DETAILED ACTION This is the first office action regarding application number 18/275070, filed on 07/31/2023, which is a 371 of PCT/JP2021/039401, filed October 26, 2021, which claims priority to Japanese Patent Application No. 2021-021847, filed February 15, 2021. 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. Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in FILLIN "Enter country name." Japan on 02 /15/2021 FILLIN "Enter foreign application filing date." . It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the English translation of JP2021-021847 application . Specification The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 (b) 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claim FILLIN "Enter claim indentification information" \* MERGEFORMAT 8 is 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 8 depends on claim 6 and recites “a steel strip”. It is not clear if there are two different strips. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 ( i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale , or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) FILLIN "Insert the claim numbers which are under rejection." \d "[ 1 ]" 6, 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 FILLIN "Insert either \“(a)(1)\” or \“(a)(2)\” or both. If paragraph (a)(2) of 35 U.S.C. 102 is applicable, use form paragraph 7.15.01.aia, 7.15.02.aia or 7.15.03.aia where applicable." \d "[ 2 ]" (a)(1) as being FILLIN "Insert either—clearly anticipated—or—anticipated—with an explanation at the end of the paragraph." \d "[ 3 ]" anticipated by FILLIN "Insert the prior art relied upon." \d "[ 4 ]" Nagai et al., JP 2017080806 (hereafter Nagai) . Regarding claim 6, A laser cutting method for a steel strip, comprising (abstract) cutting an end in a width direction of the steel strip including a joint obtained by joining a rear end of a preceding steel strip and a front end of a following steel strip by using a laser beam , (abstract teaches “ Steel strip notching equipment for forming a notch in a plate width direction end portion of a joint part where the rear end of a preceding steel strip and the leading end of a succeeding steel strip are joined is characterized in that cutting is performed on a laser cutting machine ”) wherein the steel strip is cut such that an interval between pieces of dross having an aspect ratio of 1.0 or more is set to 1.0 mm or more ( The aspect ratio is interpreted as (dross height/dross width) as described in paragraph [9] of the original disclosure. Fig. 4 (a) further teaches a dross with an aspect ratio of 1. It is implied that an interval between more than 1 mm between dross in Fig. 4(a) . ) and an interval between dross having an aspect ratio of 1.0 or more and dross having an aspect ratio of less than 1.0 is set to 1.0 mm or more in the end in the width direction after cutting . ( Annotated Fig. 4 (a) teaches 1mm or more distance between two dross.) Fig. 4 in Nagai Regarding claim 8 , A laser cutting facility for a steel strip, in which the laser cutting method for the steel strip according to claim 6 is executed . (Nagai teaches in abstract “ Steel strip notching equipment for forming a notch in a plate width direction end portion of a joint part where the rear end of a preceding steel strip and the leading end of a succeeding steel strip are joined is characterized in that cutting is performed on a laser cutting machine ”. It is implied that the laser cutting is carried out in a laser cutting facility for a steel strip.) Regarding claim 9 , A cold rolling method for a steel strip, comprising performing cold rolling on a steel strip (Abstract teaches “a cold rolling method, and a manufacturing method of a cold rolling steel strip”) cut by the laser cutting method for the steel strip according to claim 6 . (Abstract teaches “ Steel strip notching equipment for forming a notch in a plate width direction end portion of a joint part where the rear end of a preceding steel strip and the leading end of a succeeding steel strip are joined is characterized in that cutting is performed on a laser cutting machine by pulse cutting ”) Regarding claim 10 , A method of manufacturing a cold rolled steel strip, comprising manufacturing the cold rolled steel strip (Abstract teaches “a cold rolling method, and a manufacturing method of a cold rolling steel strip”) by a process including the cold rolling method for the steel strip according to claim 9. (Similar scope to claim 9 and therefore rejected under the same argument.) 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 ( i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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) FILLIN "Pluralize claim, if necessary, and then insert the claim number(s) which is/are under rejection." \d "[ 1 ]" 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FILLIN "Insert the prior art reference(s) relied upon for the obviousness rejection." \d "[ 2 ]" Nagai as applied to claim FILLIN "Pluralize claim, if necessary, and then insert the claim number(s) which is/are under rejection." \d "[ 3 ]" 6 above, and further in view of Takeda et al., US 20030015568 (hereafter Takeda). The laser cutting method for the steel strip according to claim 6, wherein a cutting process of cutting the end in the width direction (Abstract in Nagai) …. in the steel strip with a laser are continuously executed with the steel strip being stopped . (The claim is interpreted as the steel strip is continuously rolled. Abstract in Nagai teaches “ a manufacturing method of a cold rolling steel strip that enable cold rolling without causing a joint part rupture (weld zone rupture) ”.) and a hole forming process of forming one or more holes (Nagai is silent about this. Takeda teaches “In a continuous processing line, a weld portion is detected in an after process, and there is a case where a hole is processed in a vicinity of the weld portion to be used as a marker for shearing away the portion or for control” in paragraph [86] . ) Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to add the step of forming a hole in the steel strip as taught in Takeda in the method of Nagai. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “it is possible to process the hole, which is necessary for detecting the weld portion in an after process, concurrently with the shearing operation, and a time which the line is stopped may be shortened and, at the same time, a number of installation spaces may be reduced and it is possible to make cost reductions” as taught in paragraph [88] in Takeda. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT FAHMIDA FERDOUSI whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (303)297-4341 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday-Friday; 9:00AM-3:00PM; PST . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Steven Crabb can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-5095 . 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. /FAHMIDA FERDOUSI/ Examiner, Art Unit 3761