Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/688,707

PLATED STEEL SHEET HAVING EXCELLENT CORROSION RESISTANCE AND WHITENESS AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SAME

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Mar 01, 2024
Examiner
LA VILLA, MICHAEL EUGENE
Art Unit
1784
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Posco Co. Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
693 granted / 921 resolved
+10.2% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+18.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
951
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
34.2%
-5.8% vs TC avg
§102
17.3%
-22.7% vs TC avg
§112
36.6%
-3.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 921 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 13 February 2026 has been entered. 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 4 and 5 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. Regarding Claim 4, the claimed value of I(110) being 120 to 200 appears to be an arbitrary value (Figure 1), which would be expected to be a consequence of sample being tested and testing conditions and not necessarily distinguishing of the sample being tested. It is unclear how these arbitrary values would differentiate a plated steel sheet. In other words, it would be expected that for any specific plated steel sheet which meets the requirements of Claim 1 and any specific testing configuration there could always be a circumstance that would lead to I(110) being in the claimed range, and thus it is not a further distinguishing characteristic of the plated steel sheet alone. For example, the sampling time could be adjusted to lead to values in the claimed range. Note that the intensity values are reported as “arbitrary units” (Figure 1). Analogous rejection applies to Claim 5. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Regarding Claims 4 and 5, to the extent that the claimed values of I(110) of Claim 4 or of I(103) of Claim 5 fail to further limit respective previous Claim 1 because these requirements can be satisfied for any plated steel sheet that meets the requirements of previous Claim 1 under claimed conditions since units being claimed are arbitrary, these claims do not further limit previous Claim 1 and are improper. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-3 and 6-10 are allowed. Regarding Claims 1-10, the reviewed prior art does not teach or suggest the subject matter of these claims. Particularly, the reviewed prior art does not teach or suggest plated steel sheet having plating layer of claimed composition wherein I(110)/I(103) range of ratios for MgZn2 is achieved, in the claimed context, and does not teach or suggest methods of making such plated steel sheet. For example, Tokuda USPA 2023/0193425 teaches or suggests claimed plating composition on steel but fails to expressly teach or suggest or to provide basis for establishing inherency of claimed I(110)/I(103) ratio. See Tokuda (entire document). Likewise, Harada USPA 2021/0147971 teaches or suggests claimed plating composition on steel but fails to expressly teach or suggest or to provide basis for establishing inherency of claimed I(110)/I(103) ratio. See Harada (entire document). Response to Amendment In view of applicant’s amendments and arguments, applicant traverses the NSDP rejection over Serial No. 18/681,688 of the Office Action mailed on 14 November 2025. Rejection is withdrawn. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL E. LA VILLA whose telephone number is (571)272-1539. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. through Fri. from 9:00 a.m. ET to 5:30 p.m. ET. 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, Humera N. Sheikh, can be reached at (571) 272-0604. 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. /MICHAEL E. LA VILLA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784 28 February 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 01, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Nov 06, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 12, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Feb 13, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 21, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595540
STEEL SHEET AND PLATED STEEL SHEET
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584208
A coated metallic substrate
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584204
STEEL WIRE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576921
FINISH PART AND STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577651
FLAT STEEL PRODUCT HAVING AN IMPROVED ZINC COATING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+18.8%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 921 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month