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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment has been entered. Claims 1-5 and 7 are pending. Claim 6 is cancelled. Cancelling claim 6 has rendered moot rejections of claim 6. Correcting the N content in claim 3 have overcome the rejection under 35 USC 112(b). Adding a lower limit to the range recited in claim 5 has overcome the rejection under 35 USC 112(d). Claiming “and one or two or more selected from Cu: 0.1% to 3.0%, V: 0.1% to 2.0%, Ta: 0.05% to 0.50%, and Y: 0.001% to 0.010%” in claim 1 has overcome rejections under 35 USC 102 over Takano (JP2008132515A) and under 35 USC 102 over Inui (JP2001219291A), and under 35 USC 103 over Inui. Claiming Al: 0.001% to 0.149% in claim 1 has overcome rejections under 35 USC 103 over Takano.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ichikawa (US20190177824) in view of Takano (JP2008132515A). Takano is cited in the IDS filed June 6, 2023, and Ichikawa was cited in prior office action(s). References to Takano are directed to the English language translation which accompanied the office action mailed November 28, 2025.
Regarding claims 1-5 and 7, Ichikawa discloses a ferrite-based stainless steel material with composition amounts selected to improve weldability (title, abstract, [0002], [0047], [0082], [0086]). Ranges for the composition of the alloy disclosed by Ichikawa are shown in the table below with values in terms of mass%.
Alloying Element
Ichikawa
Ranges
Present Invention
C
0.025 or less [0023]
0.001 to 0.050 (claim 1)
0.001 or more and 0.042 or less (claim 5)
Si
0.40 to 2.0 [0023]
0.01 to 2.00 (claim 1)
Mn
0.05 to 1.5 [0023]
0.01 to 1.50 (claim 1)
P
0.05 or less [0024]
0.030 or less (claim 1)
S
0.01 or less [0024]
0.010 or less (claim 1)
Cr
16.0 to 30.0 [0024]
16.0 to 25.0 (claim 1)
17.0 mass to 19.2 (claim 4)
Ti
0.01 to 0.10 [0027]
0.001 to 0.149 (claim 1)
Al
0.001 to 0.15 [0024]
0.001 to 0.149 (claim 1)
O
—
0.020 or less (claim 1)
N
0.025 or less [0025]
0.050 or less (claim 1)
0.049 or less (claim 3)
Nb
0.20 to 0.80 [0024]
0.01 to 1.80 (claim 1 one or two or more selected from Nb, Mo, W)
Mo
0.60 to 3.0 [0024]
0.01 to 3.60 (claim 1 one or two or more selected from Nb, Mo, W)
W
0.01 to 1.0 [0026]
0.01 to 3.60 (claim 1 one or two or more selected from Nb, Mo, W)
Cu
0.01 to 1.0 [0026]
0.1 to 3.0 (claim 1 one or two or more selected from Cu, V, Ta, Y)
V
0.01 to 0.50 [0027]
0.1% to 2.0 (claim 1 one or two or more selected from Cu, V, Ta, Y)
Y
0.001 to 0.10 (one or more rare earth metal) [0028]
0.001 to 0.010 (claim 1 one or two or more selected from Cu, V, Ta, Y)
Fe and impurities
Balance [0025]
Balance (claim 1)
[Nb]+[Mo]+[W]+0.25[Si]
0.82 to 5.3 (calculated from values in [0023-24], [0026])
≥ 2.2 (claim 1)
[Mo]+[W]
0.61 to 4.0 (calculated from values in [0024], [0026])
≤ 3.6 (claim 1)
[Ti]+[Al]
0.011 to 0.25 (calculated from values in [0024], [0027])
≤ 0.15 (claim 1)
≤ 0.07 (claim 7)
B
0.0003 to 0.005 [0027]
0.01 or less (claim 2, any one or more of B, Zr)
Zr
0.01 to 0.30 [0027]
0.001 to 0.010 (claim 2, any one or more of B, Zr)
Ranges for Si, Mn, S, Ti, N, Nb, Mo, W, and B disclosed by Ichikawa [0024-28] directly meet ranges recited in claims 1, 2, and 3; ranges for C, Cu, V, and B disclosed by Ichikawa [0023-28] overlap ranges recited in claim 1 and 5; ranges of P, Cr, Al, and Y disclosed by Ichikawa [0023-28] encompass ranges recited in claims 1 and 4, and the range for Zr disclosed by Ichikawa [0023-28] touches the range for Zr recited in claim 2. Ichikawa is silent on the amount of O, but Ichikawa discloses selecting elements for a deoxidation effect [0045], [0059], [0084], and Ichikawa discloses alloying amounts in values as low as 0.001% (Tables 1 and 2). Considering Ichikawa does not disclose oxygen in the material, Ichikawa discloses adding alloying elements for deoxidation effects [0045], [0059], [0084], and considering the low values disclosed by Ichikawa for elements which actually are present (Tables 1 and 2), one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing would expect the amount of oxygen in the material disclosed by Ichikawa [0002] to meet or approach a value of 0.020% or less. Within claims 1 and 7, Formulas (1), (2), and (3) define the amounts of Nb, Mo, W, Si, Ti, and Al in the alloy, and the structure defined by Formulas (1), (2), and (3) in claims 1 and 7 overlap the structures defined by the ranges disclosed by Ichikawa [0023-28]. The ranges disclosed by Ichikawa [0023-28], overlap or encompass the ranges for chemical elements defined by limitations recited in claims 1-5 and 7. When claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art a prima facie case of obviousness exists; prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close, and generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. See MPEP 2144.05(I-II).
Ichikawa does not disclose that the ferrite-based material is structurally a wire.
Takano teaches a ferrite-based stainless steel welding wire (title, abstract, overview, [0001]). Takano teaches that the stainless steel comprises ranges of alloying elements [0033-51], substantially similar to those recited in claim 1 of the present application as originally presented for examination, and to those disclosed by Ichikawa, applied above (Ichikawa [0023-28]). Takano teaches advantages of lower cost, improved thermal expansion coefficient, and improved stress corrosion resistance of ferritic material when applied as welding wires [0004], [0006], and Takano teaches that there is a demand for ferritic stainless steel welding wires with improved corrosion resistance in a weld zone [0004].
Both Ichikawa and Takano teach ferrite-based stainless steel bonding materials with substantially similar compositions. Ichikawa teaches that the ferritic stainless steel material has excellent corrosion resistance [0018], [0021].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to form the material disclosed by Ichikawa, applied above into a welding wire because Takano teaches that there is a demand for a welding wire made from ferrite-based stainless steel with improved corrosion resistance [0004], Takano suggests that ferrite-based stainless steel with improved corrosion resistance are advantageous as welding wires [0004], [0006] and Ichikawa teaches ferrite-based material with improved corrosion resistance [0002], [0007], [0018], [0021]. Ichikawa discloses that “a product other than a sheet may also be processed by hot working” [0090], thereby indicating the disclosure as open to a wire product. A welding wire of the material disclosed by Ichikawa, applied above would be predicted to be a ferrite-based wire with the improved corrosion resistance as disclosed by Ichikawa [0002] [0007], [0018], [0021], which Tanaka teaches as suitable properties for a welding wire [0002] [0004] [0006].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding previously set forth rejections under 35 USC 102 and 35 USC 103 over Takano (JP2008132515), applicant argues that Takano does not disclose or suggest Al, which contrasts with the claimed, nonzero proportions of Al. While applicant’s amendment has overcome the previously set-forth rejections over Takano, for the reasons argued by applicant, the present rejection of the amended claims over Ichikawa (US20190177824) in view of Takano, relies on Ichikawa to meet the claimed composition limitations, as amended. One cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See MPEP 2145(IV).
Applicant argues for the patentability of dependent claims over the prior art by reference to independent claim(s). This argument is not persuasive for the reasons given above with respect to claim 1.
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 SEAN P O'KEEFE whose telephone number is (571)272-7647. The examiner can normally be reached MR 8:00-6:30.
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, Sally Merkling can be reached at (571) 272-6297. 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.
/SEAN P. O'KEEFE/ Examiner, Art Unit 1738
/SALLY A MERKLING/ SPE, Art Unit 1738
Prosecution Insights