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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 24 June 2024 was considered by the examiner. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97.
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 9 and 19 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.
The term “approximately” in claims 9 and 19 is a relative term which renders the claims indefinite. The term “approximately” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear if only temperatures above 1000 °F meet the limitations of the claim or if temperatures that are around but less than 1000 °F also meet the limitations of the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-7, 11, and 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP2016211037 of Komodori.
Claim 1 claims an apparatus comprising: a body defining a chamber to hold a substrate having titanium therein; a heater to heat the chamber; a gas source to provide a process gas to the substrate such that a case hardening addition and hydrogen are absorbed into the substrate; and a vacuum pump to achieve a vacuum in the chamber, the vacuum pump to remove at least a portion of the absorbed hydrogen from the substrate via a vacuum diffusion process.
Komodori discloses a surface nitriding treatment of titanium metal in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. Komodori teaches a chamber for a titanium material, means for heating the titanium material, a gas supply unit with a discharge nozzle, and a vacuum pump, Pg[4]. Therefore, Komodori anticipates all limitations of Claim 1.
Claim 3 further limits claim 1 by claiming a sensor to measure a temperature of the chamber.
Komodori discloses a temperature sensor, Pg[4]. Therefore, Komodori anticipates all limitations of Claim 3.
Claim 4 further limits claim 3 by claiming that the heater is to maintain the temperature of the chamber relatively constant as the process gas is provided to the substrate based on information from the sensor.
Komodori teaches that the temperature sensor which detects the surface temperature of the titanium material mounted on the said support stand is arrange positioned by the support stand. As shown in FIG. The induction heating coil is connected to a high frequency application device provided outside the chamber and a high frequency current of a predetermined frequency is applied. The high frequency application device applies a high frequency current of a single frequency or a plurality of frequencies to the induction heating coil to inductively heat the titanium material, Pg[4]. Thus, Komodore teaches the additional limitation of claim 4. Therefore, Komodori anticipates all limitations of Claim 4.
Claim 5 further limits claim 1 by claiming that the gas source is to repeatedly provide the process gas in response to the vacuum pump removing the hydrogen.
Komodori teaches a nitrogen gas supply unit for supplying nitrogen gas is connected to the discharge nozzle, pg[4]. Thus, Komodore teaches the additional limitation of claim 5. Therefore, Komodori anticipates all limitations of Claim 5.
Claim 6 further limits claim 1 by claiming that the vacuum pump is to achieve, via a first vacuum process, a vacuum in the chamber prior to providing the process gas to the substrate.
Komodori teaches that in the present embodiment, evacuation of the chamber is performed prior to inert gas supply. First of all, the control device closes the air release valve, the gas supply valve and the projection material adjustment valve in the evacuation step, drives the vacuum pump, and opens the exhaust valve. The vacuum pump is driven until the pressure in the chamber reaches a predetermined pressure, Pg[5]. Thus, Komodore teaches the additional limitation of claim 6. Therefore, Komodori anticipates all limitations of Claim 6.
Claim 7 further limits claim 6 by claiming that the vacuum pump is to achieve, via a second vacuum process, a vacuum in the chamber to remove the at least a portion of the absorbed hydrogen from the chamber.
Komodori teaches to “heat the titanium or titanium alloy in a hydrogen atmosphere and absorb 0.3 to 1.0 wt% of hydrogen” After heat treatment in vacuum, the surface is activated by dehydrogenation treatment to a hydrogen content of 0.01 wt% or less, Pg[1]. Thus, Komodore teaches the additional limitation of claim 7. Therefore, Komodori anticipates all limitations of Claim 7.
Claim 11 claims a system comprising: a chamber to hold a substrate having titanium therein; a heater to heat the chamber; a gas inlet of the chamber, the gas inlet to provide a process gas from a gas source to the substrate such that a case hardening addition and hydrogen are absorbed into the substrate; and a vacuum outlet to achieve a vacuum in the chamber with a vacuum device, the vacuum device to remove at least a portion of the absorbed hydrogen from the substrate via a vacuum diffusion process.
Komodori discloses a surface nitriding treatment of titanium metal in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. Komodori teaches a chamber for a titanium material, means for heating the titanium material, a gas supply unit with a discharge nozzle, and a vacuum pump, Pg[4]. Therefore, Komodori anticipates all limitations of Claim 11.
Claim 13 further limits claim 11 by claiming a sensor to measure a temperature of the chamber.
Komodori discloses a temperature sensor, Pg[4]. Therefore, Komodori anticipates all limitations of Claim 13.
Claim 14 claims further limits claim 13 by claiming that the heater is to maintain the temperature of the chamber relatively constant as the process gas is provided to the substrate based on information from the sensor.
Komodori teaches that the temperature sensor which detects the surface temperature of the titanium material mounted on the said support stand is arrange positioned by the support stand. As shown in FIG. The induction heating coil is connected to a high frequency application device provided outside the chamber and a high frequency current of a predetermined frequency is applied. The high frequency application device applies a high frequency current of a single frequency or a plurality of frequencies to the induction heating coil to inductively heat the titanium material, Pg[4]. Thus, Komodore teaches the additional limitation of claim 14. Therefore, Komodori anticipates all limitations of Claim 14.
Claim 15 further limits claim 11 by claiming that the gas inlet is to repeatedly provide the process gas in response to the vacuum pump removing the hydrogen.
Komodori teaches a nitrogen gas supply unit for supplying nitrogen gas is connected to the discharge nozzle, pg[4]. Thus, Komodore teaches the additional limitation of claim 15. Therefore, Komodori anticipates all limitations of Claim 15.
Claim 16 further limits claim 11 by claiming that the vacuum pump is to achieve, via a first vacuum process, a vacuum in the chamber prior to providing the process gas to the substrate.
Komodori teaches that in the present embodiment, evacuation of the chamber is performed prior to inert gas supply. First of all, the control device closes the air release valve, the gas supply valve and the projection material adjustment valve in the evacuation step, drives the vacuum pump, and opens the exhaust valve. The vacuum pump is driven until the pressure in the chamber reaches a predetermined pressure, Pg[5]. Thus, Komodore teaches the additional limitation of claim 16. Therefore, Komodori anticipates all limitations of Claim 16.
Claim 17 further limits claim 16 by claiming that the vacuum pump is to achieve, via a second vacuum process, a vacuum in the chamber to remove the at least a portion of the absorbed hydrogen from the chamber.
Komodori teaches to “heat the titanium or titanium alloy in a hydrogen atmosphere and absorb 0.3 to 1.0 wt% of hydrogen” After heat treatment in vacuum, the surface is activated by dehydrogenation treatment to a hydrogen content of 0.01 wt% or less, Pg[1]. Thus, Komodore teaches the additional limitation of claim 17. Therefore, Komodori anticipates all limitations of Claim 17.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 2, 8, 10, 12, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2016211037 of Komodori in view of US7267793 of Poor.
Claim 2 further limits claim 1 by claiming that the gas source is to further provide at least one of ammonia or diborane to the substrate.
Komodori does not teach ammonia or diborane.
Poor teaches a furnace for vacuum carburizing with unsaturated aromatic hydrocarbons in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. Poor teaches that it is believed that the invention will work as described with the addition of ammonia which will serve as a source of hydrogen as well as providing monatomic nitrogen, column[35]. Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use ammonia as a gas source as taught by Poor in the product disclosed by Komodori as a source of hydrogen. Thus, Komodori in view of Poor covers all limitations of claim 2.
Claim 8 further limits claim 1 by claiming that the gas source is to provide acetylene to the chamber.
Komodori does not teach acetylene.
Poor teaches the use of acetylene as a carburizing gas. The gas has been promoted for its ability to achieve carbon diffusion in small holes having high L/D (hole length to hole diameter) ratios when compared to processes using the typical straight chain alkanes, column[4]. Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use acetylene in the gas source as taught by Poor in the product disclosed by Komodori as a carburizing gas. Thus, Komodori in view of Poor covers all limitations of claim 8.
Claim 10 further limits claim 1 by claiming a cooler to cool the process gas and the substrate subsequent to the vacuum diffusion process.
Komodori does not teach a cooler.
Poor teaches that Mounted to the spherical end of furnace casing , is a fan used for gas quenching of the carburized parts. In one version of a hot wall furnace, when the fan is used for cooling, an exhaust cooling duct extends from one side of the furnace chamber to the diametrical opposite side and is provided with means for cooling the exhaust gas, column[16]. Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include the fan taught by Poor in the product disclosed by Komodori in order to quench parts. Thus, Komodori in view of Poor covers all limitations of claim 10.
Claim 12 further limits claim 11 by claiming that the gas source is to further provide at least one of ammonia or diborane to the substrate.
Komodori does not teach ammonia or diborane.
Poor teaches a furnace for vacuum carburizing with unsaturated aromatic hydrocarbons in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. Poor teaches that it is believed that the invention will work as described with the addition of ammonia which will serve as a source of hydrogen as well as providing monatomic nitrogen, column[35]. Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use ammonia as a gas source as taught by Poor in the product disclosed by Komodori as a source of hydrogen. Thus, Komodori in view of Poor covers all limitations of claim 12.
Claim 18 further limits claim 11 by claiming that the gas source is to provide acetylene to the chamber.
Komodori does not teach acetylene.
Poor teaches the use of acetylene as a carburizing gas. The gas has been promoted for its ability to achieve carbon diffusion in small holes having high L/D (hole length to hole diameter) ratios when compared to processes using the typical straight chain alkanes, column[4]. Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use acetylene in the gas source as taught by Poor in the product disclosed by Komodori as a carburizing gas. Thus, Komodori in view of Poor covers all limitations of claim 18.
Claim 20 further limits claim 11 by claiming a cooler to cool the process gas and the substrate subsequent to the vacuum diffusion process.
Komodori does not teach a cooler.
Poor teaches that Mounted to the spherical end of furnace casing , is a fan used for gas quenching of the carburized parts. In one version of a hot wall furnace, when the fan is used for cooling, an exhaust cooling duct extends from one side of the furnace chamber to the diametrical opposite side and is provided with means for cooling the exhaust gas, column[16]. Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include the fan taught by Poor in the product disclosed by Komodori in order to quench carburized parts. Thus, Komodori in view of Poor covers all limitations of claim 20.
Claims 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2016211037 of Komodori.
Claim 9 further limits claim 1 by claiming that the heater is to heat the substrate to at least approximately 1000 degrees Fahrenheit (°F), (537.8 °C).
Komodori teaches heating in the range of 800 ° C to 1000 ° C, Pg[2]. This overlaps with the claimed range. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists, see MPEP 2144.05. Thus, Komodori covers all limitations of claim 9.
Claim 19 further limits claim 11 by claiming that the heater is to heat the substrate to at least approximately 1000 degrees Fahrenheit (°F), (537.8 °C).
Komodori teaches heating in the range of 800 ° C to 1000 ° C, Pg[2]. This overlaps with the claimed range. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists, see MPEP 2144.05. Thus, Komodori covers all limitations of claim 19.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB BENJAMIN STILES whose telephone number is (571)272-0598. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am - 5:00pm.
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 (571) 272-1401. 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.
/Keith D. Hendricks/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1733
/JACOB BENJAMIN STILES/Examiner, Art Unit 1733
Prosecution Insights