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 § 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 1-8 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the difference" in line 20. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the content of C, Mn, Ni" in line 20. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It’s not established the plate or welding wire contains C, Mn, Ni.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the shielding gas" in line 18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the steel plate A" in line 20. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schmit et al (US 2021/0053154).
Schmit discloses, regarding claim 9, A steel thin-walled tailor-welded part formed by welding two steel plates to be welded of the same or different strength levels (plates 3 and 4 are steel thin walled plates. See Fig 1; Paragraph [0209]), wherein the steel plate to be welded comprises a substrate and an aluminum or aluminum alloy clad layer on at least one surface thereof (aluminum layers 7 and 8, See Paragraph [0206]), wherein the clad layer comprises an intermetallic compound alloy layer in contact with the substrate and a metal alloy layer thereon (See Paragraph [0354]), wherein the steel thin-walled tailor-welded part has a welding line structure of martensite + 1~15vol.% diffusely distributed ferrite + 0-5vol.% residual austenite; and a free aluminum content in the welding line of 0.1-4.0 wt.%, (the weld joint 22 has a structure of martensite between 5-15%, aluminum 0.5-1.25%, Paragraph [0119]; austenite: Paragraph [0406])
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-8, 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pan et al (CN 111230301) as cited by applicant with references made to US PGPUB 2022/0176490.
Regarding claim 1, Pan discloses, A method for manufacturing a steel thin-walled tailor-welded part, comprising the following steps:
taking two steel plates of the same or different strength levels to be welded and cleaning the surface of the steel plates to be welded before welding, wherein the steel plate to be welded comprises a substrate and an aluminum or aluminum alloy clad layer on at least one surface thereof, wherein the clad layer comprises an intermetallic compound alloy layer in contact with the substrate and a metal alloy layer thereon, wherein the clad layer on the steel plate to be welded is not removed or thinned;
presetting a butt gap between steel plates to be welded at 0.1-0.5 mm; (two steel plates are welded at 0.2-0.5mm, the plates having an aluminum alloy clad layer where the butt gap is preset between the plates. See Abstract and Paragraphs [0012])
welding by a laser filler wire welding, a MAG welding or a laser MAG hybrid welding; (welding is performed by a laser filler wire welding process. See Paragraph [0030])
wherein, in the laser filler wire welding, a welding speed is 40-120 mm/s, a wire feeding speed is 2-8 m/min; in the MAG welding, a welding speed is 300-800 mm/min; in the laser MAG hybrid welding, a welding speed is 60-150 mm/s, a wire feeding speed is 4-10 m/min; (wire feed speed is 40-120mm/s, See Paragraph [0030])
the shielding gas is Ar+15-80vol.%CO2+1-10vol.%N2, the shielding gas has a flow rate of from 10 to 25 L/min; (See Paragraph [0074])
the difference obtained by subtracting the content of C, Mn, Ni in steel plate A to be welded from the content of corresponding elements in the composition of the welding wire for the welding is expressed by ∆C, ∆Mn, ∆Ni, respectively;
wherein, the steel plate A to be welded has a tensile strength of <900MPa, AC: -0.05-0.09wt.%, ∆Mn: -0.5wt. %-1.4wt. %, ∆Ni: 0-4.0wt.%; or
900MPa< the tensile strength of the steel plate A to be welded <1300MPa, AC: - 0.1-0.09wt.%, ∆Mn: -2-1.4wt.%, ∆Ni: 0-4.0wt%; or
1300MPa< the tensile strength of the steel plate A to be welded <1700MPa, AC: -0.21--0.05wt.%, ∆Mn: -1.4-1.4wt.%, ∆Ni: 1.76-4.0wt%; or the tensile strength of the steel plate A to be welded is >1700MPa, ∆C: -0.26--0.15wt.%, ∆Mn: -1.4-0.7wt.%, ∆Ni: 2.26-4.0wt%; (See Paragraph [0037], tensile strength is 1300-1700 MPa, with claims 11 and 17 show a number in the same range for C, Mn and Ni in both the steel plate and the welding wire. As the ∆ includes 0 in the ranges, the prior art is considered to meet the limitation of the claim)
wherein the steel plate A to be welded is one of two steel plates to be welded of the same strength level, or the steel plate to be welded with lower strength level in two steel plates to be welded of different strength levels; (See Title and Abstract)
wherein the tailored weld part has a welding line structure of martensite + 1-15vol.% diffusely distributed ferrite + 0-5vol.% residual austenite; and a free aluminum content in the welding line of 0.1-4.0wt.%. (ferrite formation is at or about zero, See Paragraph [0058];)
However, it would have been obvious to control the welding line structure so the structure of martensite + 1-15vol.% diffusely distributed ferrite + 0-5vol.% residual austenite; and a free aluminum content in the welding line of 0.1-4.0wt.%, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art and discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Controlling theses elements would improve hardenability and thermal strength. Regarding claims 9-11, the part is formed by the method as describe above.
Regarding claim 2, Pan discloses the CO2 content is between 5-50%. It would have been obvious to provide the 15-50% range since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art and discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 4, the MAG process uses a welding current of 110-130A and voltage from 18-25 volts. (See Paragraph [0016]) Regarding claim 5, a defocus distance of from −10 to 10 mm (e.g., from 0 to 10 mm), a laser power controlled at from 4 to 6 kW. (See Paragraph [0012]) Regarding claim 7, the welding line joint has a tensile strength greater than the steel plate A. Table 3 shows the joint having a tensile strength of not more than 1700, which would mean the tensile strength of the plate would fall within 900-1700 MPa with table 2 disclosing the claimed percentages of elements.
Regarding claims 8 and 17, the welding wire used for the welding in step 3) has a composition based on weight percentage of C 0.05-0.16%, Si 0.2-0.5%, Mn 1.5-2.8%, P<0.03%, S<0.005%, Al<0.06%, Ni 1.5-3%, Cr 0.05-0.2%, Mo 0.1-0.7%, and a balance Fe and other unavoidable impurities. Preferably, the welding wire comprises 0.02%≤Al<0.06%. The claimed ranges are within or overlap with the prior art. Discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art and discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Regarding claim 16, the laser spot is 0.8-2.0mm. (See Paragraph [0012])
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pan et al (CN 111230301) in view of Breuer et al (US 2018/0326538).
The teachings of Pan have been discussed above. Pan fails to disclose the gas has a Nitrogen content of 2-4%.
Breuer discloses the shielding gas may comprise argon, helium, nitrogen and/or carbon dioxide. (See Paragraph [0028]. It would have been obvious to adapt Pan in view of Breuer to provide the gas has a Nitrogen content of 2-4% since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art and discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pan et al (CN 111230301) in view of Schmit et al (US 2021/0053154).
The teachings of Pan have been discussed above. Pan fails to disclose wherein the steel thin-walled tailor-welded part has a welding line structure of martensite + 1~15vol.% diffusely distributed ferrite + 0-5vol.% residual austenite; and a free aluminum content in the welding line of 0.1-4.0 wt.
Schmit discloses, a steel thin-walled tailor-welded part formed by welding two steel plates to be welded of the same or different strength levels (plates 3 and 4 are steel thin walled plates. See Fig 1; Paragraph [0209]), wherein the steel plate to be welded comprises a substrate and an aluminum or aluminum alloy clad layer on at least one surface thereof (aluminum layers 7 and 8, See Paragraph [0206]), wherein the clad layer comprises an intermetallic compound alloy layer in contact with the substrate and a metal alloy layer thereon (See Paragraph [0354]), wherein the steel thin-walled tailor-welded part has a welding line structure of martensite + 1~15vol.% diffusely distributed ferrite + 0-5vol.% residual austenite; and a free aluminum content in the welding line of 0.1-4.0 wt.%, (the weld joint 22 has a structure of martensite between 5-15%, aluminum 0.5-1.25%, Paragraph [0119]; austenite: Paragraph [0406])
It would have been obvious to adapt Pan in view of Schmit to provide the steel thin-walled tailor-welded part has a welding line structure of martensite + 1~15vol.% diffusely distributed ferrite + 0-5vol.% residual austenite; and a free aluminum content in the welding line of 0.1-4.0 wt since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art and discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-13, 14-15, 19 are allowed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN W JENNISON whose telephone number is (571)270-5930. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9-5.
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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at 571-270-5569. 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.
/BRIAN W JENNISON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights