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 .
Claims 1 and 3-6 are currently being examined.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “an oscillating amplitude of the laser welding head is not greater than the width of the gap” of claim 6 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Fig. 3 appears to show an oscillating amplitude of the laser welding head which is greater than the width of the gap.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NPL Schultz et al. Gap bridging ability in laser beam welding of thin aluminum sheets in view of Morton 1512787 and Smashey et al. 6049060.
Regarding independent claim 1, Schultz discloses an oscillating laser welding (Abstract and pg 546 under 2. Experimental first para. describes oscillating laser welding) with a plurality of aluminum alloy welding wires (aluminum alloy filler wires, i.e., welding wires, described on pg 552 second para. and in Fig. 10) for jointing aluminum alloy sheets with a gap therebetween (described on pg 547 first para. and shown in Fig. 1 (b)), comprising following steps:
clamping step for: providing two aluminum alloy sheets and the plurality of aluminum alloy welding wires with similar material composition to the two aluminum alloy sheets (all similarly comprise aluminum as described on pg 547 first para.), and reserving and maintaining the gap with a constant width between opposite surfaces of the two aluminum alloy sheets to be jointed (constant gap described on pg 547 in first para. and shown in Fig. 1 (b)), wherein a thickness of each of the two aluminum alloy sheets is 1 mm to 3 mm (pg 547 first para. describes each aluminum sheet is 1mm), and the constant width of the gap is 0.8 mm to 1.4 mm (pg 548 last para. under 3.2. describes a 1mm gap);
welding arrangement step for: arranging a wire feeding nozzle for feeding the plurality of aluminum alloy welding wires (pg 547 Fig. 1 (a)) and a laser welding head for emitting a laser beam above the two aluminum alloy sheets (shown on pg 547 Fig. 1 (a)-(b)), and applying protective gas to the opposite surfaces to allow the opposite surfaces to be isolated from air during welding (shielding gas nozzle for applying protective gas to opposite surfaces to be welded shown in Fig. 1(a) on pg 547 and described on pg 546 bottom para.; the purpose of shielding gas is for isolating surfaces from air during welding), wherein the wire feeding nozzle is close to the gap (shown in Fig. 1(a)), and the laser welding head is mounted to align with the wire feeding nozzle (shown in Fig. 1(a)); and
welding step for: moving and guiding a molten pool into the gap, such that the plurality of aluminum alloy welding wires are heated and molten by the laser beam to fill the gap (pg 546 last para. describes using an oscillating laser set up shown in Fig. 1(a) to create a self maintaining melt pool between two sheets in a butt-joint configuration with air gap, by having filler wire melted down by laser to provide material for the weld); having the wire feeding nozzle and the laser welding head travel along the gap (last para. on pg 548 describes laser welding speed and wire feed speed such that wire feeding nozzle and laser welding head accordingly travel along the gap during welding), so as to complete welding of the two aluminum alloy sheets (as shown in Fig. 1(a)-(b) and pg 547 last para describes “along the whole welding length”).
Schultz is silent regarding fixing the two aluminum alloy sheets to a welding fixture, and presetting a guiding plate made of a same material as the two aluminum alloy sheets at each of a welding starting end and a welding ending end of the gap; forming the molten pool on the guiding plate by the laser beam and the plurality of aluminum alloy welding wires.
Morton teaches in Fig. 4, welding two metal sheets 6, 6a and fixing the two metal sheets (via clamps 27-27c) to a welding fixture (table 7 on which sheets 6,6a are clamped); presetting a guiding plate (5, 5a are fixed, i.e., preset, to table 7; pg 1 col 2 lines 100-103) at each of a welding starting end (5 is at welding starting end) and a welding ending end (5a is at welding ending end) of gap (gap between 6 and 6a in Fig. 4); forming the molten pool on the guiding plate (as shown in Fig. 4 and described in page 1 col 2 lines 83-93, welding head 10 with a welding pencil 8 comprising a metallic welding strip causes fused metal, i.e., a molten pool, to be formed first on guiding plate 5 and then along opposite edges of sheets 6 and 6a and onto guiding plate 5a; page 2 col 1 lines 30-39 further describes as the welding strip is progressively fused, the molten metal from the strip is projected by the arc into this molten bath, i.e., molten pool, where it coalesces with the molten material of the metal sheets and forms the weld).
Welding without guiding plates 5 and 5a results in unfilled areas at the welding starting end and welding ending end of the gap as shown in Fig. 5 and described on page 2 col 1 lines 39-47 and col 2 lines 106-116. Welding with the guiding plates 5, 5a produces a continuous, thorough and efficient weld throughout the length of the metal sheets and accordingly the gap between them is filled by the weld (page 3 col 1 lines 5-9). Although Morton teaches an electric arc welding head with a metallic welding strip, this is analogous to a laser welding head with welding wires as both involve heating and melting of the metal material of metal plates being welded together along a gap between them using filler material such as the metallic welding strip or welding wire to form a molten pool.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Schultz to include fixing the two aluminum alloy sheets to a welding fixture, and presetting a guiding plate at each of a welding starting end and a welding ending end of the gap; forming a molten pool on the guiding plate by the laser beam and the plurality of aluminum alloy welding wires.as taught by Morton to hold the aluminum alloy sheets in place during welding and to produce a continuous, thorough and efficient weld throughout the length of the aluminum alloy sheets along the entire gap between them and avoid unwelded portions at the welding starting end and welding ending end of the gap.
Schultz in view of Morton is silent regarding the guiding plates are made of a same material as the two sheets.
Smashey teaches a similar method to Morton of welding of a sheet with a heat source which may be an electric arc or a laser per col 3 lines 31-33, and which includes a guiding plate 70 at the end of a weld bead as shown in Fig. 5 and as described in col 4 lines 20-25 and 65-67 to col 5 lines 1—5. A molten pool is formed along the weld line on the metal sheet and then onto guiding plate 70 past the end of the weld bead on the metal sheet as shown in Fig. 5 allows any cracking of the weld bead at the termination of the welding at the lift-off region to be on guiding plate 70 instead of on the metal sheet per col 5 lines 16-33.
The guiding plate is made of a same material as the metal sheet (col 4 lines 33-37 describes guiding plate 70 preferably is made of a material having a composition close to, i.e., same as, that of the metal sheet being welded so that there is no contamination of the metal sheet due to any incidental melting of the guiding plate during the welding procedure).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Schultz in view of Morton to have the guiding plates made of a same material as the aluminum alloy sheets as taught by Smashey so that there is no contamination of the aluminum alloy sheets due to any incidental melting of the guiding plates during the welding procedure.
Regarding claim 3, Schulz in view of Morton and Smashey teaches all that is claimed above and Schulz further discloses each of the two aluminum alloy sheets is made of a conventional aluminum alloy material (pg 547 first para. describes sheets are made of either AA 5083 or AA 6082 which are conventional aluminum alloy materials), an aluminum matrix composite material, or an aluminum alloy material from 3D printing.
Claim(s) 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NPL Schultz et al. Gap bridging ability in laser beam welding of thin aluminum sheets in view of Morton 1512787 and Smashey et al. 6049060 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Banas et al. 4000392.
Regarding claim 4, Schulz in view of Morton and Smashey teaches all that is claimed above but is silent regarding in the clamping step, grinding surfaces of the two aluminum alloy sheets and scraping off oxide layers on the opposite surfaces, and cleaning and blowing the opposite surfaces before the two aluminum alloy sheets are fixed.
Banas teaches metal joining by a laser process which results in the fusion zone having a lower concentration of undesired impurities than the parent metal (col 2 lines 21-24). Banas teaches grinding surfaces of metal workpieces (col 6 lines 8-10 describe machining, i.e., grinding, mating edges of workpieces which will be joined by a butt weld) and scrapping off oxide layers on opposite surfaces (machining also includes scraping of mating edges, i.e., opposite surfaces, which removes oxide layers), and cleaning and blowing the opposite surfaces before the workpieces are welded (per col 6 lines 12-17 describes in addition, any of the standard techniques is employed to clean the weld surfaces prior to the welding process so that the weld joint should be as free from surface contaminants as is practical under the circumstances in order to minimize the amount of contaminants which might remain in the fused zone after the weld has been performed; blowing is a standard technique of removing debris and/or drying as part of cleaning surfaces).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Schulz in view of Morton and Smashey to include in the clamping step, grinding surfaces of the two aluminum alloy sheets and scraping off oxide layers on the opposite surfaces, and cleaning and blowing the opposite surfaces before the two aluminum alloy sheets are fixed as taught by Banas so that the weld joint should be as free from surface contaminants as is practical under the circumstances in order to minimize the amount of contaminants which might remain in the fused zone after the weld has been performed.
Regarding claim 5, Schulz in view of Morton, Smashey and Banas teaches all that is claimed above and Schulz further discloses in the welding arrangement step, when the laser welding head is aligned with the wire feeding nozzle (as shown in Fig. 1(a)), a focal point of the laser beam is aligned with an outer edge of an end portion of an extending end of each of the plurality of aluminum alloy welding wires such that the laser beam is tangent to the aluminum alloy welding wire (as shown in Fig. 1(a) which is very similar to set up shown in instant Fig. 2, focal point of laser beam is aligned with outer edge of extended end of each aluminum alloy welding wire as fed from filler wire delivery, i.e., wire feeding nozzle, such that laser beam is tangent to the aluminum welding wire), and the focal point of the laser beam and upper surfaces of the two aluminum alloy sheets are located in a same plane (as shown in Fig. 1(a)).
Regarding claim 6, Schulz in view of Morton, Smashey and Banas teaches all that is claimed above and Schulz further discloses in the welding step, oscillating the laser welding head reciprocally in a direction perpendicular to a traveling direction while having the laser welding head travel along the gap during welding (as shown in Fig. 1(a), laser welding head oscillates laser beam reciprocally in Y direction which is perpendicular to welding direction V which is in X direction while laser welding head travels along the gap), and wherein an oscillating amplitude of the laser welding head is not greater than the width of the gap (as seen in Fig. 1(a) oscillating amplitude is not greater than width of the gap and as described on pg 548 first para. scan width of sinusoidal scanning movement is 1.4mm at scan frequency 200 HZ and .7mm is not greater than gap width of 1mm).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Newly cited NPL Schulz et al. is used in the current 103 rejection of amended claim 1.
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 ALYSON JOAN HARRINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-2359. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am - 5 pm EST.
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, Phutthiwat Wongwian can be reached at (571) 270-5426. 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.
/A.J.H./ /GERALD L SUNG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights