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 .
Withdrawn Objections/Rejections
The objection to the Specification of record in the previous Office Action mailed 10/29/2025 has been withdrawn due to Applicant's amendment filed 1/29/2026.
The 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejection of claims 1 and 3-7 of record in the previous Office Action mailed 10/29/2025 has been withdrawn due to Applicant's amendment filed 1/29/2026.
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 1 and 5-7 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a depth and a width of the annular shaft slots and a shaft slots distribution of the annular shaft slots are designed according to a type of and a thickness of the alloy resurfacing welding layer to assure a mechanical strength, a surface hardness, and a smoothness of the composite core rod” which renders the claim indefinite. It is not clear how a depth and a width of the annular shaft slot and a shaft slot distribution of the annular shaft slots are being designed according to a type of and a thickness of the alloy resurfacing welding layer to assure a mechanical strength, a surface hardness and a smoothness of the composite core rod.
Claims 5-7 are also rejected as being dependent on claim 1 and include the indefinite aspects thereof.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, filed 1/29/2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that claim 1 has been amended to more clearly define the subject matter.
However, it is to be pointed out that the limitation “a depth and a width of the annular shaft slots and a shaft slots distribution of the annular shaft slots are designed according to a type of and a thickness of the alloy resurfacing welding layer to assure a mechanical strength, a surface hardness, and a smoothness of the composite core rod” in claim 1 is deemed indefinite. It is not clear what is required to assure a mechanical strength, a surface hardness and a smoothness of the composite core rod. It is not clear what these design requirements are. Thus, claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112b.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CATHERINE A SIMONE whose telephone number is (571)272-1501. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4pm.
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, Frank Vineis can be reached at 571-270-1547. 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.
CATHERINE A. SIMONE
Examiner
Art Unit 1781
/Catherine A. Simone/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781
Prosecution Insights