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 § 102
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5, 8-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by United States Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0123827 A1 to Kazama et al. (Kazama).
With regard to claim 1, Kazama discloses a semi-finished pipe used for forming a finished pipe by cutting performed by a lathe (Kazama, title, abstract), the semi-finished pipe comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
606
832
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a first layer (as labeled in annotated fig. 6 above) for forming the finished pipe that remains even after cutting performed by the lathe (paragraph 0013); and
a second layer (as labeled in annotated fig. 6 above, the second layer is the outer cylindrical layer 7 that is a material that is less expensive than the material of the portion of 81 axially outward of Diameter R’ ) for a dummy use that is formed on an outer side of the first layer (paragraph 0013), and forms an object to be cut by the lathe (as shown in the annotated figure showing the cutting tool 5 of the lathe removing the two part second layer).
With regard to claim 2, Kazama discloses the semi-finished pipe according to claim 1 as set forth above, and further discloses wherein an outer diameter of the first layer is an outer diameter close to an outer diameter of the finished pipe (as shown in the annotated fig. 6 above).
With regard claim 3, Kazama discloses the semi-finished pipe according to claim 1 as set forth above, wherein the first layer has a small outer diameter that makes grasping of the semi-finished pipe by a chucking jig of the lathe difficult, and the second layer has a large outer diameter that enables grasping of the semi-finished pipe by the chucking jig of the lathe (as shown in fig. 3 and described in paragraph 0030).
With regard to claim 5, Kazama discloses the semi-finished pipe according to claim 1 as set forth above, wherein the second layer has more favorable machinability than at least a neighboring portion of the first layer close to the second layer (abstract – “The material applied to the periphery is a free-cutting material…”).
With regard to claim 8, Kazama discloses a method of manufacturing a semi-finished pipe used for forming a finished pipe by cutting performed by a lathe (Kazama, title, abstract), the method comprising:
a step of preparing a wire (3, fig. 3, paragraph 0021);
a step of forming a first layer for forming the finished pipe that remains even after cutting performed by the lathe on an outer peripheral side of the wire (shown in fig. 3, the portion that remains after the cutting tool 5 removes the second layer); and
a step of forming a second layer for a dummy use that becomes an object to be cut by cutting performed by the lathe on an outer peripheral side of the first layer (shown in fig. 3, the portion of the wire and outer layer 2 that is yet to be removed by the cutting tool).
With regard to claim 9, Kazama discloses the semi-finished pipe manufacturing method for manufacturing a second semi-finished pipe further closer to a finished pipe from a semi-finished pipe using a lathe, the semi-finished pipe manufacturing method comprising: a step of preparing the semi-finished pipe of claim 1 (as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 );
a grasping step of grasping the semi-finished pipe from an outer side of the second layer (as shown demonstrated in fig. 3 and described in paragraph 0030);
a cutting step of forming a recessed portion or a protruding portion on the first layer by cutting from the outer side the second layer (shown in fig. 6); and
a step of forming the second semi-finished pipe in a state where the grasped portion and a portion on which the recessed portion or the protruding portion is formed are connected to each other (shown in fig. 6).
With regard to claim 10, Kazama discloses a semi-finished pipe used for manufacturing a finished pipe by cutting a predetermined portion of the semi-finished pipe, the semi-finished pipe comprising:
a dummy layer stacking portion where a first layer for forming the finished pipe and a second layer for a dummy use formed on an outer side of the first layer are stacked to each other (the first and second layers of annotated fig. 6 above are considered the dummy layer); and a first layer unevenness forming portion where a recessed portion or a protruding portion is formed (shown in fig. 6, a recessed portion is formed on the finished side of the cutting tool 5).
With regard to claim 11, Kazama discloses a pipe manufacturing method for manufacturing a finished pipe from a semi-finished pipe using a lathe, the pipe manufacturing method comprising: a step of preparing the semi-finished pipe of claim 10 (as set forth above);
a grasping step of grasping the semi-finished pipe at the dummy layer stacking portion (not shown in fig. 6 but described in paragraph 0030 and as demonstrated in fig. 3); and
a cutting-off step of cutting off the first layer unevenness forming portion from a dummy layer stacked side (the cutting step demonstrated in fig. 6 is the cutting off step).
With regard to claim 13, Kazama discloses the pipe manufacturing method according to claim 11 as set forth above, and further discloses wherein in the cutting step, the second layer is cut such that a part of the second layer remains (during the cutting step a part of the second layer remains in the portion of the lathe chuck interface).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 4, 6-7, 12 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0123827 A1 to Kazama et al. (Kazama) in view of United States Patent No. 2930115 to Dietzsch, Sr. et al. (Dietzsch).
With regard to claim 4, Kazama discloses the semi-finished pipe according to claim 1 as set forth above, but fails to further discloses wherein the first layer has an outer diameter of 0.05 mm or more and less than 0.60 mm, and the second layer has an outer diameter of 0.40 mm or more and 3.00 mm or less.
Dietzsch discloses layered semi-finished pipes that are intended to function as very precisely metered nozzles having inner diameters in the range of 1/10 to 1 mm (column 3, lines 28-44). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the device of Kazama having an outer diameter of 0.05 to 0.6 mm and a second layer outer diameter of 0.5 to 3 mm in order to provide a nozzle for the uses specified by Dietzsch.
With regard to claim 6, Kazama in view of Dietzsch discloses the semi-finished pipe according to claim 5 as set forth above, wherein the first layer includes: a first layer outer layer that forms a neighboring portion with the second layer, and a first layer inner layer that is formed on an inner side of the first layer outer layer (shown in the annotated fig. 6 above), and Vicker's hardness of the first layer outer layer falls within a range of 350 to 550Hv (not disclosed).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the device of Kazama in view of Dietzsch with a first outer layer that has a Vicker’s hardness in the range of 350 to 550 Hv in order to provide a layer that can function to support the finished pipe profile during the creation of the outer auxiliary passage when creating a nozzle such as that disclosed by Dietzsch.
With regard to claim 7, Kazama in view of Dietzsch discloses the semi-finished pipe according to claim 6 as set forth above, and further discloses wherein the first layer inner layer is made of any one of gold, a gold-cobalt alloy, palladium, a palladium alloy (Kazama, paragraph 0023 and 0029), or a eutectoid of polytetrafluoroethylene and nickel, the first outer layer is made of any one of a nickel cobalt alloy, a nickel manganese alloy, or pure nickel (not disclosed), and the second layer is made of any one of copper (paragraph 0029), pure nickel, or a nickel manganese alloy.
Even though nickel cobalt, nickel manganese and pure nickel are not listed as options for the first outer layer to the palladium alloy, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the semi-finished pipe of Kazama in view of Dietzsch with nickel cobalt, nickel manganese or pure nickel in the adjacent layer to the valuable inner layer to be subsequently processed to the desired dimensions, in order to reduce the amount of valuable material removed from the semi-finished pipe as disclosed by Kazama.
With regard to claim 12, Kazama discloses a pipe manufacturing method for manufacturing a finished pipe from a semi-finished pipe using a lathe, the pipe manufacturing method comprising: a step of preparing the semi-finished pipe of claim 1 (as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above);
a grasping step of grasping the semi-finished pipe from an outer side of the second layer (not shown in fig. 6 but described in paragraph 0030 and as demonstrated in fig. 3);
a cutting step of forming a recessed portion or a protruding portion on the first layer by cutting from the outer side of the second layer (the cutting step demonstrated in fig. 6); and
a cutting-off step of cutting off a predetermined portion of the semi-finished pipe (not disclosed).
Dietzsch discloses a process of creating multiple nozzles of identical configuration that are cut off from a previously semi-finished pipe that has been subsequently machined to desired dimensions for a specific use. The nozzle is cut off from the rest of the semi-finished pipe that has been subjected to the claimed additional steps. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to further modify the semi-finished pipe of Kazama with a cutting off step that removes a predetermined portion of the semi-finished pipe for purposes of consistency as taught by Dietzsch.
With regard to claim 14, Kazama discloses a pipe made of metal (Kazama, title, abstract), having an outer diameter of 0.05 mm or more and less than 0.60 mm (not disclosed), and having a recessed portion or a protruding portion on an outer periphery of the pipe and a cut mark on the cut portion (shown in the cutting step demonstrated in fig. 6)).
Dietzsch discloses layered semi-finished pipes that are intended to function as very precisely metered nozzles having inner diameters in the range of 1/10 to 1 mm (column 3, lines 28-44). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the device of Kazama having an outer diameter of 0.05 to 0.6 mm and a second layer outer diameter of 0.5 to 3 mm in order to provide a nozzle for the uses specified by Dietzsch.
With regard to claim 15, Kazama discloses the semi-finished pipe according to claim 1 as set forth above, and further discloses wherein the first layer and the second layer are made of metals (claims 5 and 6) of which the first layer and a portion of the second layer close to the first layer are alloyed to each other by heating the semi-finished pipe (not disclosed).
With regard to claim 16, Kazama discloses the semi-finished pipe according to claim 15 as set forth above, and further discloses wherein the first layer is made of palladium or silver (claim 6), and the second layer is made of copper or iron (claim 7).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-22 are 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: With regard to claims 17 (and 18 dependent upon claim 17) the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest a semi-finished pipe having an intermediate layer formed between the first and third layers, wherein the intermediate layer prevents the metal of the third layer from being alloyed with the metal of the first layer and metal of the second layer by heating, together in combination with the other elements. With regard to claim 19, the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest a semi-finished pipe having a degree of alloying in the second layer is lowered in an outward direction, together in combination with the other elements. With regard to claims 20 and 21, the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest a semi-finished pipe in which the first layer and second layer are alloyed when heated, together in combination with the other elements.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. USPN 1814267 discloses a method of placing a cylindrical sleeve within an outer cylinder to create a dummy layer that can be machined to desired specifications to restore a combustion engine to functionality. USPN 2014/0014219 discloses a shaped pipe body. USPN 2018/0264556 discloses an automatic system and method for measuring and machining the end of tubular elements. USPN 2024/0344222 discloses a method manufacturing an electroformed pipe. USPN 2196303 discloses a silver copper alloy for use in a pipe. USPN 11045879 discloses a method of turning workpieces.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID R DEAL whose telephone number is (469)295-9216. The examiner can normally be reached M-F generally 8-4 pm CST.
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 supervisors can be reached at: Craig M Schneider (571) 272-3607 and Ken Rinehart (571) 272-4881. 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.
/DAVID R DEAL/ Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3753