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 § 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) 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al. (US 2013/0078031) in view of Hasegawa (JP 2010094686), Liu (CN 107900560) and Sakata (WO 2014119197).
Regarding claim 1, Nakamura et al. discloses “a submerged arc welded joint” (abstract, i.e., a submerged arc welded joint … wherein the welded joint comprising a steel plate having a plate thickness of 4 mm to 12 mm and including weld metal), “the joint comprising a weld metal” (abstract, i.e., a submerged arc welded joint … wherein the welded joint comprising a steel plate having a plate thickness of 4 mm to 12 mm and including weld metal) “which is formed by using a welding wire and a flux in combination and by performing submerged arc welding with a welding heat input of 300 kJ/cm or more” (product by process. MPEP 2113), wherein:
“the weld metal has a chemical composition, comprising, by mass %” (para0034-0038, in particular para.0035, i.e., ultrahigh-strength welded joint. Para.0038, i.e., First, the reason for determining each component, in relation to the chemical composition of the weld metal, is explained. In this regard, "%" for each composition means mass %):
“C: 0.05% to 0.15%” (para.0039, i.e., [C: over 0.09% to 0.24%]. Thus, C can be within the range. As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990)),
“Si: 0.2% to 0.9%” (para.0041, i.e., [Si: 0.2% to 1.0%]. [0042] Si is a deoxidizing element and has a function for reducing oxygen (O) in the weld metal and improving cleanliness. Further, the residual Si in the weld metal contributes to forming oxides and refining the structure, whereby the toughness may be improved. In order to obtain these effects, it is necessary to increase the content of Si to 0.2% or more. On the other hand, when Si is excessively contained (over 1.0%), the oxides become coarse and the toughness of the weld metal is significantly deteriorated. Therefore, the content of Si in the weld metal is from 0.2% to 1.0%. In addition, in order to stably ensure the toughness of the weld metal, a lower limit of Si may be 0.25%, 0.3% or 0.35%, and an upper limit of Si may be 0.8%, 0.7% or 0.6%. In this case, Si can be 0.25%, 0.3% or 0.35%, 0.8%, 0.7% or 0.6%. As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990)),
“Mn: 0.5% to 1.3%” ([0043] [Mn: 0.5% to 2.5%]. As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990)),
“P: 0.015% or less” ([0045] [P: 0.02% or Less]. As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990)),
“S: 0.015% or less” ([0047] [S: 0.02% or Less]. As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990)),
“Cr: 0.10% to 0.45%” ([0061] [Cr: 0.1% to 2.0%]. As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990)),
“Mo: 0.5% to 2.0%” ([0063] [Mo: 0.1% to 1.5%]. As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990)),
“Ni: 2.5% to 6.0%” ([0057] [Ni: 1.0% to 9%]. As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990)),
“O: 0.040% or less” ([0053] [O: 0.005% to 0.05%]. As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).),
“
“a balance of Fe and incidental impurities” ([0021], i.e., a balance of the weld metal is constituted by unavoidable impurities and Fe.),
Ceg, which is expressed by equation (1) below, is in a range of 0.65 to 1.00:
“Ceq=[C]+0.17[Mn]+0.04[Si]+0.025[Ni]+0.2[Cr]+0.25[Mo] (1)”
(as noted above: C: 0.05% to 0.15%, Mn: 0.5% to 1.3%, Si: 0.2% to 0.9%, Ni: 2.5% to 6.0%, Cr: 0.10% to 0.45%, Mo: 0.5% to 2.0%. Examiner selected C = 0.1 %, Mn = 0.5%, Si = 0.9%, Ni = 5 %, Cr = .45% and Mo = 2%. Applied these numbers into the equation (1) above, Ceq= 0.1 + 0.17 (0.5) +0.04 (0.9) +0.025 (5) +0.2 (0.45) + 0.25 (2) = 0.686, Ceq = 0.936 which is within the range of 0.65 to 1.00),
and
α, which is expressed by equation (2) below, is 6.0 or less:
“α=30[C]+0.7[Mn]+[Ni]−([Si]+0.5[Cr]+1.5[Mo]) (2)”
(as noted above: C: 0.05% to 0.15%, Mn: 0.5% to 1.3%, Si: 0.2% to 0.9%, Ni: 2.5% to 6.0%, Cr: 0.10% to 0.45%, Mo: 0.5% to 2.0%. Examiner selected C = 0.1 %, Mn = 0.5%, Si = 0.9%, Ni = 5 %, Cr = .45% and Mo = 2%. Applied these numbers into the equation (2), α= 30 (0.1) +0.7 (0.5) + (5) −( (0.9) +0.5 (0.1) + 1.5 (2)) = 8.35 – 3.95 = 4.4, α= 4.4 which is within the range of 6.0 or less)
,
where, “in the equation (1) and the equation (2), the expression “[element symbol]” denotes a content (mass %) of the corresponding element in the weld metal described above” ([0038] First, the reason for determining each component, in relation to the chemical composition of the weld metal, is explained. In this regard, "%" for each composition means mass %).
Nakamura et al. is silent regarding N: 0.012% or less; as measured by a tensile test is-performed on the weld metal, a yield strength of the weld metal is 630 MPa or higher and a tensile strength of the weld metal is 780 MPa or higher, an absorbed energy vE0 of the weld metal, as measured by a V-notch Charpy impact test performed at a testing temperature of 0° C., is 47 J more,
Hasegawa teaches “N: 0.012% or less” ([0012], i.e., A method for manufacturing a single-pass large heat input welded joint with excellent toughness of the weld metal as described in any one of the above items [1] to [6], … the weld contains, by mass%, … N: 0.001 to 0.010%). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Nakamura et al. with Hasegawa, by adding Hasegawa’s Nitrogen in Nakamura et al.’s weld metal or weld, to improve resistance to pitting and crevice corrosion.
Liu teaches “as measured by a tensile test is-performed on the weld metal, a yield strength of the weld metal is 630 MPa or higher and a tensile strength of the weld metal is 780 MPa or higher” (on page 8, i.e., depositing metal heat treatment at 610 degrees centigrade * 1h, the normal temperature mechanical property: tensile strength is Rm=905Mpa, yield strength Rp0.2 = 840Mpa). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Nakamura et al. with Liu, by modifying Liu’s mechanical properties of the metal according to Hasegawa’s metal, to allow the weld joint to safely bear heavy, repetitive loads and ensure the catastrophic structure failure doesn’t happen below the tensile strength.
Sakata teaches “an absorbed energy vE0 of the weld metal, as measured by a V-notch Charpy impact test performed at a testing temperature of 0° C., is 47 J more” (three Charpy impact tests were performed on each of the following temperatures: 20, 0, -18, -30, -50, -70, and -90°C. Next, the Charpy transition temperature (hereinafter referred to as vTr54 and vTr'54) that shows 54J was determined from the mutual transition curves that smoothly pass through the test values at each temperature). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Nakamura et al. with Sakata, by modifying Nakamura et al.’s absorbed energy vE₀ according to Sakata’s absorbed energy vE₀, to provide superior brittle fracture resistance and improved weld joint integrity.
Regarding claim 2, modified Nakamura et al. discloses “the chemical composition further comprises, by mass %, at least one selected from the group consisting of: “Cu: 0.8% or less” (Nakamura, [0069] [Cu: 0.01% to 1.0%]), “Al: 0.20% or less” (Nakamura, [0049] [Al: 0.004% to 0.08%]), and Ti: 0.20% or less” (Nakamura, [0051] [Ti: 0.005% to 0.15%]).
Regarding claim 3, modified Nakamura et al. discloses the chemical composition further comprises, by mass %, at least one selected from the group consisting of: “Nb: 0.10% or less” ([0125] [Nb: 0.005% to 0.2%]. In this case, examiner can selected Nb less than 0.1%. As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990)), “V: 0.10% or less” ([0121] [V: 0.01% to 0.2%] In this case, examiner can selected Nb less than 0.1%. As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990)), “Ca: 0.010% or less” ([0131] [Ca: 0.0006% to 0.0100%]), “B: 0.010% or less” ([0129] [B: 0.0002% to 0.030%]. In this case, examiner can selected B less than 0.01 %. As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990)), and REM: 0.020% or less.
Regarding claim 4, modified Nakamura et al. discloses the chemical composition further comprises, by mass %, at least one selected from the group consisting of: “Nb: 0.10% or less” ([0125] [Nb: 0.005% to 0.2%]. In this case, examiner can selected Nb less than 0.1%. As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990)), “V: 0.10% or less” ([0121] [V: 0.01% to 0.2%] In this case, examiner can selected Nb less than 0.1%. As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990)), “Ca: 0.010% or less” ([0131] [Ca: 0.0006% to 0.0100%]), “B: 0.010% or less” ([0129] [B: 0.0002% to 0.030%]. In this case, examiner can selected B less than 0.01 %. As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990)), and REM: 0.020% or less.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY CHOU whose telephone number is (571)270-7107. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday.
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, Edward Landrum can be reached at (571) 272-5567. 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.
/JIMMY CHOU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights