DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I claims 1-4 in the reply filed on 2-7-2026 is acknowledged. The restriction is made final. It is noted that Applicant did not designate claim 9 as withdrawn. Claim 9 could be considered for rejoinder if claim 1 is eventually found allowable since claim 9 depends from claim 1, but claim 9 seems to not be the scope of claim 1 and is drawn to a metal fiber which is described in the specification as a fiber that is acquired following separation of a rolled metal strip product while claim 1 scope is directed to a metal strip rolling process and there is not a positively recited separation step claimed in claim 1 to produce a fiber such as claimed in claim 9.
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 1-4 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. The claim 1 method seems to be directed to “steel strip” production but the preamble sets forth a steel fiber structure and the method steps of claim 1 do not set forth separation of the steel strip for production of the individual fiber. It is not clear that the fiber structure claimed in the preamble is realized until after the strip is separated so the scope of claim 1 is not clear.
In claim 1, lines 22-23 it is claimed that “an upper roll and a lower roll longitudinally offset therefrom” create V-shaped anchor grooves, but the specification (page 9, lines 14-21) describes a profiling roll pair (6) comprising an upper roll and a lower roll formed as a rolling unit, it is not clear what a scope of upper roll and lower roll longitudinally offset therefrom would be since this longitudinal offset is not described. The specification describes the upper and lower roller as configured to form anchor grooves that are axially offset (page 2, lines 2-23) but does not describe the upper and lower roll as being longitudinally offset. The claim does not set forth any frame of reference for longitudinal offset and it is not clear what a scope of this limitation is.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the scoring roller pairs" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the profiled steel strip" in lines 8 and 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There is not a “profile” of the steel strip set forth in claim 1.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the profiled steel strip" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There is not a “profile” of the steel strip set forth in claim 1.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the profiled" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 4, “the profiled and/or tempered steel strip” in line 1 is indefinite since the scope of the claim is not ascertainable because the “and/or” does not make it clear as to what limitation is a necessary limitation since “tempering” is claimed in claim 3, not 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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cardelli (BE 892526) in view of Noe et al. (4,558,578) and further in view of Yao et al. (CN 111558630A). The Examiner notes that Applicant is not claiming a positively recited method step in claim 1 of separating the steel strip into steel fibers. The claim 1 method is directed to “steel strip” production but the preamble sets forth a steel fiber structure and the method steps of claim 1 do not set forth production of the fiber, but the Examiner’s position is that Cardelli discloses steel fiber production wherein a steel strip is separated by separation rolls (12; Fig. 3) into a plurality of fibers with anchor grooves (Fig. 4).
Cardelli discloses a method of making a steel fiber (Fig. 4) from a steel strip (F) that is a substantially rectangular cross-section (Fig. 2). It is noted that Applicant is claiming “substantially rectangular” which does not have to be rectangular but Cardelli discloses that the strip has a rectangular shape [0026] when it is supplied from an upstream coil unwinder (3). Cardelli discloses that the steel strip (F) has a strength required ([0037],[0038]) for use as a concrete reinforcement fiber [0002]. The strip (F) is formed by an upper roll (14) and a lower roll (14; Figs. 1 and 3) to have at least one axially offset V-shaped anchor groove. Cardelli in Fig. 4 shows that the fiber has anchor grooves on a top and bottom side of the fiber which are offset relative to one another wherein a v-shaped wave (between arrows; Fig. 4) on a top side of the fiber is opposite of a crest on a bottom side of the fiber. The upper roll (14) and lower roll (14) are precisely synchronized for exact positioning of anchor lines (Fig. 5) which are defined on opposite width sides of the fiber (f) in a desired shape ([0013], lines 2-3). Cardelli discloses that upper rolls (7,8,9) and corresponding lower rolls (7,8,9) are configured to create v-shaped fracture grooves ([0016],[0017]) which extend longitudinally along the strip wherein Fig. 2 shows that undercuts (circular grooves; [0016]) on the rolls (7,8,9) are configured to form a plurality of triangular fracture grooves across the width of the strip (F) for subsequent strip separation by separation rolls (12) and forming of the final fiber shape and cropping to length (16, [0013], line 4) in a corresponding production line (12,14,16). Cardelli does not disclose that the fiber production line includes a straightener.
Noe teaches a method of making a steel fiber (3’; Fig. 4) from a steel strip (3) that is a substantially rectangular cross-section (col. 3, lines 25-26). The strip (3) is formed by an upper roll (14) and a lower roll (14; Fig. 1A) to have at least one V-shaped fracture groove (9; col. 3, lines 43-45) wherein the strip (3) is configured to be separated (8) into individual fibers (3’; Fig. 4). Noe teaches a straightener (leveler, 5) which is configured to straighten the strip prior to separation. It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the fiber production line of Cardelli to include a leveler as taught by Noe in order to straighten the strip before forming and separating the fiber from the steel strip.
Cardelli in view of Noe does not disclose an overrunning clutch. Yao teaches a strip straightener (Fig. 1) comprising a straightening roller (11) includes a motor (1), gear box (7), coupling (9) and an overrunning clutch (10). It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the straightener of Cardelli in view of Noe to include an overrunning clutch as taught by Yao in order to ensure that when a linear speed of the metal strip is greater than a straightening roller speed that any straightener driving components of a motor, gear box and coupling are stopped so that emergency braking ensues which prevents damage to the straightener drive components.
Claim(s) 2 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cardelli (BE 892526) in view of Noe et al. (4,558,578) and Yao et al. (CN 111558630A) and further in view of Rogers (4,155,238). Regarding the last three lines of claim 2, the straightener and crop shear limitation are set forth as optional and the claim 1 rejection already treats straightener and crop shear limitations.
Cardelli discloses at least three roller pairs (7,8,9) which are configured to first score the strip (roller pairs 7,8) and a roller pair (9) which is configured to subdivide the strip (zero spacing, [0010], lines 4 and 5). Cardelli does not disclose optical scanning. Regarding claim 2, Rogers teaches a slitting line (Fig. 3) comprising a longitudinal subdividing roller (31), unwinder (18) and winder (36). A photoelectric (optical) scanning sensor (33; col. 10, lines 30-36) is configured to monitor a steel strip (16) and operate the slitting roller (31) based upon a sensed condition. Regarding claim 3, Rogers teaches that the slitting line is following temper rolling in a temper mill (col. 5, lines 54-56). It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to monitor the strip and at least one scoring roller of Cardelli with optical scanning as taught by Rogers so as to monitor and control a tension and slitting condition of the strip during processing including strip tempering.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cardelli (BE 892526) in view of Noe et al. (4,558,578), Yao et al. (CN 111558630A) and Rogers (4,155,238) and further in view of Stahl (9,630,226). Cardelli in view of Noe and Yao disclose the limitations of claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, Cardelli discloses at least three roller pairs (7,8,9) which are configured to first score the strip (roller pairs 7,8) and a roller pair (9) which is configured to subdivide the strip (zero spacing, [0010], lines 4 and 5). Cardelli does not disclose optical scanning. Rogers teaches a slitting line (Fig. 3) comprising a longitudinal subdividing roller (31), unwinder (18) and winder (36). A photoelectric (optical) scanning sensor (33; col. 10, lines 30-36) is configured to monitor a steel strip (16) and operate the slitting roller (31) based upon a sensed condition. It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to monitor the strip and at least one scoring roller of Cardelli with optical scanning as taught by Rogers so as to control a tension and slitting condition of the strip during processing.
Regarding claim 4, Cardelli discloses a guide (11) following the scoring rollers (7,8,9), a guide (13) following the separation rollers (12) and a guide (15) following the fiber forming rollers (14) but does not disclose that that the separation takes place in a second production line after coiling following working of the strip by the rollers (7,8,9). Stahl teaches a second production line (bottom of Fig. 2) comprising an unwinder prior to separation rollers (12), fiber shaping rollers (13) and crop shear (14) for packaging the individual fibers with a conveyor. It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to coil the strip of Cardelli after scoring and subdividing as taught by Stahl and to separate and crop shear the fibers in a second production line so that the steel strip is configured to be separated at another location for use on site.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWARD THOMAS TOLAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4525. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5.
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, Chris Templeton can be reached at 571-270-1477. 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.
/EDWARD T TOLAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3725