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 .
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.
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, 5 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao (CN 110373639 A) as provide by (CN 110373639 A) machine translation as an English language equivalent in view of Kim (US 8,507,109 B2)
Claim 1:
Mao discloses a coated cutting tool (¶03) comprising:
a substrate (1) (fig. 1, ¶03, 31 and 58); and
a cutting layer (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10) disposed on the substrate (1) (fig. 1, ¶03, 31 and 58);
wherein the cutting layer (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10) includes a brittleness suppressing layer (3, 4, 5, 6) and a wear-resistant layer (10) disposed on the brittleness suppressing layer (3, 4, 5, 6) (fig. 1, ¶31),
the substrate (1) includes a hard alloy body such as cemented carbide, cermet, ceramic, cubic boron nitride-based materials, or high-speed steel (fig. 1, ¶31 and 58);
the brittleness suppressing layer (3, 4, 5, 6) includes a first layer (3, 4) and a second layer (5, 6) disposed on the first layer (3, 4) (fig. 1, ¶31);
the first layer (3, 4) and the second layer (5, 6) include materials different from each other (fig. 1, ¶31);
wherein the first layer (3, 4) includes (TicAl1-c)X (where 0.4 < c ≤ 0.5, X is at least one selected from N, C, CN, NO, CO, and CNO) (TiAlN at 30-60%) (fig. 1, ¶26) and the second layer (5, 6) includes (TibSi1-b)X (where 0.6 < b < 0.8, X is at least one selected from N, C, CN, NO, CO, and CNO) (TiSiN – Si at 30-60%) (fig. 1, ¶26);
wherein the brittleness suppressing layer (3, 4, 5, 6) includes a first alternating layer in which the first (3, 4) and second layers (5, 6) are alternately laminated with each other (fig. 1, ¶26, 27, 31);
wherein the first alternating layer includes two or more multilayers (3, 4 and 5, 6) and the thicknesses of the first (3, 4) and second layers (5, 6) constituting the multilayers each independently exceeds 50 nm (fig. 1, ¶20-26, 27, 31);
and, the wear-resistant layer (10) includes (Ti1-aSia)X (where 0.1< a < 0.3, and X is at least one selected from N, C, CN, NO, CO, and CNO) (fig. 1, ¶11, 27).
Mao fails to disclose the second layer includes (AlbTi1-b)X (where 0.6 < b < 0.8, X is at least one selected from N, C, CN, NO, CO, and CNO). Instead, Mao teaches the second layer (5, 6) includes (TibSi1-b)X (where 0.6 < b < 0.8, X is at least one selected from N, C, CN, NO, CO, and CNO) (TiSiN – Si at 30-60%).
Kim discloses a coated cutting tool (abstract) comprising a substrate (cemented carbide or cermet) (c2, ll. 58-62); and a cutting layer (intermediate layer and top layer) disposed on the substrate (cemented carbide or cermet), wherein the cutting layer (intermediate layer and top layer) includes a brittleness suppressing layer (intermediate layer) and a wear-resistant layer (top layer) disposed on the brittleness suppressing layer (intermediate layer) (c3, ll. 44-67), the brittleness suppressing layer (intermediate layer) includes a first layer and a second layer disposed on the first layer, wherein the second layer includes any one of (AlbTi1-b)X (where 0.6 < b < 0.8, and X is at least one selected from N, C, CN, NO, CO, and CNO) (c3, ll. 58-67).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to employ Kim’s Al-rich composition with the TiAlN layers of Mao to achieve desired hardness, oxidation resistance, wear resistance and chipping resistance (Kim, c2, ll. 1-5 and c3, ll. 44-49). See MPEP § 2143 A which describes the prima facie obviousness of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See also MPEP § 2143 B which describes the prima facie obviousness of simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results. The results would have been predictable because both reference are in the identical field (hard coating for cutting tools), use the same coating technology (PVD multilayer coatings), use TiAl-based layers, and are optimizing the same properties (hardness, wear resistance, oxidation resistance, crack/chipping resistance, adhesion and durability).
Claim 5:
Mao in view of Kim renders obvious the coated cutting tool of claim 1; and, Mao in view of Kim discloses thickness relationships between the TiAlN layer and the TiSiN layer, including a TiAlN-to-TiSiN thickness ratio of approximately 2:1 to 1:3 (Mao, ¶20). To the extent the claimed ratio is not identically disclosed, the claimed ratio represents an optimization of a known result-effective variable because Mao expressly teaches that the relative thicknesses of the layers are selected and controlled within the multilayer coating architecture. In addition, the first and second layer thicknesses are explicitly disclosed; thickness is numerically ranged; and thickness is repeatedly linked to at least crystal alignment and hardness. Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have recognized the claim limitation “a thickness ratio range of the second layer and the first layer is 1:1.5 to 1:5” is a variable which achieves the recognized result of improving crystal alignment and/or hardness (Kim, c5, ll. 46-52). One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to optimize result-effective variables. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the thickness ratio of the second layer and the first layer to the range of 1:1.5 to 1:5 since it has been held that the presence of a known result-effective variable would be motivation for a person of ordinary skill in the art to experiment to reach another workable process. See MPEP § 2144.05 II B which describes the prima facie obviousness of a person of ordinary skill in the art to use routine experimentation to determine the optimum or workable ranges of a result-effective variable with a reasonable expectation of success.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to try the claimed range of a thickness ratio of 1:1.5 to 1:5 because it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454,456, 105 USPQ 233,235 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP § 2144.05 II A which describes the prima facie obviousness of a person of ordinary skill in the art to use routine experimentation to determine the optimum or workable ranges.
Claim 7:
Mao in view of Kim renders obvious the coated cutting tool of claim 1, wherein the cutting layer (Mao, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10) further includes a second alternating layer (Mao, 7) disposed between the brittleness suppressing layer (Mao, 3, 4) and the wear-resistant layer (Mao, 10) (Mao, c3, ll. 58-67).
Claim 8:
Mao in view of Kim render obvious the coated cutting tool of claim 7, wherein the second alternating layer includes at least one structure in which a first wear-resistant layer (Mao, 10), the second layer (Mao, 5, 6), and the first layer (Mao, 3, 4) are sequentially laminated (Mao, fig. 1, ¶31); and, the first wear-resistant layer (Mao, 10) includes (Ti1-aSia)X (where 0.1 < a < 0.3, and X is at least one selected from N, C, CN, NO, CO, and CNO) (Mao, fig. 1, ¶11, 27).
Claim 9:
Mao in view of Kim renders obvious the coated cutting tool of claim 7, wherein the cutting layer (Mao, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10) further includes an intervening layer (Mao, 8) disposed on the second alternating layer (Mao, 7) (Mao, fig. ¶31.
Claim 10:
Mao in view of Kim renders obvious the coated cutting tool of claim 9, wherein the intervening layer includes a lower layer (Mao, 8 in view of Kim AlTiN) disposed directly below the wear-resistant layer (Mao, 10), and the lower layer includes (AlbTi1-b)X (where 0.6 < b < 0.8, and X is at least one selected from N, C, CN, NO, CO, and CNO) (Kim, c3, ll. 44-67 and c6, ll. 4-24). Kim discloses Al-rich TiAlN layers having compositions within the claimed range of (AlbTi1-b)X where 0.6 < b < 0.8 and further discloses such Al-rich layers disposed directly adjacent to Si-containing wear-resistant layers in the multilayer coating structure. As such, providing a lower layer disposed directly below the wear-resistant layer and having the claimed composition would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment, filed 13 May 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-10 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Mao (CN 110373639 A).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yun et al. (US 8,889,252 B2) discloses a cutting tool comprising a base material and a multi-layer coating formed thereon. Andersson et al. (US 8,864,861 B2) discloses a nanolaminated coated cutting tool. Anderson et al. (US 8,852,305 B2) disclose a nanolaminated coated cutting tool.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lee Holly whose telephone number is (571)270-7097. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 to 5:00 EST.
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, Thomas Hong can be reached at (571) 272-0993. 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.
/Lee A Holly/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726
Prosecution Insights