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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 29-32 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 08/05/2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I claims 17-28 in the reply filed on 08/05/2026 is acknowledged.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 03/27/2024 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(3)(i) because it does not include a concise explanation of the relevance, as it is presently understood by the individual designated in 37 CFR 1.56(c) most knowledgeable about the content of the information, of the JP 3009355 B2 reference listed that is not in the English language. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Claim Interpretation
Regarding claim 1, the phrase “entire surface” is herein interpreted as “that the thick slabs are heated to a predetermined nominal temperature over their entire surface and in a specific thickness upon passing through the electric heating device” as provided at [0015] of the instant specification.
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 17-28 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 17 recites the limitation "a direct hot charging process (7)" in lines 17. The limitation is indefinite as it is unclear if the reference number (7) refers to the direct hot charging process, or the electric heating device in line 16 (i.e., a tangible component).
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the thick slabs coming from the continuous casting device (3)" in lines 17-18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as while claim 17 discloses “a separating device (4), by which continually cast product can be separated into thick slabs” in line 5, claim 17 does not disclose thick slabs from the continuous casting device (3) directly.
Claim 23 recites the limitation "wherein the at least one thick slab supplying device (15) is designed as a transport and heating device" in lines 4-5. The limitation is indefinite as it is unclear how the limitation further limits the same limitation which is recited in parent claim 22, or if the limitation merely reiterates that (15) is a transport and heating device.
Claims dependent upon claims rejected above, either directly or indirectly, are likewise rejected under this statute.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 17-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kimura et al. (US 5461770 A, cited in IDS 03/27/2024).
Regarding claim 17, Kimura teaches a system for producing a flat rolled product (Abstract, Col. 1 lines 8-13) from thick-cast steel and/or non-iron metal slabs (Col. 2 lines 55-64). Kimura teaches at least one continuous casting device 1 (Fig. 6, Col. 5 lines 25-27), by which a flat continually cast product with a thickness of 60 to 200 mm (Col. 2 lines 56-59), where the apparatus would therefore be capable of continually casting slabs of at least 160 mm. Kimura teaches a separating device 2 by which the flat continually cast product can be separated into thick slabs, arranged so as to adjoin the at least one continuous casting device (Fig. 6, Col. 5 lines 29-32). Kimura teaches a hot-rolling mill (7) by which the thick slabs can be rolled to form a sheet or strip (i.e., flat rolled product) (Col. 5 lines 29-32). Kimura teaches wherein the hot-rolling mill comprises a width rolling mill 19 (i.e., a pre-rolling train) (Fig. 6, Col. 5 lines 38-39), and a finishing rolling train 4, each of which comprises at least one roll stand (Fig. 6, Col. 5 lines 43-49), wherein the hot-rolling mill 7 and the at least one continuous casting device 1 are arranged in a common transport line (Fig. 6). Kimura teaches a slab supporting arm 14 and slab clamping arrangement 15 that carry slabs from adiabatic furnace 3 to heat retaining furnace where slabs may be stored off of the production line in case of a stoppage (i.e., at least one thick slab supplying device) arranged transversely to a transport direction (Fig. 5, Col. 5 lines 51-62) and positioned between the separating device 2 and the hot-rolling mill 7 (Fig. 5). Kimura teaches at least one electric heating device 20 or 25 arranged in front of the hot-rolling mill for a direct hot charging process (Col. 5 lines 32-33, Col. 7 lines 27-36, Fig. 5). Kimura teaches the electric heating device 20 or 25 allowing at least the thick slabs coming from the continuous casting device 1 arranged in the common transport line to be heated (Col. 7 lines 27-36), where as Kimura teaches the slab is reheated to a rolling temperature (which would necessarily be predetermined) (Col. 7 lines 30-34), Kimura would be capable of heating over the entire surface to a hot-rolling temperature as defined in the instant application.
Regarding claim 18, Kimura teaches wherein the at least one electric heating device 20 or 25 is arranged in front of the pre-rolling train 19 in the transport direction (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 19, Kimura teaches at least one induction heating furnace 20 (i.e., an electric heating device) arranged in front of the finishing rolling train 4 in the transport direction (Fig. 1, Col. 5 lines 32-33), where as Kimura teaches the induction heating furnace to heat the slab that is transformed into a strip (Col. 5 lines 40-42), the induction heating furnace 20 comprises an electric pre-strip heating device.
Regarding claim 20, Kimura teaches wherein the at least one thick slab supplying device 14/15 is designed as a transport device (Col. 5 lines 51-62) where the slabs are supplied to a heat retaining furnace (i.e., and heating device) by which transported and/or temporarily stored thick slabs can be heated to the hot-rolling temperature (Col. 5 lines 51-62).
Regarding claim 21, Kimura teaches wherein the at least one thick slab supplying device 14/15 is arranged between the electric heating device 20 for the direct hot charging process 7 and the pre-rolling train 19 (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 22, Kimura teaches wherein at least one electric thick-slab preheating device 20 is connected on an inlet side upstream of the at least one thick slab supplying device 14/15 (Fig. 4). Kimura teaches wherein the at least one thick slab supplying device 14/15 is designed as a transport device (Col. 5 lines 51-62) where the slabs are supplied to a heat retaining furnace (i.e., and heating device) (Col. 5 lines 51-62).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 23-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura as applied to claim 22 above.
Regarding claim 23 and 24, Kimura teaches all of claim 22 under 35 USC 102 as noted above. Kimura does not teach wherein at least one electric supplementary thick-slab heating device (17) is connected on an outlet side downstream of the at least one thick slab supplying device.
Kimura teaches an induction heating furnace 25 between the pre-rolling train 19 of the hot-rolling mill 7 and the thick slab supplying device 14/15 equivalent to a electric heating device arranged in front of the hot-rolling mill.
Kimura does not teach a separate electric supplementary thick-slab heating device connected on an outlet side downstream of the at least one thick slab supplying device between the thick slab supplying device and the pre-rolling train. However, it has long been held that the mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP §2144.04 (VI) B. As Kimura teaches one electric heating device connected to an outlet side downstream of the thick slab supplying device, adding another heating device for the same purpose would have been prima facie obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as doing so would not produce a new or unexpected result.
Kimura teaches wherein the at least one thick slab supplying device 14/15 is designed as a transport device (Col. 5 lines 51-62) where the slabs are supplied to a heat retaining furnace (i.e., and heating device) (Col. 5 lines 51-62).
Regarding claim 25, Kimura teaches an induction heating furnace 20 upstream of the thick slab supplying device 14/15 equivalent to an electric pre-strip heating device.
Kimura does not teach at least one further electric supplementary thick-slab heating device, which is connected upstream of the electric thick-slab heating device. However, it has long been held that the mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP §2144.04 (VI) B. As Kimura teaches one induction heating furnace upstream of the thick slab supplying device 14/15, adding another heating device for the same purpose would have been prima facie obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as doing so would not produce a new or unexpected result.
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura as applied to claim 17 under 35 USC 102 above, further in view of Hino et al. (JP 6562223 B2, original copy and machine translation provided with IDS filed 03/27/2024, Examiner provided machine translation supplied herein).
Kimura does not teach a control device with an associated calculation unit.
Hino teaches a heating equipment for continuous casting slabs (Title), where continuously cast slabs are heated before hot rolling in a heating facility with a plurality of induction heating devices in the direction of transport of the cast slabs [0019], where the slabs are hot rolled into sheets [0032] thus Hino and Kimura are analogous to the instant application as both are directed to apparatuses for heating cast slabs before hot rolling into strip/sheet products. Hino teaches the induction heating device 22 heat the slab [0038], where the heating equipment is equipped with an output adjustment means 28 (i.e., a control device) that adjusts the amount of current flowing through the induction heating device, which reduces the amount of current during a period of effective stopping of the slab which is determined in advance by measurements from the rotation of the transport roller (i.e., product dimensions) [0038], thus the control device is designed to control and/or regulate the system based on product dimensions. As the control device uses measurements of rotation of the transport roller to adjust the current supplied to the heating equipment, the control device would intrinsically comprise an associated calculation unit. Further, as the control reduces the amount of current supplied during a stoppage (i.e., when current need not be applied), the control device is further designed to control and/or regulate the system based on minimized energy consumption.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have added a control device to control and/or regulate the induction heating devices as taught by Hino for the induction heating devices of Kimura as doing so would be recognized by one of ordinary skill to prevent overheating of the slab and to reduce electricity usage during stoppage of the hot rolling.
Claim(s) 27-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura as applied to claim 17 under 35 USC 102 above, further in view of Muramatsu et al. (US 5094094 A).
Regarding claims 27-28, Kimura does not teach wherein the pre-rolling train 19 comprises an upsetting device.
Muramatsu teaches a hot-rolling equipment (Title), where a continuous casting apparatus is arranged with a heating oven and a set of rough and finishing rolling mills (abstract, Col. 2 lines 29-63), where slabs are cut to predetermined lengths (Col. 2 lines 64-66) and the slabs are hot rolled into sheets (Col. 4 lines 64-66), thus Muramatsu and Kimura are analogous to the instant application as both are directed to apparatuses for heating cast slabs before hot rolling into strip/sheet products. Muramatsu teaches wherein hot-rolling equipment 10A (i.e., a pre-rolling train) comprises a sizing press 4 immediately after the outlet of a reheating oven which reduces the width of the slabs (Fig. 1A-1B, Col. 2 lines 38-42) (i.e., at least one upsetting device in the transport direction, wherein the upsetting device comprises at least one slab upsetting press). Muramatsu teaches the hot-rolling equipment 10A includes at least one first and at least one second pre-rolling stand 6 (Fig. 1A-1B, Col. 2 lines 41-42). Muramatsu teaches there is demand for changing the width of slab plate in the succeeding rolling step to standardize slab material width (Col. 1 lines 14-17), where the reduction in width it becomes possible to effect hot direct rolling which reduces energy use and equipment cost because of reduced space, also prevents occurrence of side edge cracks during rolling (Col. 4 lines 5-29).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used a pre-rolling train according to Muramatsu as the pre-rolling train of Kimura, as doing so would satisfy the demand to change the width of slab plates to a standard size, and to reduce energy use and equipment cost and size, and prevent cracking at the side portions of the slabs.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nikolas T Pullen whose telephone number is (571)272-1995. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday: 10:00 AM - 6:00 PM EST.
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
/NIKOLAS TAKUYA PULLEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1733
