CTNF 18/576,365 CTNF 89168 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II and Species B (Claims 16, 19, 21-22, 24-26, 28-30 and 33 in the reply filed on 05/08/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1, 7-14, 20 and 23 are withdrawn. Claims 16, 19, 21-22, 24-26, 28-30 and 33 are examined herein. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 16, 19, 21-22, 24-25, and 28-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yusuke (WO2020/195946, IDS dated 11/26/2024, EP3907304 is used as translation) . Regarding claims 16, 19 and 22, Yusuke teaches ([0019] to [0046]) a method for making a steel sheet, comprising: passing a cold-rolled steel sheet through an annealing furnace in which a heating zone, a soaking zone, and a cooling zone are arranged from an upstream side in a sheet passing direction, to continuously anneal the cold-rolled steel sheet in a reducing atmosphere containing hydrogen in the heating zone and the soaking zone and cooling the cold-rolled steel sheet in the cooling zone; continuously passing the cold-rolled steel sheet discharged from the annealing furnace to a hot-dip galvanizing bath and applying a vibration at a frequency of 10-80 kHz and 1-10 µm amplitude, and then heating the coated steel sheet for alloy heat treatment. Yusuke does not explicitly disclose uncoiling a cold-rolled coil to feed a cold-rolled steel sheet by a payoff reel and coiling the cold-rolled steel sheet by a tension reel to obtain a product coil. However, uncoiling a cold-rolled coil to feed a cold-rolled steel sheet by a payoff reel to an annealing furnace and coiling the cold-rolled steel sheet by a tension reel to obtain a product coil after a process is done are well-known steps in a continuously annealing process. Thus, claim 1 is obvious over Yusuke. Regarding claims 21 and 24, Yusuke discloses that the vibration step is performed after the annealing step ([0020] to [0046]), which meet the limitation recited in claims 21 and 24. Regarding claim 25, Yusuke disclose that the vibration time for a portion of steel sheet with a length of “L” is 0.01 seconds to 0.5 seconds ([0043]; Fig. 1). Since in a continuous annealing process, the length of a steel sheet is hundreds of times longer than “L”, the vibration time for the entire steel sheet is hundreds of time longer than the treatment time for “L” length steel sheet. Thus, the vibration time for the entire steel sheet is longer than 1 second and meets the recited time in claim 25. Regarding claim 28, Yusuke discloses that the tensile strength of the cold rolled steel sheet is 440 MPa or more ([0075]), which overlaps the recited strength in claim 28. 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 Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP 2144.05 I. Thus, claim 28 is obvious over Yusuke. Regarding claims 29 and 30, Yusuke discloses a steel composition that overlaps the recited amount of C, Si, Mn, P, S, Al and Ti in claims 29 and 30. The recited amount of N is a well-known impurity level N in steel sheet. 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 Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP 2144.05 I. Thus, claims 29 and 20 are obvious over Yusuke . 07-22-aia AIA Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yusuke (WO2020/195946, IDS dated 11/26/2024, EP3907304 is used as translation) , as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Hirashima (US 2020/0032364) Regarding claim 33, Yusuke is silent on the hydrogen content in the steel coil. Hirashima teaches a method of making a steel sheet having composition overlapping the composition of Yusuke ([0032] to [0060]). Hirashima discloses that controlling hydrogen content to 0.5 ppm or less improves delayed fracture resistance ([0068]). Thus, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to control the hydrogen content to 0.5 ppm or less as taught by Hirashima in the steel of Yusuke in order to make a steel sheet having improved delayed fracture resistance as disclosed by Hirashima . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim 26 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Xiaowei Su whose telephone number is (571)272-3239. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00. 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 Hendricks can be reached at 5712721401. 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. /XIAOWEI SU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733 Application/Control Number: 18/576,365 Page 2 Art Unit: 1733
Prosecution Insights