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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 30, 2026 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
Claim 14 is pending and is currently amended and claims 1-13 and 15-21 are canceled.
Status of Previous Rejections
The previous rejection of claim 14 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Usui et al. (US 5,437,746) is withdrawn in view of the Applicant’s amendment to claim 14.
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.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anyalebechi et al. (Effects of Cooling Rate and Grain Refining on Constituent Phase Particle Size in As-Cast 3004 Alloy).
In regard to claim 14, Anyalebechi et al. discloses continuous casting aluminum base alloys to a thickness of 6 to 12 mm thick strips, which overlaps the range of the instant invention thereby establishing prima facie obviousness (page 482, right column). MPEP 2144.05 I.
With respect to the recitation “primary phase of solid aluminum” in claim 14, the matrix phase in Anyalebechi et al. would be aluminum and thus would read on this limitation as being the “primary phase”.
With respect to the recitation “a secondary phase including an alloying element” in claim 14, Anyalebechi et al. teaches that as the cooling rate is increased more of the Al6(Fe,Mn) phase is formed (Table IV). The secondary phase would include alloy elements manganese and iron.
With respect to the recitation “wherein the alloying element is supersaturated in the primary phase by fast cooling freshly-solidified metal to a temperature at or below 100°C within ten seconds” in claim 14, Anyalebechi et al. teaches as cooling immediately prior to pouring (page 484, left column) and as the rate of cooling is increased, the average constituent particle length, µm would decrease (Figure 27). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the cooling rate in order to achieve the desired average particle size. MPEP 2144.05 II. Additionally, dendrite arm spacing is reduced by higher cooling rates and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the cooling rate in order to achieve the desired dendrite arm spacing (page 485, right column and Figure 7). MPEP 2144.05 II. Further, aluminum melts at approximately 660°C and Anyalebechi et al. teaches forming fine intermetallic particles with diameter or length of 0.5 to 2 micrometers by cooling at a rate of 300 to 2000°C/second (page 482, right column). Thus, it would take no more than 2 seconds to achieve a temperature of at or below 100°C.
With respect to the recitation “intermediate metal product” in claim 14, Anyalebechi et al. teaches sectioning and polishing the castings (page 484, left column). Thus, castings that have not been sectioned and polished would be considered intermediate products whereas the sectioned and polished samples would be final products.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered, but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jessee Roe whose telephone number is (571)272-5938. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 7:30 am to 4 pm.
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, Curt Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
/JESSEE R ROE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights