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 .
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 1-8 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 1 claims “when a boundary with a crystal orientation difference of 2° or more and less than 15° is regarded as a crystal grain boundary”. As worded, claim 1 defines what is or is not a crystal grain boundary; however, claim 1 appears intended to further define the particular grains, which claim 1 limit to having a crystal grain size of less than 200 μm is 10% or lower. Applicant should consider rewording the grain boundary limitation as a property of the specifically claimed grain as opposed to a conditional definition of what is or is not a grain boundary. For example, consider the difference between grains having a crystal grain size of less than 200 μm and a boundary with a crystal orientation difference of 2° or more and less than 15° is 10% or lower and grains having a crystal grain size of less than 200 μm when a boundary with a crystal orientation difference of 2° or more and less than 15° is regarded as a crystal grain boundary is 10% or less. This limitation particularly becomes confusing with claims 2, 3, and 7 which claims different conditions for what is regarded as a grain boundary.
Claim 2 claims “when a boundary with a crystal orientation difference of 15° or more is regarded as a crystal grain boundary” and “when a boundary with a crystal orientation difference of 2° or more is regarded as a crystal grain boundary”. As worded, claim 2 sets forth two different definitions for what is or is not a grain boundary, whereas claim 2 appears intended to claim two categories of grains with different ranges of crystal orientation difference. Please rephrase the grain orientation difference limitations as features of the grains and not as conditional definitions for what is or is not a grain boundary.
Claims 3 and 7 claim “when a boundary with a crystal orientation difference of 15° or more is regarded as a crystal grain boundary”. As worded, claims 3 and 7 set forth conditional definitions for what is or is not a grain boundary, whereas claim 3 appears intended to claim grains having a crystal orientation difference. Please rephrase the grain orientation difference limitations in claims 3 and 7 as features of the grains and not as conditional definitions for what is or is not a grain boundary.
Claims 2-8 are rejected under 35 USC 112(b) because they depend on claims 1, 2, or 3.
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) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chu (US20230416883). Chu is cited in the IDS filed December 5, 2024. Chu is a publication of an application for patent in the United States effectively filed prior to the effective filing date of the present application.
Regarding claims 1-8, Chu discloses a non-oriented electrical steel sheet (thin-gauge non-oriented electrical steel plate) (Title, [0001], [0006]). The composition of the non-oriented electrical steel disclosed by Chu is compared with the composition ranges recited in claims 4-6, and 8 in the table below. Unless otherwise specified, numerical values are provided in mass %:
Alloying Element
Chu
Present Invention
Claims 4-6, 8
Ranges
A15 (Table 1)
C
>0-0.003% [0010]
0.0028
0 to 0.0050
Si
1.6-3.4 [0011]
2.12
2.00 to 3.25
Al
0.1-3.0 [0014]
0.27
0 to 1.10
Mn
0.1-1.2 [0012]
0.63
0 to 1.10
P
—
—
0 to 0.30
S
≤0.003 [0013]
0.0012
0 to 0.0100
N
≤0.003 [0018]
0.0007
0 to 0.0100
Ti
Nb+V+Ti≤0.01 [0021]
0.0014
0 to 0.1000
V
Nb+V+Ti≤0.01 [0021]
0.0017
0 to 0.100
Zr
—
—
0 to 0.100
Nb
Nb+V+Ti≤0.01 [0021]
0.0015
0 to 0.100
B
—
—
0 to 0.100
O
≤0.003 [0017]
0.001
0 to 0.100
Mg
—
—
0 to 0.100
Ca
0.0005-0.01 [0016]
0.0072
0 to 0.010
Cr
—
—
0 to 5.000
Ni
—
—
0 to 5.000
Cu
—
—
0 to 5.000
Sn
0.005-0.2 [0015]
0.01
0 to 0.100
Sb
—
—
0 to 0.100
Ce
—
—
0 to 0.100
Nd
—
—
0 to 0.100
Bi
—
—
0 to 0.100
W
—
—
0 to 0.100
Mo
—
—
0 to 0.100
Y
—
—
0 to 0.100
Fe and impurities
Balance [0007]
Balance
Balance
Thickness (mm)
0.1-0.3 [0023]
0.27 (Table 2)
0.10 to 0.35
Note that the statement “the balance consisting of Fe and impurities” closes the balance to constituents other than Fe and impurities, but the composition as a whole remains open to elements which are not recited. If applicant intends to claim that the entire composition is closed to elements not recited, applicant may claim “the non-oriented electrical steel sheet has a chemical composition consisting of, by mass %” instead of the claimed “the non-oriented electrical steel sheet has a chemical composition containing, by mass %”. The composition and thickness of Example A15 disclosed by Chu (Tables 1 and 2) directly meet the composition and thickness limitations of claims 4-6 and 8.
Chu discloses selecting compositions to control grain growth [0010], [0013], [0015-18], [0020]. Chu further discloses selecting processing conditions to control grain growth and recrystallization [0025], [0031], [0036]. Chu is silent on the grain sizes and the orientation differences of grain boundaries.
Proportions of grains having a certain grain size and grain boundary orientation differences are material properties that are inseparable from the chemical composition of the material. See MPEP2112.01(II). When 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. See MPEP.2112.01(I). The discovery of a previously unappreciated property of a prior art composition, or of a scientific explanation for the prior art’s functioning, does not render the old composition patentably new to the discoverer. See MPEP2112(I). Chu discloses smelting example alloy constituents, continuous casting and hot rolling [0051-52]. Chu subjects example A15 to an intermediate annealing prior to the final cold rolling pass [0053-54]. Annealing example A15 comprises heating at a rate of 300
°
C/s to a holding temperature of 795
°
C for 60 seconds (Table 2). The present disclosure indicates that to “obtain the above-described metal structure before final cold rolling, for example, the average temperature increase rate in a temperature range of 700°C or higher is set to 50°C/second or faster, the maximum sheet temperature reached (annealing temperature) is set to 1050°C or lower, and the soaking time is set to 3 minutes or less in hot-band annealing in a case of a one-time cold rolling method in which hot-band annealing is carried out or in intermediate annealing before final cold rolling in the case of a two-time cold rolling method or a multiple-time cold rolling method” (paragraph [0062] of the present disclosure). Considering the extent to which the composition and processing conditions which Chu discloses for non-oriented electrical steel Example A15 ([0051-54], Tables 1 and 2) meet those of the presently claimed non-oriented electrical steel, and Chu’s disclosure of controlling for grain conditions [0010], [0013], [0015-18], [0020], [0025], [0031], [0036], Chu establishes a sound basis for believing that Example A15 would meet the proportions of grains having the size and boundary orientation difference of claim 1, the ratio of diameters of grains with orientation differences recited in claim 2, the axes length limitations of grains having grain boundary orientation differences recited in claims 3 and 7, and the grain size limitations recited in claims 4-6 and 8.
Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fujimura (EP3594371A1). Fujimura is an English-language family member of WO2018164185A1, is cited in the IDS filed September 25, 2023.
Regarding claims 1-8, Fujimura discloses a non-oriented electrical steel sheet (title, claim 1,[0001], [0020]). The composition of the non-oriented electrical steel disclosed by Fujimura is compared with the composition ranges recited in claims 4-6, and 8 in the table below. Unless otherwise specified, numerical values are provided in mass %:
Alloying Element
Fujimura
Present Invention
Claims 4-6, 8
Ranges
Steel Type A (Table 1)
C
0.0100 or less [0024]
0.0012
0 to 0.0050
Si
more than 3.0 and 5.0% or less [0024]
3.2
2.00 to 3.25
Al
0 to 0.9 [0024]
0.7
0 to 1.10
Mn
0.1 to 3.0 [0024]
0.6
0 to 1.10
P
0.20 or less [0024]
0.01
0 to 0.30
S
0.0018 or less [0024]
0.0007
0 to 0.0100
N
0.0040% or less [0024]
0.0018
0 to 0.0100
Ti
—
—
0 to 0.1000
V
—
—
0 to 0.100
Zr
—
—
0 to 0.100
Nb
—
—
0 to 0.100
B
—
—
0 to 0.100
O
Deoxidized [0046], [0056]
—
0 to 0.100
Mg
—
—
0 to 0.100
Ca
0 to 0.010 [0024]
—
0 to 0.010
Cr
0 to 5.0 [0024]
—
0 to 5.000
Ni
Ni: 0 to 5.0 [0024]
—
0 to 5.000
Cu
Cu: 0 to 5.0 [0024]
—
0 to 5.000
Sn
0 to 0.100 [0024]
—
0 to 0.100
Sb
0 to 0.100 [0024]
—
0 to 0.100
Ce
(REM): 0 to 0.010 [0024], [0069]
—
0 to 0.100
Nd
(REM): 0 to 0.010 [0024], [0069]
—
0 to 0.100
Bi
—
—
0 to 0.100
W
—
—
0 to 0.100
Mo
—
—
0 to 0.100
Y
(REM): 0 to 0.010 [0024], [0069]
—
0 to 0.100
Fe and impurities
Balance [0024]
—
Balance
Thickness (mm)
0.35 [0028]
0.27 [0140], [0163]
0.10 to 0.35
Note that the statement “the balance consisting of Fe and impurities” closes the balance to constituents other than Fe and impurities, but the composition as a whole remains open to elements which are not recited. If applicant intends to claim that the entire composition is closed to elements not recited, applicant may claim “the non-oriented electrical steel sheet has a chemical composition consisting of, by mass %” instead of the claimed “the non-oriented electrical steel sheet has a chemical composition containing, by mass %”. The composition and thickness of Steel type A disclosed by Fujimura (Table 1, [0140]) directly meet the composition and thickness limitations of claims 4-6 and 8.
Fujimura defines an area ratio of a crystal structure A as crystal grains having a grain size of 100 µm or greater in a cross section parallel to a rolled surface of the non-oriented electrical steel sheet and discloses A is 1 to 30% [0024]. Fujimura defines B as a crystal structure B as is a crystal structure other than the crystal structure A, and discloses an average grain size of B is 25 µm or less [0024]. Fujimura forms test 1-1 from steel type A (Table 2). Test 1-1 has a proportion of A of 5%, and an average grain size of B of 13 µm (Table 2); therefore, 95% of test 1-1 has an average grain size of 13 µm, and 5% of test 1-1 has a grain size of 100 µm or greater (Table 2). Fujimura forms test 2-3 from steel type A (Table 3). Test 2-3 has a proportion of A of 2%, and an average grain size of B of 12 µm (Table 3); therefore, 98% of test 2-3 has an average grain size of 12 µm, and 98% of test 2-3 has a grain size of 100 µm or greater (Table 3). A steel in which 95% has an average grain size of 13 µm, and 5% has a grain size of 100 µm or greater, and a steel in which 98% has an average grain size of 12 µm, and 98% has a grain size of 100 µm or greater would be expected to meet the limitation of an average grain size of 10-200 µm as recited in claims 4-6 and 8.
Fujimura discloses setting composition and manufacturing conditions to control grain size and recrystallization [0030], [0047-48], [0051], [0058], [0098], [0100], [0113], [0117], [0119], [0123], [0127]. Fujimura determines grains with a gain boundary orientation difference is 15° or more as grains [0080]. Fujimura is silent on the proportion of grains having specific grain boundary orientation differences and sizes of grains having low-angle grain boundaries.
Proportions of grains having a certain grain size and grain boundary orientation differences are material properties that are inseparable from the chemical composition of the material. See MPEP2112.01(II). When 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. See MPEP.2112.01(I). The discovery of a previously unappreciated property of a prior art composition, or of a scientific explanation for the prior art’s functioning, does not render the old composition patentably new to the discoverer. See MPEP2112(I). Fujimura discloses continuous casting steel constituents to from a slab [0112], [0137], [0162] and hot rolling the slabs [0113], [0138], [0162]. Fujimura subjects example steel type A to an intermediate annealing prior to the final cold rolling pass [0139-140], [0163]. For test steel 1-1, Fujimura discloses annealing steel type A prior to cold rolling comprises heating at a rate of 50
°
C/s to a maximum temperature of 900
°
C for 120 seconds (2 minutes) [0140]. For test steel 2-3, Fujimura discloses annealing steel type A prior to cold rolling comprises heating at a rate of 60
°
C/s to an annealing temperature of 980
°
C for 30 seconds (0.5 minutes) ([0163], Table 3). The present disclosure indicates that to “obtain the above-described metal structure before final cold rolling, for example, the average temperature increase rate in a temperature range of 700°C or higher is set to 50°C/second or faster, the maximum sheet temperature reached (annealing temperature) is set to 1050°C or lower, and the soaking time is set to 3 minutes or less in hot-band annealing in a case of a one-time cold rolling method in which hot-band annealing is carried out or in intermediate annealing before final cold rolling in the case of a two-time cold rolling method or a multiple-time cold rolling method” (paragraph [0062] of the present disclosure). Considering the extent to which the composition and processing conditions which Fujimura discloses for non-oriented test steels 1-1 and 2-3 of steel type A, (Tables 1-3, [0137-140] ,[0162-163]) meet those of the presently claimed non-oriented electrical steel, and Fujimura’s disclosure of controlling for grain conditions [0030], [0047-48], [0051], [0058], [0098], [0100], [0113], [0117], [0119], [0123], [0127], Fujimura establishes a sound basis for believing that test examples 1-1 and 2-3 would meet the proportions of grains having the size and boundary orientation difference of claim 1, the ratio of diameters of grains with orientation differences recited in claim 2, and the axes length limitations of grains having grain boundary orientation differences recited in claim 3 and claim 7.
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) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu (US20230416883).
Regarding claims 1-8, Chu discloses a non-oriented electrical steel sheet (thin-gauge non-oriented electrical steel plate) (Title, [0001], [0006]). The composition of the non-oriented electrical steel disclosed by Chu is compared with the composition ranges recited in claims 4-6, and 8 in the table below. Unless otherwise specified, numerical values are provided in mass %:
Alloying Element
Chu
Present Invention
Claims 4-6, 8
Ranges
A15 (Table 1)
C
>0-0.003% [0010]
0.0028
0 to 0.0050
Si
1.6-3.4 [0011]
2.12
2.00 to 3.25
Al
0.1-3.0 [0014]
0.27
0 to 1.10
Mn
0.1-1.2 [0012]
0.63
0 to 1.10
P
—
—
0 to 0.30
S
≤0.003 [0013]
0.0012
0 to 0.0100
N
≤0.003 [0018]
0.0007
0 to 0.0100
Ti
Nb+V+Ti≤0.01 [0021]
0.0014
0 to 0.1000
V
Nb+V+Ti≤0.01 [0021]
0.0017
0 to 0.100
Zr
—
—
0 to 0.100
Nb
Nb+V+Ti≤0.01 [0021]
0.0015
0 to 0.100
B
—
—
0 to 0.100
O
≤0.003 [0017]
0.001
0 to 0.100
Mg
—
—
0 to 0.100
Ca
0.0005-0.01 [0016]
0.0072
0 to 0.010
Cr
—
—
0 to 5.000
Ni
—
—
0 to 5.000
Cu
—
—
0 to 5.000
Sn
0.005-0.2 [0015]
0.01
0 to 0.100
Sb
—
—
0 to 0.100
Ce
—
—
0 to 0.100
Nd
—
—
0 to 0.100
Bi
—
—
0 to 0.100
W
—
—
0 to 0.100
Mo
—
—
0 to 0.100
Y
—
—
0 to 0.100
Fe and impurities
Balance [0007]
Balance
Balance
Thickness (mm)
0.1-0.3 [0023]
0.27 (Table 2)
0.10 to 0.35
The composition and thickness of Example A15 disclosed by Chu (Tables 1 and 2) directly meet the composition and thickness limitations of claims 4-6 and 8. The composition and thickness ranges disclosed by Chu [0010-23] overlap ranges recited in claims 4-6 and 8. When claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art a prima facie case of obviousness exists, 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).
Chu discloses selecting compositions to control grain growth [0010], [0013], [0015-18], [0020]. Chu further discloses selecting processing conditions to control grain growth and recrystallization [0025], [0031], [0036]. Chu is silent on the grain sizes and the orientation differences of grain boundaries.
Proportions of grains having a certain grain size and grain boundary orientation differences are material properties that are inseparable from the chemical composition of the material. See MPEP2112.01(II). When 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. See MPEP.2112.01(I). The discovery of a previously unappreciated property of a prior art composition, or of a scientific explanation for the prior art’s functioning, does not render the old composition patentably new to the discoverer. See MPEP2112(I). Chu discloses smelting alloy constituents, continuous casting and hot rolling [0029], [0051-52]. Chu subjects example steel o an intermediate annealing prior to the final cold rolling pass [0029], [0035], [0053-54]. Chu discloses that annealing comprises heating at a rate of 50-2000
°
C/s to a holding temperature for 1-180 seconds ([0053-54], Table 2). Examples disclosed by Chu anneal at a holing temperature in ranges of 743-920
°
C (Table 2). The present disclosure indicates that to “obtain the above-described metal structure before final cold rolling, for example, the average temperature increase rate in a temperature range of 700°C or higher is set to 50°C/second or faster, the maximum sheet temperature reached (annealing temperature) is set to 1050°C or lower, and the soaking time is set to 3 minutes or less in hot-band annealing in a case of a one-time cold rolling method in which hot-band annealing is carried out or in intermediate annealing before final cold rolling in the case of a two-time cold rolling method or a multiple-time cold rolling method” (paragraph [0062] of the present disclosure). Considering the extent to which the composition and processing conditions which Chu discloses for non-oriented electrical steel Example A15 ([0051-54], Tables 1 and 2) meet those of the presently claimed non-oriented electrical steel, and Chu’s disclosure of controlling for grain conditions [0010], [0013], [0015-18], [0020], [0025], [0031], [0036], Chu establishes a sound basis for believing that the ranges of non-oriented steels disclosed by Chu would encompass the proportions of grains having the size and boundary orientation difference of claim 1, the ratio of diameters of grains with orientation differences recited in claim 2, the axes length limitations of grains having grain boundary orientation differences recited in claims 3 and 7, and the grain size limitations recited in claims 4-6 and 8. Chu’s disclosure of effects on grain conditions [0010], [0013], [0015-18], [0020], [0025], [0031], [0036] further provide a sound basis for believing that one of ordinary skill in the art would adjust composition and processing parameters from conditions disclosed by Chu applied above in order to arrive at grain conditions favorable for the performance of a non-oriented electrical steel.
Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujimura (EP3594371A1).
Regarding claims 1-8, Fujimura discloses a non-oriented electrical steel sheet (title, claim 1,[0001], [0020]). The composition of the non-oriented electrical steel disclosed by Fujimura is compared with the composition ranges recited in claims 4-6, and 8 in the table below. Unless otherwise specified, numerical values are provided in mass %:
Alloying Element
Fujimura
Present Invention
Claims 4-6, 8
Ranges
Steel Type A (Table 1)
C
0.0100 or less [0024]
0.0012
0 to 0.0050
Si
more than 3.0 and 5.0% or less [0024]
3.2
2.00 to 3.25
Al
0 to 0.9 [0024]
0.7
0 to 1.10
Mn
0.1 to 3.0 [0024]
0.6
0 to 1.10
P
0.20 or less [0024]
0.01
0 to 0.30
S
0.0018 or less [0024]
0.0007
0 to 0.0100
N
0.0040% or less [0024]
0.0018
0 to 0.0100
Ti
—
—
0 to 0.1000
V
—
—
0 to 0.100
Zr
—
—
0 to 0.100
Nb
—
—
0 to 0.100
B
—
—
0 to 0.100
O
Deoxidized [0046], [0056]
—
0 to 0.100
Mg
—
—
0 to 0.100
Ca
0 to 0.010 [0024]
—
0 to 0.010
Cr
0 to 5.0 [0024]
—
0 to 5.000
Ni
Ni: 0 to 5.0 [0024]
—
0 to 5.000
Cu
Cu: 0 to 5.0 [0024]
—
0 to 5.000
Sn
0 to 0.100 [0024]
—
0 to 0.100
Sb
0 to 0.100 [0024]
—
0 to 0.100
Ce
(REM): 0 to 0.010 [0024], [0069]
—
0 to 0.100
Nd
(REM): 0 to 0.010 [0024], [0069]
—
0 to 0.100
Bi
—
—
0 to 0.100
W
—
—
0 to 0.100
Mo
—
—
0 to 0.100
Y
(REM): 0 to 0.010 [0024], [0069]
—
0 to 0.100
Fe and impurities
Balance [0024]
—
Balance
Thickness (mm)
0.35 [0028]
0.27 [0140], [0163]
0.10 to 0.35
The composition and thickness of Steel type A disclosed by Fujimura (Table 1, [0140]) directly meet the composition and thickness limitations of claims 4-6 and 8. Further, alloying amounts disclosed by Fujimura overlap ranges recited in claims 4-6 and 8. When claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art a prima facie case of obviousness exists, 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).
Fujimura defines an area ratio of a crystal structure A as crystal grains having a grain size of 100 µm or greater in a cross section parallel to a rolled surface of the non-oriented electrical steel sheet and discloses A is 1 to 30% [0024]. Fujimura defines B as a crystal structure B as is a crystal structure other than the crystal structure A, and discloses an average grain size of B is 25 µm or less [0024]. Considering Fujimura discloses structure A at 1-30% and structure B as the microstructure which is not structure A [0024], Fujimura discloses that structure B is 70-99%, and therefore that 70-99% of the grain structure has an average grain size of 25 µm or less [0024]. A range of structure defined by 1-30% having a grain size of 100 µm or more and 70-99% having an average grain size of 25 µm or less encompasses a range of structures defined by an average grain size of 10-200 µm as recited in present claims 4-6 and 8. When claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art a prima facie case of obviousness exists, 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).
Fujimura discloses setting composition and manufacturing conditions to control grain size and recrystallization [0030], [0047-48], [0051], [0058], [0098], [0100], [0113], [0117], [0119], [0123], [0127]. Fujimura determines grains with a gain boundary orientation difference is 15° or more as grains [0080]. Fujimura is silent on the proportion of grains having specific grain boundary orientation differences and sizes of grains having low-angle grain boundaries.
Proportions of grains having a certain grain size and grain boundary orientation differences are material properties that are inseparable from the chemical composition of the material. See MPEP2112.01(II). When 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. See MPEP.2112.01(I). The discovery of a previously unappreciated property of a prior art composition, or of a scientific explanation for the prior art’s functioning, does not render the old composition patentably new to the discoverer. See MPEP2112(I). Fujimura discloses continuous casting steel constituents to from a slab [0112], [0137], [0162] and hot rolling the slabs [0113], [0138], [0162]. Fujimura subjects slabs to an intermediate annealing prior to the final cold rolling pass [0118-119]. Fujimura discloses annealing comprises heating at a rate of 50
°
C/s or higher to a maximum temperature of 900-1150
°
C for 20 seconds to 4 minutes [0118-124]. The present disclosure indicates that to “obtain the above-described metal structure before final cold rolling, for example, the average temperature increase rate in a temperature range of 700°C or higher is set to 50°C/second or faster, the maximum sheet temperature reached (annealing temperature) is set to 1050°C or lower, and the soaking time is set to 3 minutes or less in hot-band annealing in a case of a one-time cold rolling method in which hot-band annealing is carried out or in intermediate annealing before final cold rolling in the case of a two-time cold rolling method or a multiple-time cold rolling method” (paragraph [0062] of the present disclosure). Considering the extent to which the composition and processing conditions which Fujimura discloses for non-oriented test steels, (Tables 1-3, [00024], [0137-140] ,[0162-163]) overlap those of the presently claimed non-oriented electrical steel, and Fujimura’s disclosure of controlling for grain conditions [0030], [0047-48], [0051], [0058], [0098], [0100], [0113], [0117], [0119], [0123], [0127], and the annealing conditions disclosed by Fujiwara [0118-124], Fujimura establishes a sound basis for believing that the range of structures encompassed by the disclosure of Fujimura would meet, overlap, or encompass the proportions of grains having the size and boundary orientation difference of claim 1, the ratio of diameters of grains with orientation differences recited in claim 2, and the axes length limitations of grains having grain boundary orientation differences recited in claim 3 and claim 7. Further in view of the composition and processing effects disclosed by Fujimura, applied above, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to adjust composition and processing conditions from within those disclosed by Fujimura, applied above, to achieve a grain structure favorable for a non-oriented steel sheet.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20180002776 shares an inventor with the invention of the present application and discloses a non-oriented steel sheet with similar composition and similar process of making.
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