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 without traverse of group I (Claims 1-25) as well as Species A2, C2, and B1 in the reply filed on June 9, 2026 is acknowledged. Furthermore, claims 4, 20, and 21 are withdrawn due to their relation with nonelected species. It is acknowledged that Claim 20 was previously, erroneously identified as generic by the examiner. This error is addressed here as the Claim is drawn to nonelected species C3 as shown in Figure 20 (which shows the light swept in a generally linear manner with four distinct linear sections) Claim 20 is subsequently withdrawn.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kondo (JP 2000000683 A) in view of Yasuoka (CA 03055275):
PNG
media_image1.png
241
228
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
417
667
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
295
553
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 1: Kondo teaches a laser welding method (“laser welding method” [0008]) comprising: forming a molten weld pool (“molten metal portion” Figure __ Element 6) by emitting laser light (“laser” [0013]) including a main power region (“irradiation point a” [0013] as shown in Figure 1) and a sub-power region (“irradiating point b” [0013] as shown in Figure 1) onto a workpiece (“workpiece” [0013]) , the main power region including at least one main beam (“main laser beam” [0013] Figure 1 Element 11), the sub-power region including at least one sub-beam (“sub laser beam” [0013] Figure 1 Element 12) and solidifying the molten weld pool (“solidification” [0006]), wherein the sub-beam is emitted onto the workpiece such that a void (“defects centering on porosity” [0008] that would form from gas bubbles”) formed inside the molten weld pool escapes to outside of the molten weld pool before the molten weld pool becomes solidified (defects escape or “get out” [0008] of the molten metal portion “before the molten metal portion solidifies” [0008])
Kondo does not explicitly teach that the sub beam has a lower power density than the main beam
However, Yasuoka does teach a welding method with a main beam (Figure 3F Element B1) in a main power region (Figure 3F Element P1) and a sub beam (Figure 3F Element B2) in a sub power region (Figure 3F Element P2) where the sub beam has a lower power density than the main beam (“the auxiliary beam [has] power density lower than power density of the main beam” [0064]). Furthermore, Yasuoka teaches that the main beam is used for welding (“The main beam may [conduct] keyhole welding” [0093]) and that the auxiliary beam is used to maintain a molten weld pool (“molten pool formed with the auxiliary beam” [0015] ). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Kondo such main beam and sub beam have the overall configuration of and such that the sub beam has a lower power density than the main beam as disclosed by Yasuoka in order to maintain the weld pool and slow cooling in order to prevent voids in the metal piece.
Regarding Claim 2: Kondo as modified by Yasuoka further teaches that the forming of the molten weld pool includes emitting the laser light such that, in a welded part formed as a result of solidification of the molten weld pool, number of voids present in lower half is equal to or smaller than number of voids present in upper half (Kondo- Figure 1 shows an example of the workpiece wherein the number of voids present in the upper and lower halves of the workpiece is equal to 0. Furthermore, the method of Kondo as modified by Yasuoka requires that the voids move upwards in the workpiece and escape the molten pool [0008]) so that any remaining impurities would exist in the upper half of the workpiece rather than the lower. Kondo suggests that some voids may remain at [0013] around the page break: “gas bubbles…hardly remain,” and they would have been in the process of rising to the surface).
Regarding Claim 3: Kondo as modified by Yasuoka further teaches that the main power region (Yasuoka- Figure 3F Element P1) is positioned on inside of outer edge of the sub-power region (Yasuoka- Figure 3F Element P2 “the laser light further includes auxiliary beams having a power density lower than the power density of the main beam and disposed in a dispersed manner on a periphery of the main beam [0028]).
Regarding Claim 5: Kondo as modified by Yasuoka further teaches that the sub-power region includes, as the at least one sub-beam, a single sub-beam (Yasuoka -Figure 3F Element B2) that surrounds the main power region (Yasuoka -Shown in Figure 3F “the laser light further includes auxiliary beams having a power density lower than the power density of the main beam and disposed in a dispersed manner on a periphery of the main beam” [0028]).
Regarding Claim 6: Kondo as modified by Yasuoka further teaches temporarily-maintaining that, after implementation of the forming of the molten weld pool, includes emitting the laser light onto the molten weld pool to temporarily maintain the molten weld pool in molten state (“slowing the cooling rate of [the] molten metal portion to increase the time required for solidification” [0008])
Claims 7-8 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kondo (JP 2000000683 A) and Yasuoka (CA 03055275) in further view of Narhi (US 2021/0299785 A1):
Regarding Claim 7: Kondo as modified by Yasuoka does not teach that in the maintenance period, power of the laser light is reduced as compared to power in the forming of the molten weld pool
However, Narhi does teach a laser welding method (“laser welding method” [0022]) wherein, in the temporarily-maintaining of the molten weld pool in molten state (“melt” state [0023]), power of the laser light is reduced as compared to power in the forming of the molten weld pool (after the weld pool is formed, “the power in the center beam [is] ramped down from second power (P2) down to the off power” [0027]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Kondo as modified by Yasuoka such that the power of the laser light is reduced while the weld pool is maintained as disclosed by Narhi in order to provide a weld method that “minimize[es] the total power applied to the workpiece… and prevents the formation of any unwanted defects in the workpiece” [0023]
Regarding Claim 8: Kondo as modified by Yasuoka does not teach that in the maintenance period, power of the main beam is reduced as compared to power in the forming of the molten weld pool
However, Narhi teaches a laser welding method (“laser welding method” [0022]) where, in the temporarily-maintaining of the molten weld pool in molten state (“melt” state [0023]), power of the main beam is reduced as compared to power in the forming of the molten weld pool (after the weld pool is formed during the T2 time period, “the power in the center beam [is] ramped down from second power (P2) down to the off power” [0027]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Kondo as modified by Yasuoka such that the power of the main beam is reduced while the weld pool is maintained as disclosed by Narhi in order to provide a weld method that “minimize[es] the total power applied to the workpiece… and prevents the formation of any unwanted defects in the workpiece” [0023]
Regarding Claim 12: Kondo as modified by Yasuoka teaches that in the forming of the molten weld pool, the main beam is emitted (Kondo- main laser beam is for “welding” [0013] and forming the molten weld pool),
Kondo as modified by Yasuoka does not teach that in the temporarily-maintaining of the molten weld pool in molten state, irradiation of the main beam is stopped.
However, Narhi teaches a laser welding method (“laser welding method” [0022]) where, in the temporarily-maintaining of the molten weld pool in molten state (“melt” state [0023]), power of the main beam is stopped ( (after the weld pool is formed during the T2 time period, “the power in the center beam [is] ramped down from second power (P2) down to the off power” [0027]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Kondo as modified by Yasuoka such that the power of the laser light is stopped while the weld pool is maintained as disclosed by Narhi in order to provide a weld method that “minimize[es] the total power applied to the workpiece… and prevents the formation of any unwanted defects in the workpiece” [0023]
Regarding Claim 13: Kondo as modified by Yasuoka does not teach that, wherein, from the forming of the molten weld pool to the temporarily-maintaining of the molten weld pool in molten state, irradiation period of the main beam is shorter than irradiation period of the sub-beam.
However, Narhi teaches a laser welding method (“laser welding method” [0022]) wherein the irradiation period of the main beam is shorter than the irradiation period of the sub-beam (“the power of the center beam is sustained for a second time T2 which is shorter than the first time T1 [for which the annular beam is sustained]” [0031])
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Kondo as modified by Yasuoka such that the main beam (of a higher power) is sustained for a shorter period than the annular beam (for heating purposes [0029]) as disclosed by Narhi in order to provide a weld method that “minimize[es] the total power applied to the workpiece… and prevents the formation of any unwanted defects in the workpiece” [0023]
Claims 24 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kondo (JP 2000000683 A) and Yasuoka (CA 03055275) in further view of Sakai (US 20210379698 A1):
PNG
media_image4.png
462
657
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 24: Kondo as modified by Yasuoka does not teach that the molten weld pool is formed in a bridged manner over a first end portion of a first member in a first direction and a second end portion of a second member in the first direction, the first member being made of a metallic member, the second member being made of a metallic member, the second member being adjacent to the first member in a second direction intersecting with the first direction such that a distance between the first end portion and the second end portion along the first direction is equal to or greater than zero.
Kondo does disclose butt welding and end portions of first and second members.
However, Sakai does disclose a welding method (“a method for welding [that] includes a process of laser welding” [0028]) wherein in the weld pool (“weld pool” [0113]) is formed in a bridged manner (“weld pool is formed” [0113] between the pieces to be welded) over a first end portion of a first member in a first direction ( first end of welding surface of “first member” [0028] Figure 14 Element 31) and a second end portion of a second member in the first direction (“the welding surface of the second member” [0028] Figure 14 Element 31 ) the first member being made of a metallic member, the second member being made of a metallic member (the members are “copper-including” [0030]), the second member being adjacent to the first member in a second direction intersecting with the first direction such that a distance between the first end portion and the second end portion along the first direction is equal to or greater than zero (Shown in Figure 14).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Kondo as modified by Yasuoka with the bridge formation as disclosed by Sakai in order to further “stabilize the quality of the weld zone” [0006])”
Regarding Claim 25: Kondo as modified by Yasuoka and Sakai further teaches that a member constituting the workpiece is a conductor in form of a rectangular wire (Sakai-“The segment conductor 31 can be formed from a rectangular wire that has a rectangular cross section [0034”]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 22 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art does not disclose or suggest “in the temporarily-maintaining of the molten weld pool in molten state, when viewed in direction of irradiation of the laser light, the laser light is swept along a route that is curved around center of the molten weld pool” in conjunction with the other limitations of claims 1 and 18 on which claim 22 depends.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SOLAN OLIVA whose telephone number is (571-)272-2518. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:00-3:00.
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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at (571) 270-8241. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-270-5569.
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.
/SOLAN OLIVA/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/TOPAZ L. ELLIOTT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights