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
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-7 in the reply filed on 5/15/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the grounds that DE066 does not teach all the elements of the newly amended claims and that the intermetallic compound cannot be generated at the interface when squeeze casting or high pressure casting methods aren’t used to form the joint based on the information in Table 4 and Figure 15. This is not found persuasive because Applicant has not established squeeze casting or high pressure casting are necessary to form the intermetallic compound, rather the data in Table 4 and the following paragraphs in the Specification seem to disagree with that statement. Specifically, there is only a single example in which die casting is used, and it is still considered a working example of the invention and the comparison examples all use high pressure casting, which seems to imply that this method does not necessarily form the intermetallic compounds. Moreover, it is unclear whether the reaction layer of Table 4 refers to the formation of the intermetallic compound or some other property. Absent some other evidence, i.e., data, Applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 8-12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 5/15/2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: Claim 12 includes the character “W” which does not appear in the specification. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Examiner’s Note
It is noted that claims 15 and 18 are identical in scope, i.e., both depend from claim 1 and include the exact same limitations. If the claims are not amended there would be a double patenting issue between the two claims if it comes to allowance. It is advised to either amend one of the claims or cancel one of the claims.
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 applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 14 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 14 recites the limitation "the non-iron metal" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Moreover, it is unclear which metal is the non-iron metal as claim 1 recites three different metals, i.e., the first joining material, the second joining material, and the 3D structural body. Clarification is required, however, for the sake of compact prosecution, the Examiner is assuming the non-iron metal is the second joining material.
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.
Claims 1-7 and 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE102017129066A1 (hereinafter “DE066”) in view of CN111716084A (hereinafter “CN084”). Applicants provided a machine translations of DE066 and CN084 with the IDS filed 9/22/2023 and 2/14/2025, respectively, and all citations refers to these translations.
Regarding claims 1 and 2, DE066 teaches a multi-material component connection comprising a first component 110 which is additively manufactured from a first material 150, in particular metal, where a connection structure 112 is additively manufactured on the first component 150 and comprises a lattice structure (DE066, [0045] and Figure 1). DE066 further teaches the component connection has a second component 120 which is provided on the first component at a connection section 121 and has a second material 160 (DE066, [0046] and Figure 2). DE066 teaches the first material is a metal and the second material is a metal (DE066, [0033-0034]).
DE066 further teaches injection molding the second material, as a viscous material, into the metallic lattice structure and as the second material is molten, it can perfectly fill the complex cavities, undercuts, and lattice structures of the connection structure, i.e., the second material continuously fills the spaces of the 3D connection structure (DE066, [0044]).
While DE066 teaches the connection structure can be additively manufactured from the first material (DE066, [0045]), DE066 does not teach away from the metal three-dimensional structural body being made of a metal material different from the first metal material or disclose wherein an intermetallic compound is formed at an interface between the metal three-dimensional structural body and the second joining material.
With respect to the difference, CN084 teaches a method for manufacturing a copper/steel composite injection mold with a honeycomb and nail-implanted interface structure (CN084, [0002]). CN084 teaches the method includes using a steel sheet as an original forming material to prepare progressively formed parts and then 3D printing a honeycomb structure on one surface of the progressively formed part, where the steel plate can be made of Q235B low carbon steel and the honeycomb structure is made of a low-carbon steel (CN084, [0009-0011] and [0052]).
As CN084 expressly teaches, the combination of a 3D printed structure on a steel surface achieves interface bonding between the steel and the copper matrix which reduces the impact of residual stress on the interface and increases the bonding area to form a strong copper/steel tenon cast welded joint (CN084, [0030]).
DE066 and CN084 are analogous art as they are both drawn to methods of forming joints of dissimilar materials using a 3D printed intermediate structure (DE066, Abstract; CN084 Abstract).
In light of the motivation to 3D print a supporting structure on a steel sheet as taught in CN084 above, it therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use different low-carbon steel compositions as a steel substrate and a 3D printed connection structure in the process of DE066 in order to achieve interface bonding between the steel and the copper matrix which reduces the impact of residual stress on the interface and increases the bonding area to form a strong copper/steel tenon cast welded joint (CN084, [0030]), and thereby arrive at the present invention.
Given the materials and method of the multi-material component connection/joint of DE066 in view of CN084 are substantially identical to the materials and method of the joint of dissimilar materials as used in the present invention, as set forth above, it is clear that an intermetallic compound would intrinsically form at an interface between the metal three-dimensional structural body and the second joining material (claim 1) and a growth of 5-60% of a length of the interface (claim 2) as presently claimed.
Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP 2112.01 (I).
The multi-material component connection of DE066 in view of CN084 corresponds to a joint structure of dissimilar metal materials of claim 1. The first component and steel sheet progressively formed part of DN066 in view of CN084 corresponds to a first joining material that is made of metal of claim 1. The connection structure formed of a low carbon steel of DE066 in view of CN084 corresponds to a metal three-dimensional structural body joined to the first joining material and having spaces, the metal three-dimensional structural body being made of a metal material different from the first metal material of claim 1. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use two different low-carbon steels as the first component and connection structure of DE066 in view of CN084 based on the desired properties of the joint structure.
The second material and connection section filling the spaces of the lattice structure of the connection structure of DE066 corresponds to a second joining material that is made of a second metal material different from the first metal material and occupying the plurality of spaces of the metal three-dimensional structural body, wherein the metal three-dimensional structural body has a lattice structure, and wherein the second joining material is continuously filled in the plurality of spaces so as to mechanically engage with the metal three-dimensional structural body of claim 1.
Regarding claims 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, DE066 teaches the connection structure is designed as a cavity structure, in particular as a lattice structure that is periodically repeated in at least one spatial direction and the lattice can have lattice struts which are oriented in two or more spatial directions and which have lattice crossing points at the crossing point of the lattice struts (DE066, [0038-0039]). DE066 further teaches many other shapes are also conceivable, for example a lattice which is based on a crystal structure of diamond or a honeycomb structure, and the grid can be constructed irregularly or regularly (DE066, [0039]). Given the teachings of DE066 it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the cross-sections parallel to an interface (claim 3), leaving no gaps between the 3D structural body and first joining material (claim 4), the spaces are perpendicular to a joint surface (claim 5), part of the spaces are formed in a direction that is inclined with respect to a joining direction (claim 6), and part of the spaces are formed in a direction that is curved with respect to a joining direction (claim 7).
Regarding claim 13, DE066 teaches an injection molding technique is used to introduce the second material into the connection structure in which the technique includes placing the structure into a mold and introducing the molten material under pressure into an injection mold to fill the cavity spaces of the connection structure (De066, [0032]). The high pressure of the injection molding corresponds to wherein a high-pressure casting is conducted to engage the second joining material with the metal three-dimensional structural body of claim 13.
Regarding claims 14 and 16, DE066 teaches the first material is a metal, in particular steel, and the second material is a metal, in particular aluminum (DE066, [0033-0034]). CN084 teaches where the base steel plate can be made of Q235B low carbon steel and the honeycomb structure is made of a low-carbon steel (CN084, [0052]). The above listed metals of DE066 and CN084 corresponds to wherein the non-iron metal is aluminum, copper, or magnesium of claim 14 and wherein (i) the first joining material made of a steel, (ii) the second joining material made of a non-iron metal, and (iii) the three-dimensional structural body made of an iron material or nickel alloy of claim 16.
Regarding claim 17, DE066 teaches the connection structure is formed by additive manufacturing including 3D printing, which include stereolithography, binder jetting, 3D screen printing, poly jet modelling, fused deposition modeling, and laser sintering (DE066, [0027-0029]), which corresponds to wherein the three-dimensional structural body is layered by means of three-dimensional printing of claim 17.
Regarding claims 15 and 18, DE066 teaches the connection structure has the advantage of forming an efficient and stable connection between the components, i.e., the first component and second component (DE066, [0038]) and corresponds to wherein the first joining material and the second joining material are joined together via the three-dimensional structural body of claims 15 and 18.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIELLE CARDA whose telephone number is (571)270-1240. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-4:00 EST.
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.
/DANIELLE M. CARDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1738
Prosecution Insights