Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 18/351,826

Method For Manufacturing Aluminum Alloy Extruded Material

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jul 13, 2023
Priority
Feb 25, 2021 — JP 2021-028184 +1 more
Examiner
LUK, VANESSA TIBAY
Art Unit
1733
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Aisin Keikinzoku Co. Ltd.
OA Round
4 (Final)
54%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
6m
Est. Remaining
81%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 54% of resolved cases
54%
Career Allowance Rate
403 granted / 739 resolved
-10.5% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+26.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
785
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
56.9%
+16.9% vs TC avg
§102
7.4%
-32.6% vs TC avg
§112
28.5%
-11.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 739 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/09/2026 has been entered. Status of Claims Claims 1-4 are pending and presented for examination on the merits. Claim 1 is currently amended. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP H09-310141 (A) to Yatsukura et al. (“Yatsukura”) (computer-generated translation is attached) in view of US 2017/0166997 (A1) to Arbab et al. (“Arbab”). Regarding claim 1, Yatsukura discloses a method for producing a high-strength Al-Zn-Mg alloy excellent in extrudability (method for manufacturing an aluminum alloy extruded material). Abstract; para. [0001]. The aluminum alloy contains the following elements in percent by mass (abstract; para. [0005], [0007]-[0010]): Element Claim 1 JP H09-310141 A Zn 6.0 - 8.0 6 - 7 Mg 1.0 - 1.38 0.9 - 1.3 Cu 0.10 - 0.50 0.1 - 0.4 Zr 0.10 - 0.25 0.05 - 0.25 Ti 0.005 - 0.05 0.005 - 0.1 at least one of Si 0.25 - 0.30 0.05 - 0.2 Fe 0.35 - 0.40 0.1 - 0.4 Al balance base The Fe content overlaps the claimed range and meets the claim limitation with respect to Fe and Si because a minimum of one elemental range (“at least one of” from among Fe and Si) needs to be satisfied. The method for manufacture includes the following steps: (i) casting a casting in the shape of a billet (homogenizing a billet cast from the aluminum alloy) (para. [0012], [0013]); (ii) homogenizing the billet and cooling thereafter at a rate of 100°C/hour or more (cooling the billet after homogenizing at a cooling rate of 50°C/hr or higher) (para. [0013]); (iii) preheating a billet to 430°C-520°C and ensuring a temperature of the extruded material is controlled within a range of 500°C and 565°C, followed by cooling at a rate of 50°C/min or more (cooling an extruded material at a cooling rate of 50-750°C/min from an extruded material temperature of 325-550°C directly after extrusion) (para. [0014], [0015]); and (iv) performing a two-stage aging treatment at 80°C-110°C for 2-12 hours and then at 140°C-180°C for 4-12 hours (performing two-stage artificial aging treatment at 90 to 130°C for 1 to 8 hours and at 130 to 180°C for 1 to 20 hours) (para. [0016]). The elemental, temperature, and temporal ranges overlap the claimed ranges. The overlap between the ranges taught in the prior art and recited in the claims creates a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP § 2144.05(I). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to select from among the prior art ranges because there is utility over an entire range disclosed in the prior art. Yatsukara does not teach using an aluminum alloy containing 20-95% by mass of recycled aluminum material made by collecting and remelting extruded materials of aluminum alloys that are used or scrap materials generated in a manufacturing process. Arbab is directed to a method for recycling scrap of 2XXX- or 7XXX-series alloys. Title. The invention relates to the fabrication of ingots of aluminum alloys in the 2xxx or 7xxx series from scrap (e.g., machining chips or waste) made of alloys in the corresponding series, the scrap originating from fabrication processes used in the aeronautical and space industries (collecting and remelting scrap materials generated in a manufacturing process). Para. [0001], [0002], [0040]. The ingot is a cast product that can be used directly for extrusion. Para. [0042], [0044]. The proportion of the metal in the ingot derived from melting scrap is equal to at least 5% by weight, even more preferably at least 25% by weight (containing 20 to 95% by mass of recycled aluminum material) (para. [0043]; claim 14), which overlaps the claimed range. Yatsukara’s alloys belong to the field of 7000-series aluminum alloys (Al-Zr-Mg). Para. [0002], [0004], [0006]. Arbab teaches that large quantities of waste are generated in industries where finished metal products are fabricated. Para. [0002]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have utilized scrap or recycled aluminum alloy as raw material for extrusion processes, as suggested by Arbab, in the method of manufacturing extruded aluminum alloy of Yatsukara because reusing already existing material would decrease landfill waste and reduce the amount of loose metal scrap existing in the environment. Regarding claim 2, Yatsukara discloses that it is not necessary to add Cr (para. [0009]), which falls within the claimed range. Yatsukara does not disclose the intentional addition of Sr; therefore, Sr is either present as an impurity or entirely absent (i.e., zero percent), which falls within the claimed range. Regarding claims 3 and 4, Yatsukara discloses examples in which the tensile strength and 0.2% yield strength exceeds 400 MPa (e.g., 475 N/mm2) and 380 MPa (e.g., 445 N/mm2). Para. [0018]; Table 2 – Examples 1-4. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 06/09/2026 have been fully considered. Applicant’s arguments with respect to Yoshida (US 2019/0360083 (A1)) have been considered but are moot because Yoshida is not relied upon to reject the claims in this Office action. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VANESSA T. LUK whose telephone number is (571)270-3587. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30 AM - 4:30 PM ET. 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, Keith D. Hendricks, can be reached at 571-272-1401. 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. /VANESSA T. LUK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733 June 25, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 1 earlier event
Sep 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Dec 31, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 31, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103
Jun 09, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 10, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 29, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Sep 01, 2026
Response Filed
Oct 21, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12760384
METHOD OF MANUFACTURING GRAIN-ORIENTED ELECTRICAL STEEL SHEET AND ROLLING APPARATUS FOR MANUFACTURING ELECTRICAL STEEL SHEET
3y 3m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12760381
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING EQUAL-HARDNESS CR5 BACK UP ROLL
3y 4m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12753463
GAS-ASSISTED MICROFLOW EXTRACTION (GAME) SYSTEM PATENT
3y 3m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Patent 12742225
METHOD FOR SEPARATING NICKEL FROM LITHIUM, AND APPLICATION THEREOF
3y 6m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12742233
DUPLEX STAINLESS STEEL PIPE
2y 6m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
54%
Grant Probability
81%
With Interview (+26.3%)
3y 10m (~6m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 739 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month