Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/553,377

NON-HEAT TREATED STEEL FOR CRANKSHAFTS AND CRANKSHAFT USING NON-HEAT TREATED STEEL

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Sep 29, 2023
Examiner
HILL, STEPHANI A
Art Unit
1735
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Nissan Motor Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
29%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 6m
To Grant
72%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 29% of cases
29%
Career Allow Rate
107 granted / 369 resolved
-36.0% vs TC avg
Strong +43% interview lift
Without
With
+43.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 6m
Avg Prosecution
87 currently pending
Career history
456
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
46.8%
+6.8% vs TC avg
§102
7.3%
-32.7% vs TC avg
§112
32.4%
-7.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 369 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of a certified copy of JP 2021-063442 filed April 2, 2021 as required by 37 CFR 1.55. Receipt is also acknowledged of WO 2022/209637, the WIPO publication of PCT/JP2022/010061 filed March 8, 2022. Response to Applicant’s Restriction Election Applicant’s election of Group I, claims 10 and 12-15, in the reply filed on January 29, 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claims 11, 16, and 17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected inventive group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Claim Status This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s Restriction Election filed January 29, 2026 and Claims filed September 29, 2023. Claims Filing Date September 29, 2023 Pending 10-17 Withdrawn 11, 16, 17 Under Examination 10, 12-15 Abstract Objection The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because Lines 1, 2, and 7 recite legal phraseology “comprises”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure. The form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims should be avoided. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 10 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Miyanishi (JP 2021-155808 machine translation). Regarding claim 10, Miyanishi discloses a non-heat treated (raw material) steel for a crankshaft ([0001]-[0003], [0101]) with a composition that falls within the scope of claim 10 ([0097]-[0101], Table 1, Exs. 38, 42). Element Claims 10, 14 Miyanishi Ex. 38 Miyanishi Ex. 42 C 0.39 to 0.42 0.40 0.41 Si 0.15 to 0.35 0.22 0.35 Mn 0.90 to 1.30 1.22 1.22 V 0.08 to 0.15 0.147 0.087 P 0.030 or less 0.011 0.015 Cu 0.300 or less 0.03 0.03 Ni Greater than 0 to 0.30 or less 0.02 0.02 Cr 0.35 or less 0.13 0.19 S 0.010 to 0.035 0.024 0.020 Bi 0.02 to 0.05 0.0360 0.0220 Fe Present Present Present Ceq 0.95 to 0.99 1.01 0.95 Regarding claim 14, Miyanishi discloses a carbon equivalent (Ceq) that is represented by the following Formula (1) is 0.95 to 0.99 (0.95) (Table 1 Ex. 42), Ceq = [C] + 0.167[Si] + 0.222[Mn] + 0.067[Cu] + 0.067[Ni] + 0.25[Cr] + 0.4[Mo] + 1.8[V]---Formula (1) wherein each pair of square brackets represents “mass %” of an element in the corresponding pair of square brackets in Formula (1). 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. Claims 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyanishi (JP 2021-155808 machine translation) as applied to claim 1. Regarding claim 12, Miyanishi Exs. 38 and 42 are silent to Mn of 1.00 to 1.20 mass %. Miyanishi discloses a content of manganese (Mn) is 1.00 to 1.20 mass % (0.80 to 1.50 %) ([0039]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the steel of Miyanishi to include 0.80 to 1.50 % Mn to enhance hardenability, suppress fusion cracks during induction hardening, combining with S to form MnS, suppressing the formation of FeS to improve ductility and suppress hot forging cracks (Miyanishi [0039]). It in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I). Regarding claim 13, Miyanishi Exs. 38 and 42 are silent to V of 0.10 to 0.13 mass %. Miyanishi discloses a content of vanadium (V) is 0.10 to 0.13 mass % (0.050 to 0.200 %) ([0043]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the steel of Miyanishi to include 0.050 to 0.200 % V to increase hardness of the ferrite and to increase internal hardness of the machine structural art such that fatigue strength is increased (Miyanishi [0043]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I). Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyanishi (JP 2021-155808 machine translation) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Kano (JP 2005-154886 machine translation). Regarding claim 15, Miyanishi discloses inclusions made only of bismuth (Bi) (Bi refines crystal grains through Bi particles) ([0044]) and inclusions of manganese sulfide (MnS) ([0039], [0041]). Miyanishi is silent to compound inclusions of manganese sulfide (MnS) and bismuth (Bi) in contact with the manganese sulfide (MnS). Kano discloses compound inclusions of manganese sulfide and bismuth (Bi) in contact with the manganese sulfide (MnS) (when S is added together with Bi as an inclusion-forming element, Bi agglomerates around sulfide-based inclusions) ([0010]-[0012], [0015]-[0016], [0021]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the steel of Miyanishi to include compound inclusions of manganese sulfide (MnS) and bismuth (Bi) in contact with the manganese sulfide (MnS) because when S is added together with Bi as an inclusion (particle) forming element, Bi is known to agglomerate around sulfide-based inclusions, which do not coarsen (Kano [0010]). The limitation of a maximum total area of inclusions and the compound inclusions of 2300 um2 or less has been considered and determined to recite a property of the claimed non-heat treated steel composition. The prior art discloses compositions within the scope of claim 10 (Miyanishi Table 1 Exs. 38 and 42), such that the claimed property of a maximum total area of inclusions and the compound inclusions of 2300 um2 or less naturally flows. Claims 10 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uno (JP H09-195000 machine translation). Regarding claim 10, Uno discloses a non-heat treated steel for a crankshaft ([0001], [0008], [0014]), with a composition that falls within the claimed Si, Mn, V, P, Cu, Cr, S, and Fe contents ([0039], Table 2 Ex. 13). Element Claims 10, 14 Uno Table 2 Ex. 13 Uno Table 2 Ex. 13- Modified Uno Citation C 0.39 to 0.42 0.29 0.20 to 0.50 [0016] Si 0.15 to 0.35 0.18 0.18 Table 2 Ex. 13 Mn 0.90 to 1.30 0.98 0.98 Table 2 Ex. 13 V 0.08 to 0.15 0.115 0.115 Table 2 Ex. 13 P 0.030 or less 0 0 Table 2 Ex. 13 Cu 0.300 or less 0.08 0.08 Table 2 Ex. 13 Ni Greater than 0 to 0.30 or less 0 0 to 0.30 [0026] Cr 0.35 or less 0 0 Table 2 Ex. 13 S 0.010 to 0.035 0.011 0.011 Table 2 Ex. 13 Bi 0.02 to 0.05 0 0 to 0.100 [0033]-[0034] Fe Present Present Present Table 2 Ex. 13 Ceq 0.95 to 0.99 0.75 0.66 to 0.98 - Table 2 Ex. 13 of Uno includes 0.29 % C. Uno discloses 0.20 to 0.50% C ([0016]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the Table 2 Ex. 13 composition of Uno to vary the C between 0.20 and 0.50 % to impart the desired static strength without reducing machinability and fatigue strength (Uno [0016]). Table 2 Ex. 13 is silent to Ni. Uno discloses adding 0 to 0.30% Ni ([0026]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the Table 2 Ex. 13 composition of Uno to vary the Ni between 0 and 0.30 % to improve hardenability and toughness without deteriorating machinability (Uno [0026]). Table 2 Ex. 13 is silent to Bi. Uno discloses 0 to 0.100% Bi ([0033]-[0034]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the Table 2 Ex. 13 composition of Uno to include 0 to 0.100 % Bi to improve machinability without impairing economic efficiency (Uno [0033]-[0034]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I). Regarding claim 12, Uno discloses a content of manganese is 1.00 to 1.20 mass % (0.98) (Table 2 Ex. 13). The Mn content of Uno Table 2 Ex. 13 is so close to the claimed range that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected the composition of Uno to have the same properties as the claimed steel. A prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are close. MPEP 2144.05(I). Alternatively, Uno discloses 0.60 and up to 1.00% Mn ([0018]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the Table 2 Ex. 13 composition of Uno to vary the Mn from 0.60 up to 1.00% to improve static strength without impairing economic efficiency ([0018]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I). Regarding claim 13, Uno discloses a content of vanadium (V) is 0.10 to 0.13 mass % (0.115 %) (Table 2 Ex. 13). Regarding claim 14, a carbon equivalent (Ceq) that is represented by the following Formula 1 is 0.95 to 0.99 (0.66 to 0.98) (Uno Table 2 Ex. 13 Modified, [0016], [0026], [0033]-[0034]), Ceq = [C] + 0.167[Si] + 0.222[Mn] _ 0.067[Cu] + 0.067[Ni] + 0.25[Cr] + 0.4[Mo] + 1.8[V]---Formula (1) wherein each pair of square brackets represents “mass %” of an element in the corresponding pair of square brackets in Formula (1). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I). Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uno (JP H09-195000 machine translation) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Kano (JP 2005-154886 machine translation). Regarding claim 15, Uno discloses 0 to 0.100 % Bi ([0033]-[0034]), 0.98 % Mn, and 0.011 % S (Table 2 Ex. 13). Uno is silent to inclusions made only of bismuth (Bi) and compound inclusions of manganese sulfide (MnS) and bismuth (Bi) in contact with the manganese sulfide (MnS). Kano discloses inclusions made only of bismuth (Bi) (Bi forms Bi metal inclusions) and compound inclusions of manganese sulfide and bismuth (Bi) in contact with the manganese sulfide (MnS) (when S is added together with Bi as an inclusion-forming element, Bi agglomerates around sulfide-based inclusions) ([0010]-[0012], [0015]-[0016], [0021]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the steel of Miyanishi to include inclusions made of bismuth (Bi) and compound inclusions of manganese sulfide (MnS) and bismuth (Bi) in contact with the manganese sulfide (MnS) because in a steel structure Bi forms metal inclusions and when S is added together with Bi as an inclusion (particle) forming element, Bi is known to agglomerate around sulfide-based inclusions, which do not coarsen (Kano [0010]). The limitation of a maximum total area of inclusions and the compound inclusions of 2300 um2 or less has been considered and determined to recite a property of the claimed non-heat treated steel composition. The prior art discloses a composition that renders obvious that recited in claim 10, including an overlapping amount of 0 to 0.100% Bi (Uno [0016], [0026], [0033]-[0034], Table 2 Ex. 13), such that the claimed property of a maximum total area of inclusions and the compound inclusions of 2300 um2 or less naturally flows. Related Art Kim (KR 101715515 machine translation) Kim discloses non-alloyed steel for a crankshaft ([0001]) with Mn generating MnS inclusions ([0047]) and Bi precipitated around MnS inclusions ([0100]). Hiroshi (JP 2003-055714 machine translation) Hiroshi discloses a non-heat treated steel use for a connecting rod part for an internal combustion engine (crankshaft) ([0001], [0036]) with an overlapping composition ([0022]-[0035]]). Tokokage (JP 2002-180194 machine translation) Tokokage discloses an untampered steel ([0001]) with an overlapping composition ([0016]-[0029]). Mitsuo (JP H11-129838 machine translation) Mitsuo discloses a non-heat treated steel ([0001]) with an overlapping composition ([0015]-[0037]) Takemoto (EP 0856590) Takemoto discloses a non-thermal refining steel (2:5-10) with an overlapping composition (3:1 to 4:31). Elm. Claim 10 JP ‘714 JP ‘194 JP ‘838 EP ‘590 C 0.39 to 0.42 0.20 to 0.60 0.01 to 0.70 0.20 to 0.50 0.30 to 0.60 Si 0.15 to 0.35 0.05 to 1.50 0.05 to 1.80 0.05 to 0.70 0.05 to 2.00 Mn 0.90 to 1.30 0.30 to 2.0 0.20 to 3.50 0.60 to 1.00 0.10 to 1.00 V 0.08 to 0.15 0.010 to 0.50 0.50 or less 0.02 to 0.50 0.05 to 0.50 P 0.030 max - - 0 to 0.05 0.03 to 0.20 Cu 0.300 max Appropriate amount - 0 to 0.30 0.03 to 0.50 Ni 0 to 0.30 Appropriate amount 1.5 max 0 to 0.30 0.03 to 0.50 Cr 0.35 max 1.5 max 1.5 max 0 to 1.00 0.01 to 0.50 S 0.010 to 0.035 0 to 0.10 0.03 to 0.20 0.01 to 0.07 0.20 max Bi 0.02 to 0.05 0 to 0.30 0.3 max 0 to 0.10 0.30 max Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHANI HILL whose telephone number is (571)272-2523. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-12pm. 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, KEITH WALKER can be reached at 571-272-3458. 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. /STEPHANI HILL/Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 29, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603203
METHOD OF MANUFACTURING Sm-Fe-N MAGNET, Sm-Fe-N MAGNET, AND MOTOR HAVING Sm-Fe-N MAGNET
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12580124
GRAIN BOUNDARY DIFFUSION METHOD FOR BULK RARE EARTH PERMANENT MAGNETIC MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12565689
FERRITIC STAINLESS STEEL HAVING IMPROVED MAGNETIZATION, AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12540385
PRODUCTION METHOD FOR METAL PLATES FOR VAPOR DEPOSITION MASKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12515254
Process for the additive manufacturing of maraging steels
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
29%
Grant Probability
72%
With Interview (+43.4%)
4y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 369 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month