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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02-Jun-2026 has been entered.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carlson (US 6,427,813) in view of Taiho Kogyo Co. Ltd. (JP 61-021439) and further in view of Sakurai (JP 2006-291879).
Regarding independent claim 1, Carlson discloses a damper assembly (see Abstract, FIG. 5) comprising: a damper tube (22b) having a tubular shape defining an inner surface and extending for an axial length (see FIG. 5), wherein the damper tube is made of low-carbon steel (see col. 3, lines 37-40); a rod disposed at least partially within the damper tube (see FIG. 5); and a piston (26b) connected to the rod and slidably disposed within the damper tube and configured to contact the inner surface of the damper tube along a stroke region less than the axial length (see FIG. 5; see also col. 6, lines 26-31), wherein the damper tube defines a fluid chamber (32b, 34b) containing a magnetorheological fluid (38b) (see col. 6, lines 31-33), wherein the piston is configured to slide within the magnetorheological fluid (see col. 6, lines 26-31).
Carlson does not disclose that the inner surface of the damper tube includes a hardened surface.
Taiho Kogyo teaches a damper assembly (see machine translation, ¶ 0001) comprising: a damper tube (11); wherein the inner surface of the damper tube includes a hardened surface (see machine translation, page 4, lines 4-12, “the surface hardening layer is . . . a quench hardened layer . . . [wherein the] quench hardened layer can be formed by . . . a laser modification method”) that extends along the stroke region (see FIGS. 1a-1c), wherein the damper tube is made of low-carbon steel (see machine translation, ¶ 0001, “seamless steel pipes (STKM) made of low-carbon steel”).
It would have been obvious to form a laser hardened surface on the inner surface of the damper tube of Carlson to provide a high-strength cylinder member having an increased hardness at the sliding interface with the piston, wherein the cylinder member can be manufactured inexpensively and easily (see Taiho Kogyo, machine translation, page 4).
Neither Carlson nor Taiho Kogyo disclose that the hardened surface includes martensite and extending along the stroke region and less than the axial length of the damper tube, wherein the hardened surface includes a plurality of bands that each extend continuously along the stroke region of the inner surface of the damper tube, and wherein the hardened surface is formed by self-quenching of the damper tube after laser heating.
Sakurai teaches a hydraulic cylinder assembly (see machine translation, ¶ 0001) comprising a cylinder (11) including a hardened surface (20, 22) that includes martensite (see machine translation, ¶ 0008) extending along the stroke region (L2 or L3) and less than the axial length of the damper tube (see FIGS. 14, 15, 17, 19, 24, 25), wherein the hardened surface includes a plurality of bands (21, 67, 67’, 74) (see FIGS. 14, 15, 17, 19, 24, 25) that each extend continuously along the stroke region of the inner surface of the damper tube (see FIGS. 14, 15, 17, 19, 24, 25), and wherein the hardened surface is formed by self-quenching of the hydraulic cylinder after laser heating (see e.g. machine translation, ¶ 0046, “applying a quenching treatment to a position between the first and second hardened treatment areas 20 and 21 using a laser irradiation device 31,” indicating that the laser irradiation device itself applies the quenching treatment; see also ¶¶ 0061-0063, hardened sections are formed by laser irradiation without any external cooling).
It would have been obvious to form the laser hardened surface on the inner surface of Carlson to have a plurality of martensite bands, as taught by Sakurai, to prevent the possibility of multiple laser treatments to the same area which would lead to annealing and a decrease in hardness and other problems (see e.g. Sakurai, machine translation, ¶ 0021).
Regarding claim 4, Sakurai teaches that the hardened surface (22) extends circumferentially around the inner surface of the damper tube (see FIGS. 14, 15, 17, 19, 24, 25).
Regarding claim 6, Sakurai teaches that the plurality of bands are spaced apart at regular angular intervals around the inner surface of the damper tube (see FIGS. 14, 15, 17, 19, 24, 25).
Regarding claim 7, Sakurai teaches that the plurality of bands each extend in an axial direction (see FIGS. 14, 15, 17, 19, 24, 25).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carlson (US 6,427,813) in view of Sakurai (JP 2006-291879) (machine translation attached) and Taiho Kogyo Co. Ltd. (JP 61-021439) (machine translation attached), as applied to claim 1, above, and further in view of Lorenzo (US 4,313,771).
Regarding claim 3, Taiho Kogyo does not disclose that the hardened surface has a Rockwell Hardness of at least about RC 49.
Lorenzo teaches a laser hardened surface comprising a Rockwell Hardness of at least about RC 49.
It would have been obvious to implement the method of Lorenzo to create a hardness of about RC 49 to provide a sufficient hardness within the cylinder that will resist wear.
Claims 8-11, 13, 14, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Carlson (US 6,427,813) in view of Taiho Kogyo Co. Ltd. (JP 61-021439) and further in view of Sakurai (JP 2006-291879).
Regarding claim 8, Taiho Kogyo discloses a method for laser hardening a damper tube (see machine translation, ¶ 0001; see also machine translation, page 4, lines 4-12, “[a] surface hardened layer 20 is formed . . . [wherein the] quench hardened layer can be formed by . . . a laser modification method”), the method comprising: generating a laser beam (see machine translation, page 4, lines 4-12, “[a] surface hardened layer 20 is formed . . . [wherein the] quench hardened layer can be formed by . . . a laser modification method”); directing the laser beam onto an inner surface of the damper tube along a stroke region (see e.g. FIGS. 1a-1c; hardened surface is formed on inner surface of the damper tube along stroke region), wherein the damper tube is made of low-carbon steel (see machine translation, ¶ 0001, “seamless steel pipes (STKM) made of low-carbon steel”).
Taiho Kogyo does not disclose heating the inner surface to an elevated temperature sufficient to cause steel of the inner surface of the damper tube to form austenite; and cooling the austenite to form a hardened surface including martensite, and wherein directing the laser beam onto the inner surface of the damper tube includes directing the laser beam along a stroke region and less than an axial length of the damper tube to form a plurality of bands that each extend continuously along the stroke region of the inner surface of the damper tube.
Sakurai teaches a method for laser hardening a cylinder (see ¶ 0001), wherein the method comprises directing a laser beam onto an inner surface of the damper tube to heat the inner surface to an elevated temperature sufficient to cause steel of the inner surface of the damper tube to form austenite (see e.g. ¶ 0008, “martensitic formation” requires heating to form austenite); and cooling the austenite to form a hardened surface including martensite (see ¶¶ 0005, 0008, 0014, “martensitic formation” requires quenching), wherein the cooling the austenite to form the hardened surface includes self quenching (see e.g. machine translation, ¶ 0046, “applying a quenching treatment to a position between the first and second hardened treatment areas 20 and 21 using a laser irradiation device 31,” indicating that the laser irradiation device itself applies the quenching treatment; see also ¶¶ 0061-0063, hardened sections are formed by laser irradiation without any external cooling), and wherein directing the laser beam onto the inner surface of the damper tube includes directing the laser beam along a stroke region (L2 or L3) and less than an axial length of the damper tube (see FIGS. 14, 15, 17, 19, 24, 25) to form the hardened surface as a plurality of bands (21, 67, 67’, 74) (see FIGS. 14, 15, 17, 19, 24, 25) that each extend continuously along the stroke region of the inner surface of the damper tube (see FIGS. 14, 15, 17, 19, 24, 25).
It would have been obvious to replace the laser hardening method of Taiho Kogyo with the laser hardening method of Sakurai to prevent the possibility of multiple laser treatments to the same area which would lead to annealing and a decrease in hardness and other problems (see e.g. Sakurai, machine translation, ¶ 0021).
Regarding claim 9, Sakurai teaches directing the laser beam onto the inner surface of the damper tube includes reflecting the laser beam onto the inner surface using one of a prism or a mirror (45) (see FIG. 10; see also machine translation ¶ 0056).
Regarding claim 10, Sakurai teaches that the method further includes moving the one of the prism or the mirror in an axial direction within the damper tube to direct the laser beam to form a band (20) of the hardened surface extending along an axial length of the damper tube (see ¶ 0062).
Regarding claim 11, Sakurai teaches that the method further includes rotating at least one of the damper tube or the laser beam to form the hardened surface circumferentially around the inner surface of the damper tube (see ¶ 0065).
Regarding claim 13, Sakurai teaches directing the laser beam onto the inner surface of the damper tube includes reflecting the laser beam onto the inner surface using one of a prism or a mirror (45) (see ¶ 0056), and wherein rotating the damper tube or the laser beam includes rotating the one of the prism or the mirror (see ¶ 0063).
Regarding claim 14, Sakurai teaches that the hardened surface (22) extends circumferentially around the inner surface of the damper tube (see FIG. 3).
Regarding claim 16, Sakurai teaches that the plurality of bands are spaced apart at regular angular intervals around the inner surface of the damper tube (see FIG. 3; ¶¶ 0062, 0063).
Regarding claim 17, Sakurai teaches that the plurality of bands each extend in an axial direction (see FIG. 3; ¶¶ 0062, 0063).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taiho Kogyo Co. Ltd. (JP 61-021439) (machine translation attached) in view of Sakurai (JP 2006-291879) (machine translation attached) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Gabilondo et al. (US 2015/0211083).
Regarding claim 12, neither Taiho Kogyo nor Sakurai disclose that that rotating at least one of the damper tube or the laser beam includes rotating, by a rotator actuator, the damper tube.
Gabilondo teaches a method of laser hardening a workpiece (see Abstract, FIG. 3), wherein either the laser is moved or the workpiece is rotated to form a hardened surface (see ¶ 0053).
It would have been obvious to rotate the cylinder of Taiho Kogyo/Sakurai method instead of rotating the laser as a simple substitution of one known method step for another (see e.g. Gabilondo, ¶ 0053).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taiho Kogyo Co. Ltd. (JP 61-021439) (machine translation attached) in view of Sakurai (JP 2006-291879) (machine translation attached) as applied to claim 8, above, and further in view of Lorenzo (US 4,313,771).
Regarding claim 19, Taiho Kogyo does not disclose that the hardened surface has a Rockwell Hardness of at least about RC 49.
Lorenzo teaches a laser hardened surface comprising a Rockwell Hardness of at least about RC 49.
It would have been obvious to implement the method of Lorenzo to create a hardness of about RC 49 to provide a sufficient hardness within the cylinder that will resist wear.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02-Jun-2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the rejection of independent claim 1 as being obvious over Kondo, a new ground of rejection is applied above. As such, Applicant’s arguments regarding Kondo are moot.
Regarding the claimed “low-carbon steel,” Applicant argues that “Sakurai fails to explicitly disclose the specific material of the cylinder 11” (see Amendment, page 4). Sakurai, however, was not relied upon for disclosing a low-carbon steel. In the present rejection, both Carlson and Taiho Kogyo disclose that the steel is a low carbon steel.
Applicant further argues that “[c]onventional laser hardening technology is primarily directed to medium-carbon and high-carbon steels, because low-carbon steel has a low carbon content and it is difficult to form high-hardness martensite” (see Amendment, page). Taiho Kogyo, however, explicitly discloses a laser hardening treatment (see machine translation, page 4, lines 4-12, “the surface hardening layer is . . . a quench hardened layer . . . [wherein the] quench hardened layer can be formed by . . . a laser modification method”) on a low carbon steel tube (see machine translation, ¶ 0001, “seamless steel pipes (STKM) made of low-carbon steel”).
Applicant further argues that “as acknowledged by the in the Office Action, ‘neither Taiho nor Sakurai disclose that the cooling the austenite to form the hardened surface includes self quenching” (see Amendment, page 6). Upon further review, however, while Sakurai does not use the term “self quenching,” it is apparent that Sakurai discloses a self quenching method. Sakurai discloses “applying a quenching treatment to a position between the first and second hardened treatment areas 20 and 21 using a laser irradiation device 31,” (see e.g. machine translation, ¶ 0046) (emphasis added). Thus, Sakurai discloses that it is the application of the laser irradiation itself that provides the “quenching” treatment. Sakurai also discloses the steps of forming the hardened sections by laser irradiation without providing any external cooling (see e.g. ¶¶ 0061-0063). Therefore, one of ordinary skill would understand that Sakurai discloses a self-quenching method.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS J LANE whose telephone number is (571)270-5988. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at (571)272-7124. 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.
/NICHOLAS J LANE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
June 25, 2026
Prosecution Insights