CTNF 18/287,351 CTNF 72382 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1, 3 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sawanishi et al (WO 2018/159404) in view of Zeniya et al (US 2016/0008906) . Sawanishi discloses an arc welded joint having a weld formed by arc welding of an overlap of at least two steel sheets (11, 12) wherein the weld has a flank angle θ of 120º or more (para 0031), but Sawanishi does not discloses for a weld bead having a bead toe surface area S TOE having a slag cover area S SLAG wherein a ratio S RATIO , (i.e., S TOE /S SLAG ) is 50% or less in a region that extends 2.0 mm from a bead toe in a weld metal direction and that extends 2.0 mm from the bead toe in a base material direction as claimed. Zeniya discloses it is known to provide a weld formed by arc welding of two steel sheets wherein a Slag area ratio (i.e., total slag area ÷ total image area wherein the total image area being a weld bead surface) of a weld is suppressed to be within 10% or less so that a favorable weld/bead toe is formed that would improve a fatigue characteristic of a weld joint (also, see para 0019 and 0119). In view of Zeniya, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt Sawanishi with the slag covered area ratio to be less than 50% or less over a region that extends 2.0 mm from a bead toe in a weld metal direction and in a base material direction, as the weld joint is predictably shaped and extended to form such region of the weld/bead, wherein the slag covered area ratio being less than 50% would further improve the fatigue characteristic of the weld by providing high corrosion resistance and fine appearance of the weld. With respect to claim 3, Sawanishi discloses the method claimed including forming an arc welding of an overlap of at least two steel sheets using a shielding gas Ar gas and an oxidizing gas (O 2 or CO 2 ; also, see para 0018) having a relationship of a formula 2 that shows the vale Y: 1≤ 2 x O 2 +CO 2 ≤ 30 withO 2 being a O 2 vol% and CO 2 being CO 2 vol% wherein such relationship overlaps with the claimed range, and Sawanishi further discloses for a welding condition based on an average welding current I, arc voltage V (para 0035), and the claimed formula of 50 ≤ (I x V) x (24+Y)/24 ≤200 would be satisfied with Sawanishi that discloses the welding current I being 100A to 300 A and the arc voltage V being 10V to 30V which are the same average values as disclosed in the Applicant’s invention (see para 0062 of the specification on page 20) with the value Y also overlapping that of the claimed formula 2 With respect to claim 6, Sawanishi discloses the arc welding using a welding wire wherein Zeniya further discloses for the welding wire being a solid wire . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 2, 7 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sawanishi view of Zeniya as applied to claim s 1, 3 and 6 above, and further in view of Miyata et al (US 2019/0232417) . Sawanishi view of Zeniya discloses the arc welding joint claimed including the flank angle that is greater than 100º as disclosed by Sawanishi but does not disclose the flank angle having a maximum and minimum value that is within 30º over a region that extends from 15 mm from a bead-start end and from a head-finish end of the weld bed as claimed. Miyata discloses it is known to provide a flank angle at a weld bead at 130º to 150º wherein such range is within 20º (para 0036) which is known to provide a weld having an excellent fatigue and corrosion resistance. In view of Miyata, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt Sawanishi, as modified by Zeniya, with the flank angle with its maximum and minimum angel to be within less than or equal to 30º which is known to provide excellent weld fatigue and corrosion resistance wherein as Zeniya discloses that the weld can be 150 mm long excluding 50 mm end parts (para 0119), a portion of the weld bead whose flank angle is measured can predictably be in a region that extends 15 mm from a bead start and finish which would be a good representation of the overall bead quality. With respect to claim 7, Sawanishi discloses the method claimed including forming an arc welding of an overlap of at least two steel sheets using a shielding gas Ar gas and an oxidizing gas (O 2 or CO 2 ; also, see para 0018) having a relationship of a formula 2 that shows the vale Y: 1≤ 2 x O 2 +CO 2 ≤ 30 withO 2 being a O 2 vol% and CO 2 being CO 2 vol% wherein such relationship overlaps with the claimed range, and Sawanishi further discloses for a welding condition based on an average welding current I, arc voltage V (para 0035), and the claimed formula of 50 ≤ (I x V) x (24+Y)/24 ≤200 would be satisfied with Sawanishi that discloses the welding current I being 100A to 300 A and the arc voltage V being 10V to 30V which are the same average values as disclosed in the Applicant’s invention (see para 0062 of the specification on page 20) with the value Y also overlapping that of the claimed formula 2 With respect to claim 12, Sawanishi discloses the arc welding using a welding wire wherein Zeniya further discloses for the welding wire being a solid wire . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 4 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sawanishi view of Zeniya as applied to claim s 1, 3 and 6 above, and further in view of Norrish et al (US 2006/0138115) . Sawanishi view of Zeniya discloses the method claimed including the shielding gas that satisfy 2 XO 2 +CO 2 ≤ 30 withO 2 being a O 2 vol% and CO 2 being CO 2 vol% wherein such relationship overlaps with the claimed range that is ≤ 5, but Sawanishi does not explicitly disclose for the arc welding including short-circuiting with an average short-circuit frequency in a range of 20 to 300 HZ and a maximum short circuit cycle that is 1.5 second or less. Norrish discloses it is known to perform an arc welding using shorting circuiting of a welding wire wherein the short-circuiting frequency is performed in a range of 20-100 Hz with the short circuit period that is 2.5 ms to 6 ms (para 0062). In view of Norrish, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt Sawanishi, as modified by Zeniya, with the arc welding of the steel sheets with a welding wire using a short-circuiting that is known in the art that allows the welding wire to be advanced and melt on the workpiece in a regulated frequency to predictably perform the arc welding that is known in the art. With respect to claim 13, Sawanishi discloses the arc welding using a welding wire wherein Zeniya further discloses for the welding wire being a solid wire . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 5 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sawanishi view of Zeniya as applied to claim s1, 3 and 6 above, and further in view of Koshiishi et al (US 2007/0210048) . Sawanishi view of Zeniya discloses the method claimed except for the arc welding using a pulse current that satisfy a value of X (A s/m): 50 ≤ X ≤ 250 wherein the value of X is determined by (I peak x t peak/L) + (I peak + I base) x (t up + t down)/(2 x L) wherein I peak is a peak current, I base is a base current, t peak is a peak time, t up is a rise time, t down is a fall time, and L being a distance between the steel and a contact tip as claimed. Koshiishi discloses it is known to provide a pulse arc welding current based on a peak current (para 0018), a base current (para 0018), a peak period/time (para 0018), a rise time (para 0063) and a fall time (para 0065), and a distance (para 0085) between a contact tip and a base metal so as to control an arc length for a desired weld droplet transfer. In view of Koshiishi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt Sawanishi, as modified by Zeniya, with the arc welding using a pulse current with the value X that is within the claimed range as a matter of routine operations and optimizations to optimize the desired weld droplet transfer that depends on the welding parameters including a peak current, a base current, a peak time, a rise time, a fall time, and a distance between the steel and a contact tip that predictably produces a varying rate of a weld droplet transfer (i.e., more or less weld droplets) that would predictably meet the welding operations as desired. With respect to claim 15, Sawanishi discloses the arc welding using a welding wire wherein Zeniya further discloses for the welding wire being a solid wire . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 8 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sawanishi view of Zeniya and Miyata as applied to claim s 2, 7 and 12 above, and further in view of Norrish et al (US 2006/0138115) . Sawanishi view of Zeniya and Miyata discloses the method claimed including the shielding gas that satisfy 2 XO 2 +CO 2 ≤ 30 withO 2 being a O 2 vol% and CO 2 being CO 2 vol% wherein such relationship overlaps with the claimed range that is ≤ 5, but Sawanishi does not explicitly disclose for the arc welding including short-circuiting with an average short-circuit frequency in a range of 20 to 300 HZ and a maximum short circuit cycle that is 1.5 second or less. Norrish discloses it is known to perform an arc welding using shorting circuiting of a welding wire wherein the short-circuiting frequency is performed in a range of 20-100 Hz with the short circuit period that is 2.5 ms to 6 ms (para 0062). In view of Norrish, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt Sawanishi, as modified by Zeniya and Miyata, with the arc welding of the steel sheets with a welding wire using a short-circuiting that is known in the art that allows the welding wire to be advanced and melt on the workpiece in a regulated frequency to predictably perform the arc welding that is known in the art. With respect to claim 14, Sawanishi discloses the arc welding using a welding wire wherein Zeniya further discloses for the welding wire being a solid wire . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 9 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sawanishi view of Zeniya and Miyata as applied to claim s 2, 7 and 12 above, and further in view of Koshiishi et al (US 2007/0210048) . Sawanishi view of Zeniya and Miyata discloses the method claimed except for the arc welding using a pulse current that satisfy a value of X (A s/m): 50 ≤ X ≤ 250 wherein the value of X is determined by (I peak x t peak/L) + (I peak + I base) x (t up + t down)/(2 x L) wherein I peak is a peak current, I base is a base current, t peak is a peak time, t up is a rise time, t down is a fall time, and L being a distance between the steel and a contact tip as claimed. Koshiishi discloses it is known to provide a pulse arc welding current based on a peak current (para 0018), a base current (para 0018), a peak period/time (para 0018), a rise time (para 0063) and a fall time (para 0065), and a distance (para 0085) between a contact tip and a base metal so as to control an arc length for a desired weld droplet transfer. In view of Koshiishi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt Sawanishi, as modified by Zeniya and Miyata, with the arc welding using a pulse current with the value X that is within the claimed range as a matter of routine operations and optimizations to optimize the desired weld droplet transfer that depends on the welding parameters including a peak current, a base current, a peak time, a rise time, a fall time, and a distance between the steel and a contact tip that predictably produces a varying rate of a weld droplet transfer (i.e., more or less weld droplets) that would predictably meet the welding operations as desired. With respect to claim 16, Sawanishi discloses the arc welding using a welding wire wherein Zeniya further discloses for the welding wire being a solid wire . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 10 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sawanishi view of Zeniya and Norrish as applied to claim s 4 and 13 above, and further in view of Koshiishi et al (US 2007/0210048) . Sawanishi view of Zeniya and Norrish discloses the method claimed except for the arc welding using a pulse current that satisfy a value of X (A s/m): 50 ≤ X ≤ 250 wherein the value of X is determined by (I peak x t peak/L) + (I peak + I base) x (t up + t down)/(2 x L) wherein I peak is a peak current, I base is a base current, t peak is a peak time, t up is a rise time, t down is a fall time, and L being a distance between the steel and a contact tip as claimed. Koshiishi discloses it is known to provide a pulse arc welding current based on a peak current (para 0018), a base current (para 0018), a peak period/time (para 0018), a rise time (para 0063) and a fall time (para 0065), and a distance (para 0085) between a contact tip and a base metal so as to control an arc length for a desired weld droplet transfer. In view of Koshiishi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt Sawanishi, as modified by Zeniya and Norrish, with the arc welding using a pulse current with the value X that is within the claimed range as a matter of routine operations and optimizations to optimize the desired weld droplet transfer that depends on the welding parameters including a peak current, a base current, a peak time, a rise time, a fall time, and a distance between the steel and a contact tip that predictably produces a varying rate of a weld droplet transfer (i.e., more or less weld droplets) that would predictably meet the welding operations as desired. With respect to claim 17, Sawanishi discloses the arc welding using a welding wire wherein Zeniya further discloses for the welding wire being a solid wire . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 11 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sawanishi view of Zeniya, Miyata and Norrish as applied to claim 8 and 14 above, and further in view of Koshiishi et al (US 2007/0210048) . Sawanishi view of Zeniya, Miyata and Norrish discloses the method claimed except for the arc welding using a pulse current that satisfy a value of X (A s/m): 50 ≤ X ≤ 250 wherein the value of X is determined by (I peak x t peak/L) + (I peak + I base) x (t up + t down)/(2 x L) wherein I peak is a peak current, I base is a base current, t peak is a peak time, t up is a rise time, t down is a fall time, and L being a distance between the steel and a contact tip as claimed. Koshiishi discloses it is known to provide a pulse arc welding current based on a peak current (para 0018), a base current (para 0018), a peak period/time (para 0018), a rise time (para 0063) and a fall time (para 0065), and a distance (para 0085) between a contact tip and a base metal so as to control an arc length for a desired weld droplet transfer. In view of Koshiishi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt Sawanishi, as modified by Zeniya, Miyata and Norrish, with the arc welding using a pulse current with the value X that is within the claimed range as a matter of routine operations and optimizations to optimize the desired weld droplet transfer that depends on the welding parameters including a peak current, a base current, a peak time, a rise time, a fall time, and a distance between the steel and a contact tip that predictably produces a varying rate of a weld droplet transfer (i.e., more or less weld droplets) that would predictably meet the welding operations as desired. With respect to claim 18, Sawanishi discloses the arc welding using a welding wire wherein Zeniya further discloses for the welding wire being a solid wire. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANG Y PAIK whose telephone number is (571)272-4783. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:30; M-F. 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, Steven W. Crabb can be reached at 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. /SANG Y PAIK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/287,351 Page 2 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/287,351 Page 3 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/287,351 Page 4 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/287,351 Page 5 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/287,351 Page 6 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/287,351 Page 7 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/287,351 Page 8 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/287,351 Page 9 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/287,351 Page 10 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/287,351 Page 11 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/287,351 Page 12 Art Unit: 3761
Prosecution Insights