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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on January 15, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
This Non-final Rejection is in response to the Amendment filed January 15, 2026 in response to the last Final Rejection, dated August 15, 2025.
The claim objection in the last Final Rejection is withdrawn in view of the objection being addressed.
The 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection in the last Final Rejection is withdrawn in view of amendments made to the claims distinguishing them from the rejection. However, claims 1-3 and 5-7 and 21 are unpatentable over the prior art under 35 U.S.C. 103 as explained below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues, starting at the top of page 8 of the Amendment, claim 1 has been amended to distinguish it over the previous 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection. Examiner agrees. Therefore, the 35 U.S.C. 102(a) rejection of claims 1-3 and 5-7 is withdrawn as stated above. However, claims 1-3 and 5-7 are unpatentable over the prior art under 35 U.S.C. 103 as explained below. Examiner finds claim 8 contains allowable subject matter for the reasons given in the Allowable Subject Matter section below such that claims 8-10 have been indicated as being allowable if claim 8 is written in independent form as specified below.
Applicant argues, starting at the bottom of page 10, claim 11 as amended distinguishes claims 11-17 over the previous 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection. Examiner agrees for the reasons given in the Allowable Subject Matter section below. Examiner finds claim 11 is also allowed over the prior art reference combination cited in the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection presented below such that claims 11-20 are allowed.
Applicant argument starting at the bottom of page 13 regarding claim 21 is moot in view of the new grounds of rejection necessitated by the claim amendments made to claim 1.
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 1-3, 5-7 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 1,104,088 to Wales, hereinafter “Wales”, in view of Japanese Patent Publication No. JP 59-215238 A by Amanoto et al., hereinafter “Amanoto”.
Regarding claim 1, Wales discloses a system (Fig. 2; page 1, line 26-28) for manufacturing a tubular member (1 in Fig. 1; page 1, line 44), the tubular member including a central axis (the central axis of tubular member billet 1 in Fig. 1), a longitudinal first terminal end, a longitudinal second terminal end, a throughbore extending between the first terminal end and the second terminal end (the left and right terminal ends of tubular billet 1 with throughbore hole 2 in Fig. 1; page 1, line 50-51), and an outer surface extending between the first terminal end and the second terminal end, wherein the outer surface includes a central portion that is spaced from the first terminal end and the second terminal end along the central axis (the outer surface of tubular member billet 1 in Fig. 1 between the left and right ends), the system comprising:
a rigid mandrel configured to be inserted within the throughbore to engage with an inner diameter of the throughbore (rigid mandrels 8 and 9 in Fig. 2 are configured to be inserted within throughbore hole 2 as shown in Figs. 3 and 4; page 1, line 86-90);
a die assembly having a pair of opposing ends (upper and lower central die sections 4 and 5 in Figs. 2-4 each have opposing ends; page 1, line 70-72) comprising a cavity (the die cavity created between upper and lower central die sections 4 and 5 in Figs. 2-4), wherein the die assembly is configured to be disposed about the outer surface such that the central portion is aligned with the cavity (Fig. 2 shows upper and lower central die sections 4 and 5 are disposed about the outer surface of tubular member billet 1 with its central portion aligned with the die cavity); and
a ram (ram collars 12 and 13 in Fig. 4; page 1, line 99-112) comprising an engagement surface that is positioned external the throughbore of the tubular member and extends orthogonally relative to the central axis between a radially inner end and an opposing radially outer end (the inner surfaces of collars 12 and 13 in Fig. 4 are engagement surfaces positioned external the throughbore which extend orthogonally relative to the central axis between a radially inner end and an opposing radially outer end), wherein the ram is configured to apply a load directed parallel the central axis and orthogonally from the engagement surface to the first terminal end or second terminal end of the tubular member along the central axis of the tubular member to expand the central portion of the outer surface into the cavity to expand a wall thickness of the tubular member along the central portion whereby an upset region is formed along the tubular member having an expanded wall thickness (the engagement surfaces of collars 12 and 13 apply a load to the terminal ends of tubular member billet 1 along its central axis to expand the outer surface central portion into the cavity to expand the wall thickness as shown in the progression from Fig. 2 through Fig. 4 forming upset regions; page 1, line 103-112. See “Upset Regions” annotation below.).
PNG
media_image1.png
194
544
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The hollow axle made by Wales’ system is designed with an upset regions located on either side of the center of the axle and its terminal ends such that the mandrels supporting the throughbore in the upset regions does not have to be present at the center of the tubular member because upsetting is not being performed at the axle’s center. Therefore, Wales does not disclose a mandrel extending continuously and entirely between the pair of opposing ends of the die assembly.
In the same field of upsetting tubular members, Amanoto teaches it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a mandrel extending continuously and entirely between the pair of opposing ends of the die assembly when forming an upset region of expanded wall thickness along the central portion of the outer surface of the tubular member. Fig. 3 shows tubular member blank material P positioned in die assembly 11 with mandrel 21 extending continuously and entirely between the opposing ends of die assembly 11. Amanoto discloses gripping the exterior of blank material P with die 11 and grip die 13 and pressing the two together as shown in the progression from Fig. 3(a) to Fig. 3(c) which forms the upset region in the center of the tubular member. See the abstract of Amanoto previously provided.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute Amanoto’s mandrel 21 for Wales’ mandrels 8 and 9 in Wales’ system when a tubular member with a single, centrally-located upset region is desired as Amanoto teaches. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized applying the teaching of Amanoto to the system of Wales would achieve the predictable result of positioning the mandrel in Wales’ system to support the throughbore of the tubular member where the upsetting is being performed.
Regarding claim 2, the prior art reference combination of Wales in view of Amanoto renders the system of claim 1 unpatentable as explained above. Wales further discloses a heater configured to heat the outer surface of the tubular member (page 1, line 64-66 disclose tubular member billet 1 is heated by a heater).
Regarding claim 3, the prior art reference combination of Wales in view of Amanoto renders the system of claim 2 unpatentable as explained above. Wales further discloses a plurality of guides (upper and lower end sections 6 and 7 in Figs. 2-4; page 1, line 72-75) configured to be coupled to the outer surface of the tubular member to prevent buckling of the tubular member.
Regarding claim 5, the prior art reference combination of Wales in view of Amanoto renders the system of claim 1 unpatentable as explained above. When applying the teaching of Amanoto to the system disclosed by Wales, the throughbore of the die assembly of the combination would be designed as shown in Fig. 3 of Amanoto where the inner diameter of the throughbore of die assembly 11 reaches a maximum within the cavity in the upset region. See “Upset Region” annotation to Fig. 3 of Amanoto reproduced below.
PNG
media_image2.png
698
615
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, the prior art reference combination of Wales in view of Amanoto renders the system of claim 5 unpatentable as explained above. Wales further discloses, wherein the die assembly comprises a body that includes the throughbore of the die assembly and the cavity, wherein the body of the die assembly comprises a plurality of segments (upper and lower central die sections 4 and 5 in Figs. 2-4) that are configured to be coupled together to circumferentially surround the tubular member (die sections 4 and 5 couple together to circumferentially surround tubular member billet 1 as shown in Figs. 2-4).
Amanoto similarly teaches the die assembly (die assembly 11 in Fig. 3) comprises a body that includes the throughbore of the die assembly and the cavity, wherein the body of the die assembly comprises a plurality of segments that are configured to be coupled together to circumferentially surround the tubular member (upper and lower dies 14 and 15 of assembly 11 are couple together to circumferentially surround material P as shown in Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 7, the prior art reference combination of Wales in view of Amanoto renders the system of claim 5 unpatentable as explained above. When applying the teaching of Amanoto to the system disclosed by Wales, the throughbore of the die assembly of the combination would be designed as shown in Fig. 3 of Amanoto. Amanoto further teaches the cavity is defined by:
a pair of frustoconical surfaces (see “Frustoconical Surfaces” annotations to Fig. 3 of Amanoto reproduced below); and
a cylindrical surface positioned between the pair of frustoconical surfaces (see “Cylindrical Surface” annotation below).
PNG
media_image3.png
698
1033
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 21, the prior art reference combination of Wales in view of Amanoto renders the system of claim 1 unpatentable as explained above. Wales further teaches the inner engagement surface of ram collars 12 and 13 corresponds to a longitudinal termina end of the ram.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 8 has been amended to claim the mandrel body is defined by an enlarged outer diameter portion extending between a pair of longitudinally opposed terminal ends both located external the pair of opposing ends of the die assembly. The prior art of record does not appear to disclose, teach nor suggest this claimed relationship.
Claims 9 and 10 depend from and further limit claim 8.
Claims 11-20 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 11 has been amended to claim the mandrel body is defined by an enlarged outer diameter portion extending between a pair of longitudinally opposed terminal ends both located external the pair of opposing ends of the die assembly. The prior art of record does not appear to disclose, teach nor suggest this claimed relationship.
Claims 12-20 depend from and further limit claim 11.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL DEREK PRESSLEY whose telephone number is (313)446-6658. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am to 3:30pm Eastern.
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, Christopher Templeton can be reached at (571) 270-1477. 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.
/P DEREK PRESSLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3725