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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 7-10, 12-13, 16-18, and 21-24 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 7 recites the limitation "wherein the and the two layers" in line 4. The limitation is indefinite as there appears to be an omitted term after “wherein the”, making unclear what and the two layers of surface layer structure and the one layer of core structure for man intermediate layer.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "controlled cooling stage < the slow cooling stage < the fast cooling stage" in line 5. The limitation is indefinite as it is unclear what the meaning of < is in this context (e.g., meaning a relationship between each cooling rate of “less than”, indicating the order of steps as an arrow, etc.).
Claim 22 recites the limitations "the first injection pressure" in line 3, “the first holding time” and “the second injection pressure” in line 4, and “the second holding time” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim, as while claim 22 recites that the bainite steel is cooled by injecting cooling gas twice, the claim does not describe that e.g., the first injection pressure and first holding time are of the first injecting of cooling gas to the surface of the bainite steel, or that the second injection pressure and second holding time are of the second injecting of cooling gas.
Claim 24 recites the limitation "the soaking temperature" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 1, 3-5, 15-16, and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (CN 114107785 B, original document provided herein, US family document US 20230357882 A1 used as English language equivalent).
Regarding claims 1 and 3-4, Zhang teaches a bainite steel (title), comprising 0.12-0.24% C, 0.2-0.5% Si, 1.3-2.0% Mn, 0.001-0.004% B, 0.01-0.05% Al, < 0.4% Cr, < 0.4% Mo, < 0.1% Ti, < 0.06% Nb, and the remainder Fe and other unavoidable impurities [0023]. Zhang teaches Examples 1, 4, 7, and 8 (Table 1) which disclose compositions within the claimed ranges of claims 1, 3, and 4 as noted in the table below.
C mass%
Si mass%
Mn mass%
B mass%
Al mass%
Cr mass%
Mo mass%
Fe mass%
Ti mass%
Nb mass%
P mass%
S mass%
Claimed
0.10
~0.19
0.05~0.45
1.5~2.2%
0.001~0.0035%
0.01~0.05%
0.05~0.40%
0.05~0.40%
>90%
<0.15%
<0.1 %
<0.015%
< 0.004%
Example 1
0.16
0.45
1.75
0.002
0.02
0.3
0.19
Remainder
0
0
0.010
0.002
Example 4
0.19
0.23
2
0.003
0.03
0.23
0.13
Remainder
0.02
0.04
0.011
0.002
Example 7
0.16
0.43
1.56
0.002
0.04
0.21
0.15
Remainder
0.08
0.02
0.009
0.001
Example 8
0.19
0.41
1.53
0.002
0.05
0.35
0.12
Remainder
0.01
0.06
0.010
0.003
Table 1: Example Compositions of Bainite Steels in Zhang
Zhang teaches compositions which fall within the claimed ranges. When, as by a recitation of ranges or otherwise, a claim covers several compositions, the claim is ‘anticipated' if one of them is in the prior art, thus Zhang teaches claims 1, 3, and 4 as claimed. See MPEP 2131.03(I).
Regarding claim 5, Zhang teaches wherein the mass percentages of the chemical elements meet the following relationships: R=(Mn+Si)/(12*C+ 160*B) wherein R = 0.982 for example 1, which is within the claimed range.
Zhang does not teach the mass percentages of chemical elements in the bainite steel meet meeting Q=(C+Cr+Mo+Mn/2)/R, wherein 1.15<Q<1.5. The Examiner notes however that meeting the claimed range of Q values is considered optional in claim 5, thus Zhang is considered to read upon claim 5 in its entirety.
Regarding claim 15, Zhang teaches a manufacturing method for the bainite steel (abstract, [0001]) comprising smelting and casting, hot rolling, post-rolling cooling and coiling, pickling and cold rolling, and annealing [0075].
Regarding claim 16, Zhang teaches wherein the annealing step comprises a heating stage [0061-0062], a slow cooling stage [0063], a fast cooling stage [0064], a controlled cooling stage [0065], and an air cooling stage in sequence [0066]. Zhang teaches wherein the cooling rates at the slow cooling stage, the fast cooling stage, and the controlled cooling stage are controlled to be < 15 °C/s, 93.4 °C/s, and 1.12 -1.68 °C/s respectively for the composition of Example 1 [0063-0065], satisfying the controlled cooling stage < the slow cooling stage < the fast cooling stage as best can be examined in view of the rejection of claim 16 under 35 USC 112(b) above.
Regarding claim 26, Zhang teaches wherein the process parameters of the manufacturing method are controlled to meet in the step of hot rolling: a heating temperature is controlled at 1150-1260 °C [0082], such as 1180 °C in Example 1 (Table 2-1), which is within the claimed range; an initial rolling temperature of finishing rolling is controlled at 1100-1220 °C [0082], such as 1140 °C in Example 1 (Table 2-1), which is within the claimed range, and a final rolling temperature of finishing rolling is controlled at 900-950 °C [0082], such as 920 °C (Table 2-1), which is within the claimed range.
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) 7-8 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang as applied to claim 1 under 35 USC 102 above, in view of Zhu et al. (CN 113355590 A, original document and machine translation supplied herein).
Regarding claim 7, Zhang teaches a bainite steel according to claim 1, but does not teach wherein the bainite steel comprises two layers of surface layer structure.
Zhu teaches a three-layer composite structure high-strength steel plate and manufacturing method thereof (Title) which is a bainite steel [n0007, n0028], comprising 0.08-0.35% C, 0.01-2.5% Si, and 0.5-3% Mn [n0016-n0017], <0.0005% B [n0022], <3% Cr and Mo [n0022], and <0.15% Ti and Nb [n0024], where the steel plate is produced by steelmaking (i.e., smelting) and continuous casting, hot rolling, pickling, and continuous annealing [n0027], thus Zhu and Zhang are analogous to the instant application as both are directed to steels comprising C, Si, Mn, B, Cr, Mo, Fe, Ti, and Nb in or overlapping the claimed ranges, each comprising smelting, casting, hot rolling, pickling, and annealing steps. Zhu teaches the layered composite structure is formed by a method comprising steelmaking, continuous casting, hot rolling, pickling, and continuous annealing, where in the continuous annealing step, high-temperature humidification and decarburization are performed: under the condition that the steel plate temperature is 750–900 °C, the dew point inside the annealing furnace is controlled to be -15–15 °C, and the reaction time is 40–160 s, so that the upper and lower surfaces of the steel plate become decarburized layers with a thickness of 5–100 micrometers (i.e., both the upper and lower surfaces are decarburized layers) [n0027]. Zhu teaches the bainite steel comprises two layers of surface layer structure and one layer of core structure wherein the core structure is between the two layers of surface layer structure [n0007]. Zhu teaches the steel with layers improve strength while not compromising formability and toughness as much as other steel plates [n0002].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have treated the bainite steel of Zhang according to the method of Zhu to create a steel with one layer of core structure between two layers of surface layer structure as taught by Zhu, as doing so would improve the strength of the steel without compromising formability or toughness of the steel.
Zhang in view of Zhu does not teach the bainite steel further comprising two multi-phase layers, however comprising two multi-phase layers is considered optional in claim 7, thus Zhang in view of Zhu is considered to read upon 7 in its entirety.
Regarding claim 8, Zhu teaches wherein in the bainite steel, the surface layers have a thickness of 5-100 µm [n0013] while the plate as a whole has a thickness of 0.5-2.5 mm (500-2500 µm) [n0011], thus Zhang teaches a volume of the core structure accounts for 60-98% of the volume of the bainite steel and the rest is the surface layer structure.
Zhu teaches a volume of the core structure accounts for 60-98% of the volume of the bainite steel. This overlaps the claimed range of 20%~50% (i.e., about 20-50%). The overlap between the ranges taught in the prior art and recited in the claims creates a prima facie case of obviousness because the prior art indicates substantial utility over the entire range disclosed therein, including that portion of the range which also falls within the claimed range. See MPEP § 2144.05(I).
Regarding claims 12-13, Zhang in view of Zhu does not teach the presence of multi-phase layers. The Examiner notes however that the presence of multi-phase layers is considered optional in parent claim 7, and as claims 12 and 13 only recite further limits of the optional limitation, Zhang in view of Zhu is considered to read upon claims 12-13 in their entirety.
Claim(s) 14, 17, and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang.
Regarding claim 14, Zhang teaches claim 1 under 35 USC 102 as noted above. Zhang teaches wherein the bainite steel has a yield strength of > 900 MPa [0015], and a hole expansion ratio of > 55 % [0015] which are within the claimed range. Zhang teaches the bainite steel has a tensile strength of > 980 MPa [0015], and an elongation at break of > 9% [0059].
Zhang teaches a tensile strength of > 980 MPa and an elongation at break of > 9%. This overlaps the claimed ranges of > 1000 MPa and an elongation at break > 12%. The overlap between the ranges taught in the prior art and recited in the claims creates a prima facie case of obviousness because the prior art indicates substantial utility over the entire range disclosed therein, including that portion of the range which also falls within the claimed range. See MPEP § 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 17, Zhang teaches claim 16 under 35 USC 102 as noted above. Zhang teaches wherein the bainite steel is cooled to a slow cooling temperature of 700-820 °C [0061, 0063] and a slow cooling rate of < 15 °C/s [0063]. Zhang teaches in Example 1 a composition that corresponds to a R value of 0.982, and a Q value of 1.55. Zhang teaches that the Cr content may be 0-0.4% [0022, 0029], of which 0.05-0.4% is within the claimed range, thus using Example 1 as a starting point for the composition, the range of Cr content corresponds with a Q value of 1.23 at the lower bound, thus Zhang teaches R and Q values within the claimed ranges.
Zhang teaches temperatures of 700-820 °C and a slow cooling rate of < 15 °C/s. This overlaps the claimed range of 720~800 °C/s and 620~700 °C/s, and a slow cooling rate of Q~10*Q (1.23-12.3 °C/s for the calculated Q value). The overlap between the ranges taught in the prior art and recited in the claims creates a prima facie case of obviousness because the prior art indicates substantial utility over the entire range disclosed therein, including that portion of the range which also falls within the claimed range. See MPEP § 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 24, Zhang teaches at the heating stage the bainite steel is heated at a heating rate of <50 °C/s [0060] to the soaking temperature of 840-900 °C (which is within the claimed range), and then held for a holding time of 5 minutes or less.
Zhang teaches a holding time of 5 minutes or less. This overlaps the claimed range of 60~ 180 s. The overlap between the ranges taught in the prior art and recited in the claims creates a prima facie case of obviousness because the prior art indicates substantial utility over the entire range disclosed therein, including that portion of the range which also falls within the claimed range.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-10, 18, and 21-23 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph to claims 7, 16, and 22, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The closest identified prior art of record is Zhang et al., Zhu et al., Zheng et al. (“A novel method for the development of a low-temperature bainitic microstructure in the surface layer of low-carbon steel”, supplied herein), Wang et al. (US 20150007913 A1), and Li et al. (CN 101871078 A, original document and machine translation provided herein).
Regarding claim 9, Zhang in view of Zhu teaches a composition according to claim 7 as noted above. Zhang in view of Zhu does not teach wherein the surface layer structure comprises needle-like bainite and granular carbide precipitate phase or wherein the core structure comprises massive bainite and granular carbide precipitate phase.
Zheng teaches a novel method for the development of a low-temperature bainitic microstructure in the surface layer of low-carbon steel (Title), where the steel comprises C, Si, Mn, Cr, Ni, Mo, Al, P, and S (pg. 294 paragraph 3). Zheng teaches the steel is austempered at 200 °C which forms needle-like bainite in a surface layer of the steel (Fig. 3, pg. 295 paragraph 3), and that the steel comprises a microstructure comprising plate-like (i.e., massive) bainite .also at the surface (Fig. 4, pg. 295 paragraph 4). Zheng teaches carbides are not present (pg. 295 paragraph 4).
Zheng does not teach wherein the surface layer structure comprises granular carbide precipitate phase or wherein the core structure comprises massive bainite and granular carbide precipitate phase.
Regarding claim 18, Zhang in view of Zhu does not teach cooling by injecting cooling gas to the surface of the bainite steel.
Wang teaches a manufacturing method for strip casting 550 MPa-grade high strength atmospheric corrosion-resistant steel strip (Title), where steel containing C, Si, Mn, P, S, Cr , Nb, Ti, and Mo, along with Fe and unavoidable impurities is smelted, cast, hot rolled, and cooled and coiled (Abstract). Wang teaches the coiling of the steel endows the steel with a bainite microstructure [0085]. Wang teaches pressure and flow of cooling gas can be employed for regulation and control [0082], however Wang does not teach or suggest wherein the cooling gas injection pressure is controlled in tor for the claimed durations
Li teaches a super-high strength cold rolled steel and manufacturing method thereof (Title) where the steel comprises C, Si, Mn, P, S, Al, Cr, and B, with the remainder being Fe and unavoidable impurities [0018], where the steel may comprise bainite [0018, 0060]. Li teaches the steel is subjected to smelting, casting, hot rolling, pickling, cold rolling, and annealing [0031]. Li teaches during the annealing, jet cooling the steel from 780-880 °C to 700-750 °C (i.e., the bainite steel is cooled by injecting a cooling gas to the surface of the bainite steel) [0038], at a rate of 10-30 °C/s which corresponds to a duration of 1-13 seconds which overlaps the claimed holding times of the cooling gas injection. Li does not teach or suggest wherein the cooling gas injection pressure is controlled in the claimed ranges.
Therefore neither, of Wang or Li teaches or suggests the specific claimed ranges of 0.2*Q~Q kPa (0.260~1.30 kPa for the Q value of Example 1) or 0.05*Q~0.15*Q (0.065-0.195 kPa for the Q value of Example 1), which are critical to the claimed invention (see pg. 11 line 17 – pg. 13 line 20 of the instant specification).
Regarding claim 21, Zhang teaches wherein the bainite is cooled to a fast cooling temperature of 410-460 °C for a Ts of 900 °C [0063], which is within the claimed range. Zhang teaches wherein the fast cooling rate is 36.6 °C/s according to the Q value for Example 1 [0063], but does not teach or suggest the claimed range of a fast cooling rate of 12.983-25.966 °C/s for the Q value of Example 1.
Li teaches a fast cooling rate of 60-200 °C/s [0038]. Li does not teach or suggest a fast cooling rate of 10*Q~20*Q °C/s at the fast cooling stage (a fast cooling rate of 12.983-25.966 °C/s for the Q value of Example 1), therefore neither of Zhang or Li teaches or suggests the cooling rates as claimed, which are critical to the claimed invention, (see pg. 13 lines 21-24 of the instant specification).
Based on the above discussion, the closest prior art, taken singularly or in combination, does not fairly suggest or render obvious a bainite steel comprising needle-like bainite and granular carbide in the surface layer structure and massive bainite and granular carbide precipitate in the core structure; or a manufacturing method of the bainite steel, or as claimed. As claim(s) 9, 18, and 21 is/are free from the art, claims 10, 22, and 23 are also free from the art due at least to their dependency from claim(s) 9, 21, and 18 respectively.
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
Prosecution Insights