DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is responsive to the application filed on 09/11/2023 and the claims as amended 03/11/2024. Claims 20-34 are pending.
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 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.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
It appears the Non-Patent Document to Brock, cited in the 12/07/2023 IDS, which is not in English and was inadvertently split into two separate files of 70 pages and 84 pages respectively. This document in its entirety is not in English; however, Applicant has included a partial translation of a selection of the document’s pages (noted as “pages 35-36” on Applicant’s IDS). This translated portion appears to be what is being cited on Applicant’s IDS of 12/07/2023 and has been considered. Therefore, the IDS is initialed and signed as considered with respect to the listing:
PNG
media_image1.png
68
624
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The remainder of the document (i.e., the non-English portion) has not been considered.
[continued below]
It is noted that for non-English documents that are cited, the following must be provided:
(a) A concise explanation of the relevance, as it is presently understood by the individual designated in 37 CFR 1.56(c) most knowledgeable about the content of the information, unless a complete translation is provided; and/or
(b) A written English language translation of a non-English language document, or portion thereof, if it is within the possession, custody or control of, or is readily available to any individual designated in 37 CFR 1.56(c).
Since Applicant has not provided a concise explanation of the relevance and has opted not to provide a written English language translation of the remainder of the non-English language document, it does not appear to form part of the information intended to be considered.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 20, “the parts to be joined” at line 6 and at line 12 appears in error for – the two parts to be joined --.
In Claim 20, “the depth” at line 6 appears in error for – a depth --.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The recitations of “in that” have been interpreted as – in the method for laser welding --.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 20-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
As to Claim 20, the recitation of “the depth at which there is a risk of cracks (hot cracks)” at line 7 renders the claim indefinite. It is not clear if the claim is requiring the claimed ‘risk of cracks’ to be a risk of hot cracks or simply providing a non-limiting example within the parenthesis. As such, the metes and bounds of the claim are not clear. For purposes of further examination and in view of the specification “risk of cracks (hot cracks)” has been construed as – risk of hot cracks --.
Claims 21-34 are rejected as being dependent on, and failing to cure the deficiencies of, rejected independent claim 20.
As to Claim 24, “less than about 50%” is a relative term that renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Specifically, they would not be appraised about the range of values that are covered by about 50% that are greater that 50%.
As to Claim 26, the term “material at risk of hot cracking” is a subjective term. The specification fails to supplies some objective standard for measuring the scope of the term “at risk”. The claim requires the exercise of subjective judgment without restriction and renders the claim indefinite.
Prior Art Relied Upon
Prior art rejections were not able to be made in view of the prior art of record. A discussion of the pertinent prior art is provided under Pertinent Prior Art section heading below, following the Allowable Subject Matter section.
Allowable Subject Matter
Independent Claim 20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended, consonant with the interpretation applied, to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. For example, by replacing “risk of cracks (hot cracks)” has been construed as – risk of hot cracks --. The same would place Claims 21-23, 25 and 27-34 in condition for allowance. Dependent Claims 24 and 26 would be also be allowable if rewritten to overcome their respective rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action while remaining dependent from properly amended independent claim 20.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Prior art fails to teach or fairly suggest, in combination with the other limitations of the independent claim, a method wherein the same laser head is used to carry out the first welding step and the subsequent welding step, the laser beam is oscillated, starting from an initial position defined by an end point of an oscillating movement in which the laser beam melts material down to the target welding-in depth, initially counter to the feeding direction and then back into the initial position with a swing back movement, and the swing back movement of the laser beam into the initial position is responsible for carrying out the subsequent welding step (carried out with a reduced energy input).
Examiner Comment: Performing a subsequent laser welding step with reduced energy input after a first laser welding step was known for heat treating / crack reduction. See Pertinent Prior Art section below. Further, providing laser beam oscillation (wobble) was also known. Id. However, the prior art fails to teach or fairly suggest a sequence by the same laser head as claimed in the present method by which the laser beam is oscillated, starting from an initial position defined by an end point of an oscillating movement in which the laser beam melts material down to the target welding-in depth (which is deeper than a critical welding-in depth of the parts to be joined), initially counter to the feeding direction and then back into the initial position with a swing back movement, wherein a movement rate of the laser beam, during the oscillating movement, is higher than the feed rate, and the swing back movement of the laser beam into the initial position is responsible for carrying out the subsequent welding step (melting the weld seam produced by the first welding step again down to a welding-in depth which, as a maximum, corresponds to the critical welding-in depth of the parts to be joined).
PNG
media_image2.png
514
776
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[Above: Examiner’s notes and annotations to Figure 3 in view of specification; not limiting]
According to the instant specification, this facilitates high welding rates without addition of material with a benefit of healing of cracks formed in the first welding step.
Pertinent Prior Art
Prior Art
Pertinence
US-20050028897-A1
‘897 teaches laser welding in which a second heat source applies heat (consonant with the subsequent welding step of the instant invention) to reduce hot cracking. The second heat source is provided with a reduced energy input. However, the second heat source is provided separately from the first (rather than with the same laser head) and fails to teach the laser beam is oscillated, and fails to teach an oscillating movement as claimed.
US-20200147723-A1
‘723 teaches laser welding in which the laser beam is oscillated utilizing a single laser head starting from an initial position defined by an end point of an oscillating movement. However, ‘723 fails to teach the end point melts material down to the target welding-in depth, initially counter to the feeding direction and then back into the initial position with a swing back movement, the swing back movement of the laser beam into the initial position is responsible for carrying out the subsequent welding step at a welding-in depth which, as a maximum, corresponds to the critical welding-in depth of the parts to be joined.
US-20170157839-A1
‘839 teaches laser welding in which the laser beam is oscillated utilizing a single laser head starting from an initial position defined by an end point of an oscillating movement along a feeding direction and then back into the initial position with a swing back movement. However, ‘723 fails to teach the end point melts material down to the target welding-in depth, initially counter to the feeding direction and then back into the initial position with the swing back movement, the swing back movement of the laser beam into the initial position is responsible for carrying out the subsequent welding step at a welding-in depth which, as a maximum, corresponds to the critical welding-in depth of the parts to be joined.
US-20120298638-A1
‘638 teaches laser welding in first and subsequent steps, thereby smoothing the surface of a laser weld seam using a same laser head. ‘638 fails to teach an oscillating laser beam.
US-20150001183-A1
‘183 teaches laser welding in first and subsequent steps, thereby improving durability and reducing cracks laser weld seam using a same laser head, the subsequent step having a lower energy input. ‘638 fails to teach an oscillating laser beam and would not suggest welding initially counter to the feeding direction and then back into the initial position with the swing back movement, the swing back movement of the laser beam into the initial position is responsible for carrying out the subsequent welding step at a welding-in depth which, as a maximum, corresponds to the critical welding-in depth of the parts to be joined.
US-10137530-B2
‘530 is directed to laser welding in multiple steps, but utilizes separate lasers and fails to teach an oscillating pattern performed by a single laser head.
US-20180361506-A1
‘506 is directed to laser welding in first and subsequent steps and oscillating beam, but utilizes separate lasers and fails to teach an oscillating pattern performed by a single laser head in the manner claimed the swing back movement of the laser beam into the initial position is responsible for carrying out the subsequent welding step at a welding-in depth which, as a maximum, corresponds to the critical welding-in depth of the parts to be joined.
US-20240269771-A1
‘771 is not prior art, but is relevant to oscillating laser welding.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON H DUGER whose telephone number is (313) 446-6536. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30a to 6:30p EST Monday & Tuesday, and is OFF Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.
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, Phutthiwat Wongwian, can be reached on (571) 270-5426. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
JASON H DUGER
PRIMARY EXAMINER, ART UNIT 3741
PHONE (313) 446 6536
FAX (571) 270 9083
DATE
July 25, 2026
/JASON H DUGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights