Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 04, 2026
Application No. 18/565,931

Hot-Formed Steel Part and Manufacturing Method

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 30, 2023
Priority
Jun 02, 2021 — FR FR2105812 +1 more
Examiner
PATEL, DEVANG R
Art Unit
1735
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Ascometal France Holding SAS
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
5m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% — above average
65%
Career Allowance Rate
662 granted / 1017 resolved
At TC average
Strong +39% interview lift
Without
With
+39.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
59 currently pending
Career history
1076
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
54.6%
+14.6% vs TC avg
§102
18.6%
-21.4% vs TC avg
§112
23.1%
-16.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1017 resolved cases

Office Action

§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. 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 7 -26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bian (US 2011/0132502) . Regarding claim 1 7 , Bian discloses a hot-formed steel part [0012] , wherein the steel has a composition that consists of the following , by weight% : Element Claimed range Prior art- Bian Table 1; [0026]; claim 17 C 0.22-0.35% 0.29; 0.25-0.6% Mn 0.50-1.70% 1.13; 0.5-2.0% Cr 0.50-1.70% 0.43; U p to 1.2% B 0.001-0.01% 0.001; 0.00 0 8-0.005% Ti 0.01-0.06% 0.03; Up to 0.05% Si <0.40% 0.24; Up to 0.40% Al <0.10% 0.035; 0.01-0.06% P <0.10% 0.017; Up to 0.03% Fe remainder remainder The respective amounts of elements taught by Bian overlap with the claimed ranges ([0026], see Table 1 examples; claims 16-18). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Woodruff , 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990), MPEP 2144.05 . The composition containing 0.29%C, 1.13%Mn, 0.6%Cr, 0.1%Mo, 0.1%Ni, 0.03%Ti, and 0.004%N also meets the recited relation ship: 540 ≤ (830 - 270*C% - 90*Mn% - 70*Cr% - 83*Mo% - 37*Ni%) ≤ 600 [yields 596]; and Ti% ≥ 2.5*N%. Bian also discloses that the steel has a microstructure that consists of , in surface fractions: 9 0% of a mixture of bain ite (40%) & ferrite (50%), a residual austenite portion of 6% and a martensite portion of 4% ([0019-0021], [0046])- this overlaps with claimed ranges. It is also noted that term “and/or” is taken to mean OR. Accordingly, recited steel part structure is at least rendered obvious. As to cla i m 18 , B ian tea c hes a residual austenite portion below 10% [0019], which overlaps with claimed portion of less than or equal to 5 % . As to claim s 19-25, Bian discloses respective amounts of C, Mn, Mo, Si, Ni, Cu, and V that overlap with recited ranges (see [0026] ; claims 16-18 ). 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 . As to claim 26, Bian teaches the steel composition containing 0.29%C, 1.13%Mn, 0.6%Cr, 0.1%Mo, 0.1%Ni, 0.03%Ti, and 0.004%N also meets the recited relationship: 540 ≤ (830 - 270*C% - 90*Mn% - 70*Cr% - 83*Mo% - 37*Ni%) ≤ 600 [yields 596] . Claims 27-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bi a n as applied to claim 17 above, and in view of Kurosawa et al. (JP 2006-052459-A, see attached translation, hereafter “Kurosawa”) . Rega r ding claim 27, Bian discloses a method of manufacturing a steel part comprising [0011-0012]: hot-forming a steel semi-finished product in the austenitic phase and having a recited composition by weight - rejection of claim 17 above is incorporated herein for the steel composition. With respect to cooling, Bian discloses cooling down to the bainite forming temperature and after the end tempering period, cooling down to room temperature [0019]. Bian also teaches that the austenitizing temperature of the steel is within the range of 750-810°C [0027, 0029], which overlaps with 750 °C just before cooling down to the bainitic forming temperature. Bian lacks specific cooling rate of between 0.1-0.5 °C /s. Examiner notes that cooling rate of 0.2-0.5 °C /s from 750 °C to room temperature meets the recited cooling conditions. Such cooling rate is known in the steel manufacturing art. Analogous to Bian [0002, 0028] , Kurosawa also discloses hot forming steel part s useful for mechanical structural parts such as automobile shafts [0002] . After hot working, Kurosawa teaches cooling rate of 0.2 °C/s in order to obtain a sufficiently uniform and fine bainitic structure [0041] , which falls within the claimed cooling rate range of 0.2- 0.5 °C/s . Bian desires to form ‘bainitic grade’ structure. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to perform cooling at rate of 0.2°C/s in method of Bian with a motivation to obtain a sufficiently uniform and fine bainitic structure . As to claim 28 , Bian discloses the steel blanks have been split from a previously cold-formed or cold-rolled flat product [0034], prior to hot forming. As to claim 29, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to carry out cold machining on the hot-formed semi-finished product after cooling in the method of Bian order to fabricate a desired size/shape of the target product, such as vehicle part pillars bumpers [0002, 0028] As to claim 30 -31 , Bian does not mention induction hardening. However, Kurosawa teaches performing induction hardening in order to refine austenite grain structure [0042]. Kurosawa teaches induction hardening with a frequency of 15 kHz and then tempering in a heating furnace at 170 °C , which meets the recited temperature range, thereby improving torsional fatigue strength [0077]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to carry out subsequent induction hardening and tempering after cooling in the method of Bian in order to refine & tailor the steel part to improved mechanical properties such as enhanced fatigue strength. As to claim 32, B ian teaches that it has been known to perform work hardening of steel blanks in practice for producing high-strength body components [0003-0004]. Accordingly, i t would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to perform work hardening as a finishing step in the method of Bian since such step is conventional and doing so would yield desired strength for the steel component/part. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/30/23 complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Inquiry Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVANG R PATEL whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 270-3636 . The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8am-5pm , EST. To schedule an interview, Applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/laws/interview-practice . Communications via Internet email are at the discretion of A pplicant. I f Applicant wishes to communicate via email , a written authorization form must be filed by Applicant: Form PTO/SB/439, available at www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms . The form may be filed via the Patent Center and can be found using the document description Internet Communications , see https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/forms . In limited circumstances , the A pplicant may make an oral authorization for Internet communication. See MPEP § 502.03. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Keith Walker can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Center. For more information, see https://patentcenter.uspto.gov . For questions, technical issues or troubleshooting, please contact the Patent Electronic Business Center at ebc@uspto.gov or 1- 866-217-9197 (toll-free) . /DEVANG R PATEL/ Primary Examiner, AU 1735
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 30, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12615720
ASSEMBLING METHOD OF ELECTRONIC MODULE
2y 11m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12616051
METHODS OF DETERMINING A SEQUENCE FOR CREATING A PLURALITY OF WIRE LOOPS IN CONNECTION WITH A WORKPIECE
1y 5m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12605784
SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING EQUIPMENT
2y 6m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12610841
METHOD OF BONDING COLUMN TYPE DEPOSITS
2y 0m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12599020
ELECTRONIC COMPONENT BONDING MACHINES, AND METHODS OF MEASURING A DISTANCE ON SUCH MACHINES
3y 10m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
65%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+39.3%)
2y 10m (~5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1017 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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