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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-15 are currently under examination.
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 1-15 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 line speed" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the line speed" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the line speed" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the solutionizing temperature" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-7, 10-12 and 14-15 are also rejected since they depend on vague and indefinite parent claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 10-11 and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2006005573 (WO573) and further in view of EP3227036 (EP036).
WO573 teaches a process for heat treating aluminum alloy, comprising:
Casting an Al alloy strip (pg 2 ln 10);
Homogenizing (pg 2 ln 11);
Hot rolling (pg 2 ln 12);
Cold rolling (pg 2 ln 12);
Solutionizing the Al alloy strip (pg 2 ln 13);
Cooling;
Thermally spiking the cooled Al alloy strip at 100-250°C(pg 2 ln 15-16); and
Coiling the Al alloy strip(pg 6 ln 6-13).
Regarding claims 1, 3, 7 and 10-11, WO573 further teaches that the Al alloy strip is processed on a continuous annealing line(pg 7 ln 34-35). Additionally, the spike temperature as taught by WO573 overlaps the claimed spike temperature. Therefore, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05. The selection of claimed spike temperature from the spike temperature of WO573 would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art since WO573 teaches the same utilities in its disclosed spike temperature. Therefore, process of WO573 produces a coiled Al alloy strip as claimed.
However, WO573 does not explicitly teach that the cooling after solutionizing treatment is air-cooling.
EP036 teaches a process for manufacturing aluminum alloy sheet, comprising solutionizing at 485-571°C[0005] and air-cooling after solution heat-treatment[0024].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the air-cooling method into as taught by EP036 into the cooling of solutionized Al alloy sheet with expected success in light of the teachings of EP036.
Regarding claim 2, WO573 further teaches the claimed coiling the coiled metal strip(pg 6 ln 6-13).
Regarding claim 4, the claimed natural cooling would have happened in the process of WO573 in view of EP036.
Regarding claim 5, WO573 further teaches that heating process is on a continuous annealing line (pg 7 ln 34-35), which read on the claimed continuous line.
Regarding claim 6, WO573 further teaches cooling rate of less than 20°C/s(pg 5 ln s 13-14), which reads on the claimed cooling rate.
Regarding claim 13, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the solutionizing temperature of 485-571°C as taught by EP036 into the process of WO573 in order to sufficiently dissolve the alloying elements as taught by EP036.
Regarding claim 14, EP036 teaches cooling to room temperature.
Regarding claim 15, the Al alloy strip produced by the process of WO573 reads on the claimed heat treated metal strip.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-9 and 12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including 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 prior art is WO573 as discussed above. However, WO573 does not teach or fairly suggest, either alone or in combination, the claimed line speed or the furnace length.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LOIS L ZHENG whose telephone number is (571)272-1248. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:15-4:45.
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.
LOIS ZHENG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1733
/LOIS L ZHENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733
