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
In the amendment dated 07/07/2026, claims 1-4 are pending.
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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Esibian (US 4059743 A) in view of Kitahashi (US 5726414 A)
Regarding claim 1, Esibian discloses
A modified cathode device (combo 1-2, see figs.1-2) adapted for use in a plasma arc spray gun (plasma arc torch, see title and fig.1), said modified cathode device (combo 1-2, see figs.1-2) comprising: a central longitudinal axis (see central longitudinal axis in annotated fig.1 below) traversing the modified cathode device (combo 1-2) from a first end to a second end (see first end and send end in annotated fig.1 below)
PNG
media_image1.png
503
707
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
840
1168
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated figs. 1-2 of Esibian
a partially dome-shaped portion (22, see fig.2), said partially dome-shaped portion (22, see fig.2) having rounded edges (see fig.2), said rounded edges (22, see fig.2) terminating as a flat surface (20, see fig.2) along the first end (see first end in annotated fig.1 above) of the modified cathode device (combo 1-2), said flat surface (20, see fig.2) characterized by a width (width of 20) extending from a first edge of the flat surface to a second edge of the flat surface (see first and second edges of the flat surface 20 annotated fig.2 above) and a midpoint (see midpoint in annotated fig.2 above) located between the first edge and the second edge (see first and second edges of the flat surface annotated fig.2 above), wherein the midpoint (see midpoint in annotated fig.2 above) of the flat surface (20, see fig.2) is located along the central longitudinal axis (see central longitudinal axis in annotated figs.1-2 above) of the modified cathode device (combo 1-2); and
a body portion (1, see figs.1-2) extending from the partially dome-shaped portion (22) to the second end of the modified cathode device (See the annotated second end of the combo 1-2 in fig.1 above).
Esibian discloses said partially dome-shaped portion 22 (See fig.2), but Esibian does not expressly disclose said partially dome-shaped portion being a partially spherical structure.
However, Kitahashi discloses an electrode for use in a plasma torch, comprising:
said partially dome-shaped portion (forward end portion, see fig.6A) being a partially spherical structure having rounded edges (See fig.6A and col.7, lines 21-22: “As shown in FIG. 6A, an electrode 3' had a forward end that was contoured in a spherical configuration”).
PNG
media_image3.png
296
500
media_image3.png
Greyscale
At the time the invention was made, it would have been obvious mater of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify said partially dome-shaped portion of Esibian to be “a partially spherical structure” as taught by Kitahashi (Notes: the modification does not affect to the flat surface 20 of Esibian), because applicant has not disclosed that the shape “a partially spherical structure” provides an advantage is used for particular purpose or solves a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art would have expected the Applicant' s invention to perform equally well with Kitahashi’s shape or Esibian’s shape, because both shapes perform the function of generating the plasma arc equally well (MPEP 2144.04 IV B)
Regarding claim 2, Esibian further discloses said flat surface (20, see fig.2) is
sufficient to stabilize an arc along a central portion (See central portion in annotated fig.2 below) between the first edge and the second edge of the flat surface ( see first and second edges of the flat surface annotated fig.2 below and col.6, lines 47-50: “ a pilot arc is established between the electrode 1 and the nozzle 3 in the gap 19 to draw the cutting arc between the electrode 1 and the metal being treated”).
PNG
media_image4.png
840
1168
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig.2 of Esibian
Regarding claim 3, Esibian further discloses the rounded edges (22, see fig.2) have a
degree of curvature represented by a radius (R, see fig.2) of .1 inches to .3 inches (see fig.2 and col.6 lines 28-39, R=3cm (=0.118 inches) or 5 mm (=0.197 inches), which is within the claimed ranges).
Regarding claim 4, Esibian further discloses the second end (see second end in
annotated fig. 1 above) of the body portion (1, see fig.1-2) is configured to be operably connected to a cathode holder ( electrode holder 4 , see fig.1).
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed on 7/7/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments: “the spherical configuration of Kitahashi does not terminate as a flat face. Rather, the spherical configuration is contoured with curvature at the tip, as is customary understood by the term "spherical configuration." Combining the spherical configuration of Kitahashi with Esibian would produce an entirely rounded face. Stated differently, incorporating the teachings of Kitahashi would cause the flat face in Fig. 2 of Esibian (reproduced hereinbelow) to be transformed into the fully rounded face as shown in Fig. 6A of Kitahashi” (see Remarks, page 3).
The arguments are not persuasive because:
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091,231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In this case, the combination of Esibian with Kitahashi teaches partial spherical structure with rounded edges that terminate as a flat surface as recited in claim 1. The main reference Esibian teaches the partially dome-shaped portion being a structure having rounded edges 22, said rounded edges terminating as a flat surface 20 along the first end of the modified cathode device 1 as shown in fig.2 of Esibian:
PNG
media_image5.png
535
550
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It is agreed that Esibian does not expressly state that the cathode device 1 being a partially spherical structure, but Kitahashi does. Thus, one of the ordinary skills would be able to modify the shape of the cathode device 1 of Esibian to be a little bit more rounded on the sides to have “partially spherical structure” as taught by Kitahashi. The modification does not affect flat face 20 of Esibian so that flat face 20 is still the same and has the structures as shown in fig.2 of Esibian. State another way, Combining the spherical configuration of Kitahashi with Esibian would produce the partial spherical structure, as shown in fig.6A of Kitahashi, with rounded edges that terminate as the flat surface along the first end of the modified cathode device, as shown in fig.2 of Esibian. In addition, it is noted that all features related to the flat surface are taught by Esibian, such as: “said flat surface characterized by a width extending from a first edge of the flat surface to a second edge of the flat surface and a midpoint located between the first edge and the second edge, wherein the midpoint of the flat surface is located along the central longitudinal axis of the modified cathode device” as cited in claim 1, are taught by Esibian.
There is no evidence in Esibian and/or Kitahashi to show that the shape of the cathode device 1 of Esibian cannot be modified to be a little bit more rounded on the sides to have “partially spherical structure”. Moreover, the modification would not destroy the flat surface of Esibian as well as the invention of Esibian.
Furthermore, the structural arrangement “partial spherical structure” is a matter of design choice, as the specification does not indicate that the claimed arrangement is critical to achieving any function or result. The specification does not identify any unexpected result, technical advantage, or other criticality associated with the claimed structure “partial spherical structure”. Accordingly, the combination of Esibian with Kitahashi to obtain the claimed structure “partial spherical structure” would have been within the ordinary skill in the art.
For the above reasons, the rejections to claim 1 are respectfully sustained.
Claims 2-4 are rejected by the virtue of the dependency upon claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20060261046 A1 discloses a welding electrode has a body having a shank and a contact region for placement against a workpiece during welding. A portion of the body may be formed on a parabolic profile.
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 TIFFANY T TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3673. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 10am - 6pm.
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, Edward Landrum can be reached on (571) 272-5567. 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 or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TIFFANY T TRAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
