of an infrared region of the workpiece (ABSTRACT teaches a short wavelength laser welding a high reflectivity workpiece wherein the relationship between reflectivity is that as the wavelength becomes shorter, the reflectivity decreases). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the laser system in modified Kumazawa to include the feature as taught by Zhou.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to reduce laser energy used while processing the workpiece and increase weld quality, as stated by Zhou, Example 4, “the reflective metal (silver, copper, nickel, gold, rhodium, platinum) low reflectivity to laser, laser absorption is good, the welding part can obtain the expected penetration, meets the welding requirement and effectively improves the energy utilization rate and welding efficiency of the laser and reduce the energy consumption.”.
Claim 37 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumazawa et al. (JP 2012110905 A, hereinafter Kumazawa) in view of Olsen (US 9044824 B2) and Umeyama et al. (WO 2015114445 A2, hereinafter Umeyama) and Umeyama et al. (KR 101838382 B1, hereinafter Umeyama 2018) in further view of Kangastupa (WO 2018104575 A1).
Regarding claim 37, modified Kumazawa teaches the apparatus according to claim 18, as set forth above.
Modified Kumazawa does not disclose:
wherein the welding apparatus includes a plurality of laser systems as the laser system and further includes a multi-core fiber that combines laser beams emitted from the plurality of laser systems and guides the combined laser beam to the optical head.
However, Kangastupa discloses, in the similar field of laser welding systems, wherein the welding apparatus includes a plurality of laser systems as the laser system (Fig. 4, Refs. 30 and 31), and further includes a multi-core fiber (Fig. 4, Ref. 35) that combines laser beams emitted from the plurality of laser systems and guides the laser beam to the optical head (Fig. 4, wherein the beams emitted from Refs. 30 and 31 are combined into Ref. 35). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the laser system in modified Kumazawa to include the features as taught by Kangastupa.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to optimize the beam profile for the material to be processed, as stated by Kangastupa, Para. 0024, “The power intensities of the inner and outer cores may be adjustable by the control unit 10 individually, and according to the current thickness of the workpiece and possible a set of other parameters associated with the cutting operation, by adjusting the power of the originating laser sources.”.
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 KEVIN GUANHUA WEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9940 and whose email is kevin.wen@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached on 571-270-5569. 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.
/KEVIN GUANHUA WEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
01/23/2026
/IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761