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 Claims
Pending:
1-4, 9-16, 18, 47, 62-66, 68
Withdrawn:
NONE
Rejected:
1-4, 9-16, 18, 47, 62-66, 68
Amended:
1, 2, 9, 11, 68
New:
NONE
Independent:
1, 2
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.
Claims 1-4, 8-16, 62-65 and 68 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al (US 2014/0230974, cited on IDS filed 4/26/22).
Concerning independent claims 1 and 2, Lin teaches a process for manufacturing an aluminum alloy sheet from molten aluminum, by casting and simultaneously cooling (see Lin at [0017], [0068-0071]) with a continuous in-line process of: continuous casting a thin strip <0.249 in thick [0033] (<6.3 mm) by feeding a belt caster or roll caster [0017] with molten aluminum, while using a compression force on the aluminum strip of 25-300 lb/in width [0032] (which overlaps the claimed compressive force range in independent claim 1), thereby obtaining a strip in a substantially solid state [0032], which overlaps the claimed process steps, strip thickness, and compression force (cl. 1). Lin teaches substantially complete solidification occurs prior to the nip (N) at [0071], which meets the instant “at least 90wt% of the aluminum-based alloy strip is in a solid state when exiting the belt caster”. Lin teaches two solidification fronts are formed (see Fig. 6w) when belt casting, followed by cooling during the straight sections of the belt caster (Fig. 6u, 6w). Said two solidification fronts form between two curved mold support sections (Fig. 6w), which meets the instant “curved mold support sections” limitation.
Concerning the amendment to claims 1 and 2 of “compression force being applied by belts of the belt caster on the aluminum-based alloy strip, during its solidification”, as detailed above, Lin teaches solidification is substantially complete at the nip (N in Fig. 6b-2), however, pressure by the belts of the belt caster is not exclusively applied in the horizontal plane after solidification/the nip. The belts of Lin begin to interface with the molten alloy at points labeled “2-6” and “4-6” (see Fig. 6b-2) where the melt begins solidification. Further, the melt advances and solidification advances (with continued pressure applied from said belts) to just prior to the nip “N” at mushy/semi-solid zone (labeled “16.6” Fig. 6b-2), where the solidification of the melt is substantially complete. Because Lin teaches the belts apply pressure and interface with the molten aluminum prior to complete solidification, Lin is held to meet the amended instant “compression force being applied by belts of the belt caster on the aluminum-based alloy strip, during its solidification” limitation. Therefore, because Lin teaches a process of belt casting with identical steps and overlapping parameters, it is held that Lin has created a prima facie case of obviousness of the presently claimed invention.
Concerning claims 3, 9, and 10, Lin teaches further steps of extended cooling (used interchangeably by Lin with quenching, see [0013], [0046], etc.) and cold rolling of the aluminum strip [0077], which meets the instant steps of further cooling and rolling. Further concerning claim 10, Lin does not specify a mandatory heat treatment step following casting and cooling and prior to rolling.
Concerning claim 11, Lin teaches simultaneous casting while cooling, followed by further cooling [0046], and therefore meets the instant claim limitations. More particularly, the “cooling” of Lin includes, but is not exclusive to, “quenching”, and therefore Lin teaches the claimed “free from quenching” limitation.
Concerning claim 12, Lin teaches simultaneous casting while cooling, followed by further cooling [0046]; wherein the further cooling of Lin can be done with a fluid or air [0046], and is within the scope of the claimed “quenching” (see 112(b) rejection above).
Concerning claims 4 and 63, Lin’s teaching of a compression force on the aluminum strip of 25-300 lb/in width [0032], overlaps the claimed 10-150 lb/in range in instant claim 4 and 63, and therefore meets said limitation.
Concerning claim 8, as set forth above, Lin teaches simultaneously casting and cooling with a belt caster, which meets the instant limitation.
Concerning claim 12, 16, 62, 64, following simultaneous casting and cooling, Lin teaches (cold) rolling at temperatures <400°F (<204°C), which overlaps the temperature range in instant claims 16 and 64. Concerning claim 12, Lin does not specify quenching following rolling at temperatures <204°C. However, Lin does not teach heat is applied to the rolling equipment during this “cold rolling” step [0076], and therefore Lin implies cooling takes place (wherein cooling is expected from elevated temperature of <400°F to room temperature). Lin does not specify the cooling rate of said cooling (see 112(b) rejection above). However, it would have been within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art, given the disclosure of Lin, to have cooled the rolled strip of Lin after rolling at temperatures <204C by media of air, spray, or liquid (which qualify as “quenching”, see Lin at [0013]) because Lin teaches cooling with various media is suitable to provide a sheet with excellent properties (examples, [0013]).
Concerning claims 13 and 14, following cooling (which qualifies as quenching), Lin teaches thermally treating by aging [0141], Fig. 2(a).
Concerning claims 15, 65, Lin teaches casting and simultaneously cooling, wherein said cooling occurs at a rate 1000C/s [0035], which falls within the claimed cooling rate range and therefore meets the instant limitation.
Concerning claim 68, Lin teaches two solidification fronts are formed (see Fig. 6w) when belt casting, followed by cooling during the straight sections of the belt caster (Fig. 6u, 6w), which meets the instant limitation.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin as applied to claims 1 and 3 above, and further in view of “ASM Handbook Vol. 2A” pp 255-278 (cited herein).
Lin is discussed in paragraphs above. Lin does not specify coiling after belt casting and prior to further cold rolling. However, Lin does mention post casting processing can be completed in a batch or continuous mode [0012]. “ASM Handbook Vol. 2A” p 265 teaches aluminum sheet is available in coil form (intended for further processing). Further, “ASM Handbook Vol. 2A” p 269 teaches that aluminum strips after casting by continuous casting (such as twin belt casting) are uncoiled, cold rolled, and recoiled (p 269, 3rd column, p 270 Fig. 6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have coiled the twin belt strip of Lin, and further uncoiled prior to rolling, in order to facilitate logistics and operate in a batch type manner (taught by Lin) by coiling after casting and uncoiling prior to further working (taught by “ASM Handbook Vol. 2A”).
Claims 47, 66 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of Handa (US 2016/0265095, cited herein).
Lin is discussed in paragraphs above. Lin does not specify “pulse heating” at “about 400°C to about 570°C”. However, Handa teaches a heat treatment of final annealing at 450-560°C for 10-60 sec is effective to increase formability and bendability of aluminum sheets [0075-0076], which overlaps the claimed heat treatment temperature and time duration. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have annealed the aluminum strip of Lin at temperatures of 450-560°C for 10-60 sec, as taught by Handa, because Handa teaches said heat treatment provides the predictable result of improving formability and bendability [0075-0076].
Response to Amendment
In the amendment filed 10/28/25 applicant amended claims 1, 2, 9, 11, and 68. No new matter has been added. The instant amendment has overcome the previously applied 112 rejections.
Applicant’s argument that the instant invention is allowable because Lin teaches solidification prior to compression force applied by the belts of the belt caster has not been found persuasive. As detailed above, though Lin teaches solidification is substantially complete at the nip (N in Fig. 6b-2), the belts of Lin begin to interface with the molten alloy at points labeled “2-6” and “4-6” (see Fig. 6b-2) where the melt begins solidification. Further, the melt advances and solidification advances (with continued pressure applied from said belts) to just prior to the nip “N” at mushy/semi-solid zone (labeled “16.6” Fig. 6b-2), where the solidification of the melt is substantially complete. Because Lin teaches the belts apply pressure and interface with the molten aluminum prior to complete solidification, Lin is held to meet the amended instant “compression force being applied by belts of the belt caster on the aluminum-based alloy strip, during its solidification” limitation. Therefore, because Lin teaches a process of belt casting with identical steps and overlapping parameters, it is held that Lin has created a prima facie case of obviousness of the presently claimed invention.
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 JANELL COMBS MORILLO whose telephone number is (571)272-1240. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7am-3pm.
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, Keith Hendricks can be reached at 571-272-1401. 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.
/Keith D. Hendricks/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1733
/J.C.M/Examiner, Art Unit 1733
2/23/26