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 .
Election/Restrictions
No election of species has been made between different groove / blind hole conditions. Note however, that an election of species requirement could have been made.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 2, 4-6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, “the groove” several instances, should be –at least one groove—for consistency. See also dependent claims which also require revision. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 2, 4 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 2 “a plurality of grooves including the groove” is unclear, if applicant means each of the plurality of grooves has the structure of “the groove” or if only one “groove” requires the structure of claim 1. As the claim can be read either way, it is unclear. See also claim 4.
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(s) 1, 2, 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lachman (1303919) in view of Ikegami et al (5304769). Lachman teaches (1) A welding electrode used for spot welding of a workpiece, wherein the welding electrode comprises an end face 2 provided so as to contact the workpiece, and at least one elongated groove 3 provided in the end face or a plurality of blind holes provided in the end face, a depth of the groove or a depth of the blind holes, the width of the groove or the size of the blind holes, a ratio (d/w) of the depth d of the groove to a width w of the groove or a ratio (d/s) of the depth d of the blind holes to a size s of the blind holes is 2 or more [note the depth of groove 3 appears to be at least twice that of the width], the width of the groove is substantially constant in the depth direction, and the size of the blind holes is substantially constant in the depth direction. Alternately, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the depth to be at least twice that of the width, as taught by the illustration of Fig. 1, as an obvious matter of using the workable ratios in the art. (2) wherein the welding electrode comprises a plurality of grooves including the groove 3, and the plurality of grooves are provided in a grid pattern [Figs. 2, 4]. Lachman do not teach a depth of the groove or a depth of the blind holes is 0.5 mm (0.02”) or more and 20 mm (0.787”) or less, the width of the groove or the size of the blind holes is 0.01 mm or more and 0.5 mm (0.0012”) or less. Ikegami et al teach the depth of about less than 0.8 mm for the depth, noting that is for the deepest groove. The width of the groove is determined by the ratio of d/w of Lachman. When using 2-4.5 for the ratio of d/w, then the width w can be 0.8/2 0.8/3 0.8/4, 0.8/4.5 etc. and overlap with the claimed ranges for w. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ the claimed ranges of d (0.8), as taught by Ikegami, and to use the claimed range of w, as well as specific ratios of d/w of around 2-4.5, as an obvious matter of using the workable ranges in the art for the grooved electrode surface of Lachman. Lachman further do not teach (5) wherein the end face has a dome shape with a radius of curvature of 15 mm or more and 60 mm or less. Ikegami et al teach wherein the end face has a dome shape with a radius of curvature of 15 mm or more and 60 mm or less [Fig. 43]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the end face has a dome shape with a radius of curvature of 15 mm or more and 60 mm or less, as a typical configuration used in the art for electrode face, and which facilitates a target weld location. Lachman further do not show what is virtually inherent, i.e. (6) A welding apparatus comprising: at least one welding electrode according to claim 1; and a power supply device electrically connected to the welding electrode, wherein the welding electrode and the power supply device are configured to apply an output current of the power supply device to the workpiece via the welding electrode. Ikegami et al teach A welding apparatus comprising: at least one welding electrode 6 according to claim 1; and a power supply device [supplying electric current], see electrically connected to the welding electrode 6, wherein the welding electrode and the power supply device are configured to apply an output current of the power supply device to the workpiece via the welding electrode. Ikegami et al teach this is the standard practice in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ a welding apparatus comprising: at least one welding electrode according to claim 1; and a power supply device electrically connected to the welding electrode, wherein the welding electrode and the power supply device are configured to apply an output current of the power supply device to the workpiece via the welding electrode, as taught by Ikegami et al, in order to utilize the welding electrode of Lachman with a practical welding apparatus that uses an electric power supply.
As for (7) wherein a ratio (d/w) of the depth d of the groove to a width w of the groove or a ratio (d/s) of the depth d of the blind holes to a size s of the blind holes is 4 or more, this particular range of 4 or more, is within the ordinary skill in the art, as treated above, and obvious to use as an obvious matter of using the workable ranges in the art. Lachman further do not teach (4) wherein the welding electrode comprises a plurality of grooves including the groove, and the plurality of grooves or the plurality of blind holes are provided so that a density of the grooves or a density of the blind holes at a center of the end face is higher. Ikegami et al teach wherein the welding electrode comprises a plurality of grooves including the groove, and the plurality of grooves or the plurality of blind holes are provided so that a density of the grooves or a density of the blind holes at a center of the end face is higher [see Fig. 16a, 16b, 16d as examples of higher density at center]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ a plurality of grooves including the groove, and the plurality of grooves or the plurality of blind holes are provided so that a density of the grooves or a density of the blind holes at a center of the end face is higher, as taught by Ikegami et al, as an equivalent configuration used in the art.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lachman (1303919) in view of Ikegami et al (5304769), as applied above, and further in view of Oikawa et al (2020/0156179). Lachman does not teach 6) A welding apparatus comprising: at least one welding electrode according to claim 1; and a power supply device electrically connected to the welding electrode, wherein the welding electrode and the power supply device are configured to apply an output current of the power supply device to the workpiece via the welding electrode.
Oikawa et al teach A welding apparatus comprising: at least one welding electrode 1; and a power supply device [3 supplying electric current], see electrically connected to the welding electrode 1, wherein the welding electrode and the power supply device are configured to apply an output current of the power supply device to the workpiece via the welding electrode 1. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ A welding apparatus comprising: at least one welding electrode according to claim 1; and a power supply device electrically connected to the welding electrode, wherein the welding electrode and the power supply device are configured to apply an output current of the power supply device to the workpiece via the welding electrode, as taught by Oikawa et al, as this is the standard practice in the art to supply power to the welding electrode.
Prior Art
Sigler is also relevant.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to TED KIM whose telephone number is 571-272-4829. The Examiner can be reached on regular business hours before 5:00 pm, Monday to Thursday and every other Friday.
The fax number for the organization where this application is assigned is 571-273-8300.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Devon Kramer, can be reached at 571-272-7118. Alternate inquiries to Technology Center 3700 can be made via 571-272-3700.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center. Should you have questions on Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). General inquiries can also be directed to the Inventors Assistance Center whose telephone number is 800-786-9199. Furthermore, a variety of online resources are available at https://www.uspto.gov/patent
/Ted Kim/
Telephone
571-272-4829
Primary Examiner
Fax
571-273-8300
February 11, 2026