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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasegawa et al. (US 2014/0377584), as cited in the IDS dated 5/11/2023, hereinafter “Hasegawa.”
Regarding claims 1-7, Hasegawa teaches a method for manufacturing a high-strength steel sheet having excellent impact resistance, the method comprising the steps of: reheating a slab comprising, in wt%: 0.05-0.5% C, 0.01-2.5% Si, 0.5-3.5% Mn, 0.010-0.5% Al, 0.005-2.00% Cr, 0.005-2.00% Mo, 0.003-0.100% P, 0.02% or less S, 0.05% or less Ti and Ti>4N, 0.01-0.20% Nb, 0.005-2.00% V, 0.0002-0.005% B, and a balance of Fe and inevitable impurities to a temperature of 1100-1300⁰C, hot rolling with a finish rolling temperature of A3 temperature or higher (the A3 temperatures of the inventive examples range from 798-900⁰C, and the finish rolling temperatures of the inventive examples range from 900-950⁰C), cooling the resulting steel sheet to a coiling temperature of 300-550⁰C at a cooling rate of 30⁰C/s or more, coiling the steel sheet at the coiling temperature, performing a heat treatment including heating the steel sheet to a temperature of (A3 transformation point - 20⁰C) or higher and (A3 transformation point + 80⁰C) or lower (the A3 temperatures of the inventive examples range from 798-900⁰C, and the heat treatment temperatures of the inventive examples range from 800-900⁰C) and holding at this temperature for 10 seconds or more, cooling to a temperature range of 100-350⁰C at a cooling rate of 30⁰C/s or more, reheating the steel sheet to a temperature of 300-600⁰C for tempering and holding for 10-600 seconds, and finally cooling to room temperature at a cooling rate of 10⁰C/s (Title, Abstract, [0002], [0026]-[0036], [0081]-[0109], [0113], Tables 1-3), which overlaps with the instantly claimed ranges and relational expressions. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP §2144.05.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/12/20025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the claimed method steps of reheating the steel sheet to 850-1000⁰C, maintaining for 10 to 60 minutes, and then cooling to 0-100⁰C at a rate of 30-100⁰C/s is distinct from the method taught in Hasegawa. In response, Examiner notes that Hasegawa teaches heating the steel to (A3 transformation point - 20⁰C) or higher and (A3 transformation point + 80⁰C) or lower (the A3 temperatures of the inventive examples range from 798-900⁰C, and the heat treatment temperatures of the inventive examples range from 800-900⁰C) and holding at this temperature for 10 seconds or more, which overlaps with 850-1000⁰C and 10-60 minutes. Hasegawa further teaches cooling to a temperature range of 100-350⁰C at a cooling rate of 30⁰C/s or more, which overlaps with 0-100⁰C and 30-100⁰C/s. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP §2144.05.
Conclusion
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 ANTHONY M LIANG whose telephone number is (571)272-0483. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at (571)272-1177. 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.
/ANTHONY M LIANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights