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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more.
The claim 1 recites:
A method for producing a hot-rolled steel sheet, the method comprising:
a measurement step of measuring a surface temperature of hot-rolled strip-shaped steel;
a first calculation step of calculating a temperature history in a natural cooling state after coiling, assuming that the strip-shaped steel has been coiled without unevenness on an end face, based on the surface temperature measured in the measurement step;
a coiling step of actually coiling the strip-shaped steel after the measurement step;
a derivation step of scanning with a displacement meter, an end face of a coil formed in the coiling step, and deriving a size of the unevenness of the end face over a radius of the coil; and
a first prediction step of predicting a temperature history of the unevenness in a natural cooling state using: the temperature history calculated in the first calculation step; and the size of the unevenness derived in the derivation step.
Step 1:
The claim recites a method. Thus, the claim is directed to a process, which belongs to statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A Prong one:
Claim 1 recites the limitations of “a first calculation step of calculating a temperature history in a natural cooling state after coiling, assuming that the strip-shaped steel has been coiled without unevenness on an end face, based on the surface temperature measured in the measurement step; and deriving a size of the unevenness of the end face over a radius of the coil; a first prediction step of predicting a temperature history of the unevenness in a natural cooling state using: the temperature history calculated in the first calculation step; and the size of the unevenness derived in the derivation step”. The recited “calculating …, deriving …, predicting…” steps, as drafted, are processes that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitation in the mind or with pen and paper. For example, calculating a temperature history in a natural cooling state after coiling can be done in the mind or with pen and paper by scaling a previous temperature history of similar coil with regards to current air temperature and the measured coiling temperature. The unevenness size of the end face over a radius of the end face of the coil can be calculated in the mind or using pen and pager by subtracting the measured scanning height data with the smallest height. The temperature history of the coil with the unevenness can be calculated in the mind or using pen and pager by applying a scaling factor that proportion to the size of the unevenness. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas.
Step 2A Prong two:
Besides the abstract ideas, the claim recites additional elements of 1) “producing a hot-rolled steel sheet”, “a measurement step of measuring a surface temperature of hot-rolled strip-shaped steel”, “a coiling step of actually coiling the strip-shaped steel after the measurement step” and “scanning with a displacement meter, an end face of a coil formed in the coiling step”, these additional limitations merely link the recited judicial exception to a particular technology environment or particular field of use, and do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B:
The claim as a whole does not amounts to significantly more than the recited exception. The claim has the following additional limitations and elements:
1) “producing a hot-rolled steel sheet”, “a measurement step of measuring a surface temperature of hot-rolled strip-shaped steel”, “a coiling step of actually coiling the strip-shaped steel after the measurement step” and “scanning with a displacement meter, an end face of a coil formed in the coiling step”;
Regarding 1) as explained previously, merely link the recited judicial exception to a particular technology environment or particular field of use, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application, and do not add inventive concept.
Therefore, the claim directs to an abstract idea without significantly more, and is not patent eligible.
Claim 2 depends on claim 1, and recites additional limitations of “a second calculation step of calculating a phase transformation rate using the temperature history predicted in the first prediction step; and a second prediction step of predicting a hardened portion of the strip-shaped steel using the phase transformation rate calculated in the second calculation step” that merely specifies some details of the “predicting …” (“mental process” group of abstract idea) and does not change the fact that the claim 2 is directed to abstract idea without significantly more. Therefore claim 2 is not patent eligible.
Claim 3 depends on claim 1, and recites additional limitations of “in the derivation step, a size of the unevenness is determined by using as a criterion, a median value of measurement values by the displacement meter” that merely specifies some details of the “deriving …” (“mental process” group of abstract idea) and does not change the fact that the claim 3 is directed to abstract idea without significantly more. Therefore claim 3 is not patent eligible.
Claim 4 depends on claim 1, and recites additional limitations of “in the derivation step, a size of the unevenness is determined by using a two-dimensional coordinate system defined by: a protruding direction of the unevenness; and a direction of scanning with the displacement meter” that merely specifies some details of the “deriving …” (“mental process” group of abstract idea) and does not change the fact that the claim 4 is directed to abstract idea without significantly more. Therefore claim 4 is not patent eligible.
Claim 7 depends on claim 2, and recites additional limitations of “in the derivation step, a size of the unevenness is determined by using as a criterion, a median value of measurement values by the displacement meter” that merely specifies some details of the “deriving …” (“mental process” group of abstract idea) and does not change the fact that the claim 7 is directed to abstract idea without significantly more. Therefore claim 7 is not patent eligible.
Claim 8 depends on claim 2, and recites additional limitations of “in the derivation step, a size of the unevenness is determined by using a two-dimensional coordinate system defined by: a protruding direction of the unevenness; and a direction of scanning with the displacement meter” that merely specifies some details of the “deriving …” (“mental process” group of abstract idea) and does not change the fact that the claim 8 is directed to abstract idea without significantly more. Therefore claim 8 is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 5,
Step 1: The claim recites a method. Thus, the claim is directed to a process, which belongs to statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A and Step 2B: Similarly, as recited in the rejection of claim 1, claim 5 is directed to abstract idea without significantly more.
Therefore, claim 5 is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 6,
Step 1: The claim recites a method. Thus, the claim is directed to a process, which belongs to statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A and Step 2B: Similarly, as recited in the rejection of claim 1, claim 6 is directed to abstract idea without significantly more.
The recited additional limitations of “a second calculation step of calculating a phase transformation rate using the temperature history predicted in the first prediction step; and a second prediction step of predicting a hardened portion of the strip-shaped steel using the phase transformation rate calculated in the second calculation step.” that merely specifies some details of the “predicting …” (“mental process” group of abstract idea) and does not change the fact that the claim 6 is directed to abstract idea without significantly more.
Therefore claim 6 is not patent eligible.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101 set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claims and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding independent claims 1 and 5-6:
YASUTAKE JP 2017144483 A teaches a method comprising:
a coiling step of actually coiling the strip-shaped steel after hot-rolling strip-shaped steel;
a derivation step of scanning with a displacement meter, an end face of a coil formed in the coiling step, and deriving a size of the unevenness of the end face over a radius of the coil;
a first prediction step of predicting a temperature history of the unevenness in a natural cooling state using the size of the unevenness derived in the derivation step.
TSUKUDA JP 2012196692 A teaches a measurement step of measuring a surface temperature of hot-rolled strip-shaped steel.
IWANAGA JP 2005281809 A teaches a first calculation step of calculating a temperature history in a natural cooling state after coiling, assuming that the strip-shaped steel has been coiled without unevenness on an end face, based on the surface temperature measured in the measurement step.
However, YASUTAKE, TSUKUDA and IWANAGA do not teach or suggest individually or in combination:
predicting a temperature history of the unevenness in a natural cooling state using: the temperature history calculated in the first calculation step; and the size of the unevenness derived in the derivation step.
Regarding dependent claims 2-4 and 7-8, they depend on allowable base claims, therefore would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101 set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claims and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
JUN KR 20040053633 A teaches measuring telescoping of coil.
OTA US 20120216924 A1 teaches hot rolling striped shape metal sheet and winding coil using the hot rolled metal sheet.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Tang whose telephone number is (571)272-7437. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4 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, Kamini Shah can be reached on (571)272-2279. 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.
/M.T./ Examiner, Art Unit 2115
/PAUL B YANCHUS III/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115 March 13, 2026