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
Claims 9-16 are examined in this office action of which claims 9 and 14 were amended in the reply dated 4/29/26.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 9-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “wherein the powder carrying device in step (d) is built flexibly around said bottom of the area to be repaired” in the last paragraph of the claim. It is not clear what is meant by “built flexibly”. It is not clear whether this refers to the powder carrying device is built with influence of parameters, whether the powder carrying device is capable of being flexed, or some other meaning. Further, even if this means that the powder carrying device is capable of being flexed, it is unclear what sort of flex in the material is required for something to be “built flexibly”. Claims 10-16 are also rejected as they depend from claim 9 and do not solve the above issue.
The term “soft metallic materials” in claim 9 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “soft metallic materials” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. While the specification recites “ building a powder carrying device 21 flexibly on the two sides of the bottom of the area to be repaired with soft metallic materials such as aluminum foil (Specification, pg. 13, lines 21-23), aluminum foil is merely an example and does not elucidate what scope is encompassed by “soft metallic materials”. Claims 10-16 are also rejected as they depend from claim 9 and do not solve the above issue.
The term “high-temperature resistance tape” in claim 9 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “high-temperature resistance tape” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. While "high-temperature resistance tape is recited in page 13, line 24 of the specification, this is merely a repetition of the term and does not elucidate on what scope is encompassed within "high-temperature resistance tape. Claims 10-16 are also rejected as they depend from claim 9 and do not solve the above issue.
The term “high energy beam equipment” in claim 12 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “high energy” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. While applicant notes in the specification that the laser parameters include a laser power of 300-400W, this does not elucidate what constitutes “high energy beam equipment”.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-16 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Prior art of record CN 112281156 A (cited on IDS dated 4/10/25) of Yao discloses where the clamping blocks are assembled and the assembly surface of the inner clamping block is matched with the inner profile of the part to be repaired, and the assembly face of the outer clamping block is profiled and matched with the outer profile of the part to be repaired (Yao, pg. 5 lines 14-17 and 27-29 and Fig. 3), meeting limitation (d) of building a powder carrying device around a bottom of the area to be repaired, so that powder is filled into the powder carrying device until it is on the same plane as or tangent to a bottom surface of the area to be repaired. However, Yao does not disclose where the powder carrying device is built using soft metallic materials fixed to the ultra-thin structure by a high-temperature resistance tape.
Response to Arguments
With respect to the 112(b) rejection of claim 14, applicant’s amendments cure the indefiniteness issue and the rejection is withdrawn.
With respect to the 112(b) rejection of claim 12, applicant argues that the term “high energy beam” is not a relative term but a definite term in the art in manufacturing and cites references that use the term high-energy beam (Applicant’s remarks, pg. 5, last paragraph – pg. 6, 1st paragraph). However, while references may recite the term, it is nonetheless a relative term. Energy beams vary greatly in the energy density that they produce. For example, lasers vary from pointers and cat toys up to ones that can start fusion reactions. By using the term “high energy beam” it is not clear what is encompassed within the scope of this term. Thus, the rejection of claim 12 is maintained.
With respect to the rejection over Yao, it is agreed that Yao does not teach where a powder carrying device is built using soft metallic materials fixed to the ultra-thin structure by a high-temperature resistance tape. However, as these are relative terms the claims stand rejected under 35 USC 112(b) as shown in the new rejections above.
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 Joshua S Carpenter whose telephone number is (571)272-2724. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:30 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, 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.
/JOSHUA S CARPENTER/Examiner, Art Unit 1733
/JOPHY S. KOSHY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733
Prosecution Insights