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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on June 9th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-7 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Specification, Drawings have overcome each and every objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed May 5th, 2014.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because “v-shaped anvil” is used in step 4, fig.5 points the v-shaped anvil to a rectangular section. It is not clear how a rectangular shaped section is v-shaped anvil. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-5, 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon (KR101411516B), in view of Wang (CN 100460138 C), Arrizabalaga (WO 2021234188 A1), and LAN (CN101314202B).
Regarding claim1, Kwon discloses a compound profiling forging method (fig.2) for a large wind turbine main shaft (abstract), comprising the following steps:
step S1, carrying out first heat-up (fig.2, Step S100) upsetting (fig.2, Step S200) on a billet (fig.2, 10) to make the billet (10) into a flat round billet (fig.2, Step S200, details in fig.3), returning the billet into a furnace (fig.2, S400, §[0030], after completing S200 and S300 billet is returned to furnace, see attached translation) and holding a temperature at 1200 °C or above (see §[0023], fig.3 and fig.5, zoomed heat map (red));
step S2, working step 2: putting the billet in the first punching block (fig.2, S300, shows a first punching block on the bottom); operating an oil press (fig.2, S200, shows top and bottom press) to press the first piercing punch (fig.2, P) to be flush with the billet.
step S3: holding a temperature at 850 °C (surface temperature is around 850 °C see fig.6 last two pictures shows that the billet is mostly light blue meaning a temperature around 850 °C) and mounting on the oil press (fig.2, S200, shows top and bottom press, same oil press can be used in this step).
step S4: the billet is drawn out in four sections (fig.2, S700).
Kwon is silent about making the billet into a flat square billet; returning the billet into a furnace and holding a temperature at 1250 °C; step S2, preliminary stamping, comprising the following working steps: working step 1: upsetting and drawing out the billet twice, and carrying out punching and rolling on the billet to form a punched hole on top of the billet; and working step 2: preparing a first piercing punch and a first punching block, putting the first piercing punch into the punched hole of the billet, and, so that the first piercing punch punches and pierces through the billet to form a through hole and the punching is completed, wherein the first piercing punch comprises a forming part I and a forming part II, the forming part II is provided below the forming part I, a radius of the first piercing punch gradually decreases along a center axis from top to bottom, and a curved surface transits from the first forming part I to the forming part II; step S3, spinning forming: heating the billet, , putting the billet in a second punching block, preparing a female die and a second piercing punch, mounting the female die, inserting the second piercing punch into the through hole of the billet to carry out flange upsetting, so that the spinning forming is completed gradually; and step S4, forging forming of a shaft body: inserting a special-shaped mandrel into the through hole of the billet, pre-drawing a small end of the shaft body of the billet by using a v-shaped anvil, drawing out the shaft body of the billet in sequence, wherein a forging temperature range is 850-1250 °C, billet have respective dimensions of 91170 mm x 1110 mm, 91090 mm x 450 mm, 9990 mm x 440 mm and 9900 mm x 890 mm, and an overall forging ratio is >5.
However, Wang teaches step S2, preliminary stamping, comprising the following working steps:
working step 1: upsetting and drawing out the billet (fig.3, first row second picture from left), and carrying out punching and rolling on the billet to form a punched hole on top of the billet (fig.3, first row third, fourth, fifth picture from left); and
working step 2: preparing a first piercing punch (fig.3, 1), putting the first piercing punch into the punched hole of the billet (fig.3, first row last picture on right), and press the first piercing punch to be flush with the billet, so that the first piercing punch (fig.3, 1) punches and pierces through the billet to form a through hole (fig.3, first row right picture) and the punching is completed, wherein the first piercing punch (fig.3, 1) comprises a forming part I (fig.3, 1, first row last picture, first part on the left of mandrel 1) and a forming part II (fig.3, 1, first row last picture, on right part of mandrel 1), the forming part II is provided below the forming part I (when the mandrel is rotated 90 degree forming part I will be on top of forming part II), a radius of the first piercing punch gradually decreases along a center axis from top to bottom and a curved surface transits from the first forming part I to the forming part II (fig.3, 1, shows the end is rounded which means the diameter decreases).
step S3, spinning forming: heating the billet (step 4 and 5, see page5, para2, see attached translation) and putting the billet in a second punching block (note that Wang teaches the second punching block as together with a female die 2 in fig.3 and is the bottom portion of a female die 2), preparing a female die (fig.3, 2, top portion), mounting the female die, inserting a second piercing punch (fig.3, 3) into the through hole of the billet to carry out flange upsetting (fig.3, second row, third and fourth picture from left), so that the spinning forming is completed gradually;
step S4, forging forming of a shaft body: inserting a special shaped mandrel (fig.3, 4) into the through hole of the billet (fig.3, third row, referred as third fire), pre-drawing a small end of the shaft body of the billet by using a v-shaped anvil (note that v-shaped anvil is shown in last two pictures), drawing out the shaft body of the billet in sequence.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Kwon and include the steps of step S2, working steps 1 and 2, step S3, and step S4 above, for the purpose of forging forming a hollow shaft with higher and consistent mechanical properties (page4, para3, see attached translation).
Both Kwon and Wang are silent in Step 1: making the billet into a flat square billet. returning the billet into a furnace and holding a temperature at 1250 °C; working step 1: drawing out billet twice; in Step S4: a forging temperature range is 850 – 1250 °C; in Step 4: the dimension of the billet φ1170 mm × 1110 mm, φ1090 mm × 450 mm, φ990 mm × 440 mm and φ900 mm × 890 mm and overall forging ration of ≥5.
Note, however, that there is no criticality for the billet being a flat square billet, as opposed to the flat round billet of Kwon. Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinary artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kwon such that a flat square billet is made, since it has been held that changing the shape of features taught in the prior art is merely an obvious matter of design and/or engineering choice (MPEP § 2144.04, subsection IV.B).b).
Also, note that Kwon discloses heating the billet in step S100 (fig.2) to 1200°C or higher for a subsequent forming operation (§[0023]). Note that the temperature to which the billet is heated can be considered a result-effective variable since the billet would not be easily formable if not heated to a high enough temperature. Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinary artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify first heating of Wang and heat the billet up to 1250°C, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result-effective variable involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP § 2144.05). Further, note that according to the colored picture found in Global Dossier also attached with this office action: fig.3 and fig.5 shows maximum temperature of the billet (red) in this steps are 1271 °C and 1254 °C also described in §[0023], when the billet is taken out from the furnace (fig.2, Step S100) the temperature is same for entire billet internal and external but as different processes such as upsetting, spinning, rolling takes place external surface temperature decreases while internal temperature is still high (red) (see fig.3).
Also note, that there is no criticality for the billet being upset and drawn twice or little longer or shorter. Increasing the length of upsetting and drawing would just increase the length of the billet (Wang, fig.3, first row, second picture from left). Also, Kwon discloses the billet being elongated in the s300. Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinary artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Wang and duplicate or increase the length of upsetting and drawing the billet as taught by Kwon in order to increase the length of the billet (Kwon, §[0025], see attached translation).
Both Kwon and Wang are silent in Step S4: a forging temperature range is 850 – 1250 °C; in Step 4: the dimension of the billet φ1170 mm × 1110 mm, φ1090 mm × 450 mm, φ990 mm × 440 mm and φ900 mm × 890 mm and overall forging ration of ≥5.
However, Arrizabalaga teaches the temperature range 800 – 1300 °C (page 8, lines 18-21, see translation attached). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify method of Kwon in view of Wang and select a temperature range of 850 – 1250 °C as taught by Arrizabalaga to achieve plastic behavior of the billet for the purpose of making a forged formed large wind turbine shaft to have better mechanical properties, less defect, eliminate costly machining step, and save material (less waste).
Kwon, Wang, and Arrizabalaga all are silent in Step 4: the dimension of the billet φ1170 mm × 1110 mm, φ1090 mm × 450 mm, φ990 mm × 440 mm and φ900 mm × 890 mm and overall forging ration of ≥5.
However, Lan teaches about the dimensions having four stepped sections of the main shaft with different sizes (fig.3) that makes the shaft light weight and saves material (design optimization); thus, making the dimensions a result effective parameter. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to calculate the optimum dimensions for the main shaft based on different loading conditions such as wind load, temperature variation, earthquake, sand storm, etc. (Lan, §[0002], §[0059]-§[0064]) and draw out the billet into four sections which have respective dimensions of φ1170 mm × 1110 mm, φ1090 mm × 450 mm, φ990 mm × 440 mm and φ900 mm × 890 mm, and an overall forging ratio is ≥5 (§[0117]), since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim2, which depends on claim1: Kwon in view of Wang, Arrizabalaga, and Lan discloses a compound profiling forging method for a large wind turbine main shaft (abstract) according to claim1, wherein in step S1, the flat circular billet is made.
Kwon in view of Wang, Arrizabalaga, and Lan are silent about dimensions of the square billet being 900 mm × 1400 mm × 3000 mm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the size of the billet with the dimensions of 900 mm × 1400 mm × 3000 mm, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the size of the billet to be smaller or larger for the purpose of making the final wind turbine main shaft size and meet design requirement.
Regarding claim3, which depends on claim2: Kwon in view of Wang, Arrizabalaga, and Lan discloses a compound profiling forging method for a large wind turbine main shaft (abstract) according to claim 2. Kwon further discloses in step S1 (Kwon fig.2, Step S100), the billet (10) is heated to more than 1200 °C or above.
Kwon, Wang, Arrizabalaga, and Lan are silent about holding the billet temperature 1250 °C for a duration of 8-12h.
However, Lan teaches a billet (referred as red hot steel ingots) is held at the temperature of 1260 °C for 10–11 h (fig.8, §[0006] (7 h) and §[0011] (3-4 h)). Lan further teaches that a primary steel ingot (fig.6) having a cast structure, contains casting defects such as shrinkage cavities, porosity, segregation, and dendrites (§[0094]). Lan also teaches that, upsetting of ingot removes defects such as internal shrinkage cavities and porosity, and can also break up coarse grains and dendritic structures (requiring a red hot ingot having temperature 1260 °C). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the billet temperature 1250 °C for a duration of 8-12h to improve mechanical properties of the billet.
Regarding claim4, which depends on claim1: Kwon in view of Wang, Arrizabalaga, and Lan discloses a compound profiling forging method for a large wind turbine main shaft (abstract) according to claim 1 (see claim1 above). Wang further teaches in working step 1 of step S2, and the punched hole (fig.3, first row last picture on right) of the billet.
Kwon in view of Wang, Arrizabalaga, and Lan are silent about the dimension of the hole (H) being φ700 mm and rolling dimension of φ1780 mm × 1800 mm. However, Arrizabalaga teaches the advantages of making hole (fig.4c, 9, referred as cavity) as a first step before punching the mandrel (fig.5a, 6). The function of the hole is to act as a guide for the extrusion punch (page4, line 2-5, see attached translation). Depending on the size of the extrusion punch the size of the hole will change, thus making the size a result effective parameter. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to design a piercing punch (Kwon, fig.4, P) dimension to make a punching hole (Known, fig.4, H) dimension of φ700 mm, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Also, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the rolling dimensions φ1780 mm × 1800 mm, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the size of the billet to be smaller or larger for the purpose of making the final wind turbine main shaft size and meet design requirement.
Regarding claim5, which depends on claim4: Kwon in view of Wang, Arrizabalaga, and Lan discloses a compound profiling forging method for a large wind turbine main shaft (abstract) according to claim 4. Kwon, Wang, Arrizabalaga, and Lan are silent about the dimension of the first punching block working in step 2 of step S2.
Note, however, Arrizabalaga shows a cross-sectional picture of the punching block (fig.2, 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a punching block (fig.2, 1) of Arrizabalaga with dimension φ1750 mm x 750mm x 540 mm x R150 mm based on the final shaft dimensions, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Depending on the size of the shaft needed, the size of the punching block will change; thus, making the size of the punching block a result effective parameter.
Also, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a punching block of Arrizabalaga (fig.2, 1) with the dimensions of φ1750 mm×φ750 mm × 540 mm × R150 mm , since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim7, which depends on claim1: Kwon in view of Wang, Arrizabalaga, and Lan discloses a compound profiling forging method for a large wind turbine main shaft (abstract) according to claim 1. Wang further teaches a second punching block (fig.3, 2, note that Wang teaches the second punching block as together with a female die 2 in fig.3 and is the bottom portion of a female die 2).
Although Wang teaches about a cross-sectional picture of the punching block (fig.3, 2, note that Wang teaches the second punching block as together with a female die 2 in fig.3 and is the bottom portion of a female die 2) all the references (Kwon, Wang, Arrizabalaga, and Lan) are silent about the dimension of the second punching block.
Note, however, Wang shows the picture of the punching block (fig.3, 2, note that Wang teaches the second punching block as together with a female die 2 in fig.3 and is the bottom portion of a female die 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a second punching block with dimension φ2600 mm ×φ1375 mm × 550 mm × R320 mm based on required shaft dimensions, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Depending on the size of the shaft needed, the size of the punching block will change; thus, making the size of the punching block a result effective parameter.
Also, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a second punching block of Wang (fig.3, 2, note that Wang teaches the second punching block as together with a female die 2 in fig.3 and is the bottom portion of a female die 2) with the dimensions of φ2600 mm ×φ1375 mm × 550 mm × R320 mm based on required shaft dimension, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon in view of Wang, Arrizabalaga, and LAN as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gray (WO 2005021182 A1).
Regarding claim6, which depends on claim1: Kwon in view of Wang, Arrizabalaga, and Lan discloses a compound profiling forging method for a large wind turbine main shaft (abstract) according to claim 1. Kwon further teaches in step S3 (fig.2, Step S500)a spinning forming process (fig.5) with a temperature of the billet (10) between 780 °C to 1220 °C (fig.5).
Kwon in view of Wang, Arrizabalaga, and Lan are silent about returning the billet to the furnace when the billet temperature is lower than 850 °C.
However, Gray teaches about maintaining the temperature between 900 °C to 1000 °C (page 9, lines 3 to 12) because of heat losses during rolling. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to maintain the temperature between 900 °C to 1000 °C since it is much easier to deform or shape steel when it is hot rather than when it is cold (page 8, lines 15-19) .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections of independent claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are made in view of Kwon, Wang, Arrizabalaga, and Lan.
Applicant argues on page 14 that the three steps taught in Arrizabalaga are in a different order . The examiner disagrees since no specific order is claimed. Moreover, Kwon in view of Wang discloses “step(3)”.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MD A RAHMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9337. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 7:30am-5pm.
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, Christopher Templeton can be reached at (571) 270-1477. 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.
/M.A.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3725
/Christopher L Templeton/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3725
Prosecution Insights