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 2021-079218 filed May 7, 2021 as required by 37 CFR 1.55. Receipt is also acknowledged of WO 2022/234760, the WIPO publication of PCT/JP 2022/017334 filed April 8, 2022.
Claim Status
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s Claim Amendments filed November 3, 2023.
Claims Filing Date
November 3, 2023
Amended
1, 3
Pending
1-3
Claim Interpretation
Claim 1 lines 12-13 recite “volume density of 100 L/min/m2”. Applicant’s specification at [0053] describes determining the water volume density by dividing a water flow rate (L/min) used for cooling in the portion to be cooled of the steel sheet by the length (m) and width (m) of the section of the cooling facility or the like. The length and width each have units of m, however the volume density units are in m2, indicating the water flow rate is divided by the area (length * width) of the portion of the steel sheet being cooled. Applicant’s claimed units appear to be equivalent to L/min∙m2, calculated by
L
m
i
n
*
1
m
2
.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-3 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 lines 7-9 “(including 0% by mass)” renders the claim indefinite. Since this limitation is in parenthesis it is unclear whether or not it is part of the claim. For the purpose of examination claim 1 will be interpreted as “including 0% by mass” as being part of the claim.
Claim 2 lines 3-6 “(including 0% by mass)” renders the claim indefinite. Since this limitation is in parenthesis it is unclear whether or not it is part of the claim. For the purpose of examination claim 2 will be interpreted as “including 0% by mass” as being part of the claim.
Claim 3 is rejected as depending from claim 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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haga (JP 2013-032581 machine translation) in view of Sasaki (JP 2005-089821 machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Haga discloses a method for manufacturing a steel sheet for cold rolling ([0001]), the method comprising:
hot-rolling a slab ([0061]) with an overlapping chemical composition ([0016], [0026]-[0029], [0050]-[0060])
so that an outlet temperature of a finishing rolling mill is 800°C or higher and 940°C or lower (above Ar3 and above 820°C and preferably less than 950°C) ([0062]);
cooling at least a portion of the hot-rolled steel sheet, for 0.1 seconds or more (cooling to 780°C or lower at an average cooling rate of 400°C/s or higher with examples up to 1600°C/s cools for at least 0.1 seconds from 800 to 780°C, (800-780°C)/1600°C/s), within 3.0 seconds after passing through a final stand of the finishing rolling mill and being sent out on a run-out table (cooling within 0.4 seconds of completion of rolling) ([0066], Table 2); and
coiling, at a coiling temperature of 550°C or higher, the cooled hot-rolled steel sheet (winding preferably above 550°C and preferably less than 650°C) ([0068]).
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).
Element
Claim 1 (mass%)
Haga (mass%)
Haga Citation
C
0.15 to 0.25
0.020 to 0.30
[0050]
Si
0.8 to 3.0
0.10 to 3.00
[0051]
Mn
1.8 to 3.0
1.00 to 3.50
[0053]
Ni, Cr, Cu, and Mo
1.0 or less
Cr: 1.0 or less
Mo: 0.50 or less
[0059]
Ti, Nb, V
1.0 or less
Ti: less than 0.050
Nb: less than 0.050
V: less than 0.50
[0058]
B
0.01 or less
0.010 or less
[0059]
Haga is silent to cooling at a water volume density of 100 L/min/m2 or more.
Sasaki discloses manufacturing a steel sheet ([0001]) comprising cooling water volume density of 100 L/min/m2 or more (2000 to 7000 l/min∙m2) ([0042]-[0045]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Haga to use a cooling water volume density of 2000 to 7000 l/min∙m2 to create a uniform structure by strong cooling (Sasaki [0042]). Further, the cooling rates of Haga (400°C/s or higher, [0066], Table 2) and Sasaki (150°C/sec or higher, [0019], [0023]) overlap, such that the cooling water volume density of Sasaki achieves the desired cooling rate of Haga. 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).
In the event it is determined that the disclosed water volume density of Sasaki does not overlap with that claimed because of the units, then the following rationale is applied.
Generally, differences in concentration or temperature (or cooling water volume density) will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature (or cooling water volume density) is critical. “[W]here the general conditions of a claimed are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” MPEP 2144.05(II)(A).
Regarding claim 2, Haga discloses the slab with an overlapping composition ([0016], [0026]-[0029], [0050]-[0060]). 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).
Element
Claim 2 (mass%)
Haga (mass%)
Haga Citation
P
0.1 or less
0.10 or less
[0054]
S
0.01 or less
0.010 or less
[0055]
Al
0.10 or less
2.00 or less
[0056]
N
0.01 or less
0.010 or less
[0057]
Regarding claim 3, Haga discloses a method for manufacturing a cold-rolled steel sheet, comprising cold-rolling a steel sheet manufactured by the method according to claim 1 at a rolling rate of 30% to 80% (40% or more to less than 80%) ([0069]). 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).
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haga (JP 2013-032581 machine translation) in view of Tomita (US 4,938,266).
Regarding claim 1, Haga discloses a method for manufacturing a steel sheet for cold rolling ([0001]), the method comprising:
hot-rolling a slab ([0061]) having an overlapping chemical composition ([0016], [0026]-[0029], [0050]-[0060])
so that an outlet temperature of a finishing rolling mill is 800°C or higher and 940°C or lower (above Ar3 and above 820°C and preferably less than 950°C) ([0062]);
cooling at least a portion of the hot-rolled steel sheet, for 0.1 seconds or more (cooling to 780°C or lower at an average cooling rate of 400°C/s or higher and examples up to 1600°C/s cools for at least 0.1 seconds ((800-780°C)/1600°C/s)), within 3.0 seconds after passing through a final stand of the finishing rolling mill and being sent out on a run-out table (cooling within 0.4 seconds of completion of rolling) ([0066], Table 2); and
coiling, at a coiling temperature of 550°C or higher, the cooled hot-rolled steel sheet (winding preferably above 550°C and preferably less than 650°C) ([0068]).
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).
Element
Claim 1 (mass%)
Haga (mass%)
Haga Citation
C
0.15 to 0.25
0.020 to 0.30
[0050]
Si
0.8 to 3.0
0.10 to 3.00
[0051]
Mn
1.8 to 3.0
1.00 to 3.50
[0053]
Ni, Cr, Cu, and Mo
1.0 or less
Cr: 1.0 or less
Mo: 0.50 or less
[0059]
Ti, Nb, V
1.0 or less
Ti: less than 0.050
Nb: less than 0.050
V: less than 0.50
[0058]
B
0.01 or less
0.010 or less
[0059]
Haga is silent to cooling at a water volume density of 100 L/min/m2 or more.
Tomita discloses manufacturing a steel sheet (1:7-8, 45-48) comprising cooling water volume density of 100 L/min/m2 or more (minimum of 0.3 m3/m2∙minute, 300 L/m2∙minute) (4:15-17, 5:23-25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Haga to use a cooling water volume density minimum of 300 L/m2∙minute (0.3 m3/m2∙minute) for accelerated cooling that ensures the steel is cooled uniformly (Tomita 4:15-17, 5:23-25). 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).
In the event it is determined that the disclosed water volume density of Tomita does not overlap with that claimed because of the units, then the following rationale is applied.
Generally, differences in concentration or temperature (or cooling water volume density) will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature (or cooling water volume density) is critical. “[W]here the general conditions of a claimed are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” MPEP 2144.05(II)(A).
Regarding claim 2, Haga discloses the slab with an overlapping composition ([0016], [0026]-[0029], [0050]-[0060]). 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).
Element
Claim 2 (mass%)
Haga (mass%)
Haga Citation
P
0.1 or less
0.10 or less
[0054]
S
0.01 or less
0.010 or less
[0055]
Al
0.10 or less
2.00 or less
[0056]
N
0.01 or less
0.010 or less
[0057]
Regarding claim 3, Haga discloses a method for manufacturing a cold-rolled steel sheet, comprising cold-rolling a steel sheet manufactured by the method according to claim 1 at a rolling rate of 30% to 80% (40% or more to less than 80%) ([0069]). 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).
Related Art
Fujibayashi (JP 2003-191005 machine translation)
Fujibayashi discloses cooling a hot rolled steel strip with cooling water ([0001]) to eliminate temperature unevenness in the width direction ([0027]) by cooling with a water density of 2500 L/min∙m2 or higher from the start of cooling ([0020]) less than 2 seconds after hot finish cooling ([0023], [0037]). Fujibayashi discloses finish rolling at 880 to 910°C ([0034]) then cooling to 700 to 720°C ([0036], [0045])
Nishio (JP 2015-147991 machine translation)
Nishio discloses manufacturing cold-rolled steel sheets ([0001]) by hot rolling at Ar3 or higher ([0050]-[0051]), first water cooling within 0.3 seconds after completing of hot rolling to a temperature over 750°C with a high water density ([0056]-[0058]), cooling stop for 0.3 to 3.0 seconds, second water cooling to 750°C or lower ([0059]-[0064]), winding between 40 and 620°C ([0065]), then cold rolling at 40% to 60% ([0066]) ([0015]-[0017]). Nishio discloses a composition that overlaps with that claimed ([0017]-[0020], [0038]-[0048]).
Ueoka (US 2010/0192658)
Ueoka discloses cooling a hot strip ([0001]) using cooling water ([0028]) with a water flow rate of 350 to 1200 L/min∙m2 ([0028]-[0029]), which is the flow rate of normal run-out cooling ([0067]-[0068]).
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, Wednesday-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
Prosecution Insights