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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim 2 have been amended, claim 6 is added as a new claim; Claims 1-6 remain for examination, wherein claim 1 is an independent claim.
Previous claim Objections/Rejections
Previous objection of Claim 2 because informalities has been withdrawn in view of the Applicant’s “Arguments/Remarks with amendment” filed on 6/18/2026.
Previous rejection of Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fishler et al (US 4,791,978, listed in IDS filed on 12/07/2023, thereafter US’978) in view of Hanse et al (US 5,691,061, listed in IDS filed on 12/07/2023, thereafter US’061) has been withdrawn in view of the Applicant’s “Arguments/Remarks with amendment” filed on 6/18/2026.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 1-6 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory obviousness type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5 of co-pending application No. 17/417461 (US 12,023,730 B2).
Claims 1-5 of co-pending application No. 17/417461 (US 12,023,730 B2) is applied to the claims 1-5 for the same reason as stated in the previous office action dated 3/23/2026.
Regarding claim 6, Figs.1-3 and claims of co-pending application No. 17/417461 (US 12,023,730 B2) teach the gas pas path with sit-shaped gas pool as claimed in the instant claim.
Thus, no patentable distinction was found in the instant claims compared with the manufacturing process a grain-oriented electrical steel sheet as disclosed by Claims 1-5 of co-pending application No. 17/417461 (US 12,023,730 B2).
Claims 1-6 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory obviousness type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-11 of co-pending application No. 17/431214 (US 11,745,257 B2).
Claims 1-11 of co-pending application No. 17/431214 (US 11,745,257 B2) is applied to the claims 1-5 for the same reason as stated in the previous office action dated 3/23/2026.
Regarding claim 6, Figs.1-5 and Claims 1-11 of co-pending application No. 17/431214 (US 11,745,257 B2) teach the gas pas path with sit-shaped gas pool as claimed in the instant claim.
Thus, no patentable distinction was found in the instant claims compared with the manufacturing process a grain-oriented electrical steel sheet as disclosed by Claims 1-11 of co-pending application No. 17/431214 (US 11,745,257 B2).
Notes: Morikawa et al (US-PG-pub 2016/0297003 A1) is cited as a reference only.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments to the art rejection to Claims 1-6 have been rejected as stated above. Proper “Terminal Disclaimer” can overcome ethe ODP rejections as stated above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIE YANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1884. The examiner can normally be reached on IFP.
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, Jonathan J Johnson can be reached on 571-272-1177. 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.
/JIE YANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights