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
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-3 in the reply filed on 8/20/26 is acknowledged.
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 1-3 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.
With respect to claim 1, limitation "improved delayed facture resistance" is ambiguous. The relative term “improved” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the limitation. Therefore, the recited vague language fails to clearly set forth the scope of the claims, rendering them indefinite. For purpose of examination and in accordance with broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification, the claim is taken to mean: A steel part with delayed fracture resistance.
With respect to claim 3, feature of “carbides in prior austenite grains have an average thickness of 15 nm or less” is ambiguous because it is unclear whether the carbides are meant to be in the austenite phase or martensite phase? According to Applicant’s specification, the carbides are precipitated in the autotempered martensitic structure due to the quenching treatment with a refrigerant [0057-0058]. Based on this description, the carbides appear to be part of the autotempered martensite, not austenite. Also, it is generally known to one of ordinary skilled in the steel art that austenitized steel is quenched to form the martensite structure. The recited conflicting language fails to clearly set forth the scope, rendering the claim indefinite. For purpose of examination and in accordance with broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification, the claim is taken to mean: carbides in the autotempered martensite have an average thickness of 15 nm or less.
Appropriate corrections are requested.
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.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (KR 10-20210078116 A, hereafter “Jung”) in view of Matsuda et al. (US 8840834, hereafter “Matsuda”). US 2023/0020467 is taken to be a faithful translation of the above KR document and portions cited below refer to the US Publication.
Regarding claim 1, Jung discloses a steel part having excellent delayed fracture resistance (abstract, [0005]) comprising by weight (wt%): 0.3-0.5% C, 0.0-0.3% Si, 0.3-1.0% Mn, 0.3-1.5% Cr, 0.01-0.4% V, and the balance being Fe and other impurities [0006, 0024]. The respective amounts taught by Jung [0031-0038] overlap with recited range(s). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990), MPEP 2144.05.
Jung is silent with regard to content of minor elements/impurities P, S, Ti and B. However, such constituents are known in the art. Analogous to Jung, Matsuda (also drawn to high-strength steel) teaches a low-carbon steel (0.12-0.50%) comprising P: 0.05% or less & S 0.04% or less as tolerable impurities (col. 7, lines 31-44), Ti: 0.01-0.1% as useful for precipitation-strengthening of the steel and B: 0.0003-0.005% providing an effect of suppressing the formation and growth of ferrite from austenite grain boundaries (see col. 8, lines 19-30). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to tolerate P, S as impurities about 0.03% and provide recited amount of Ti and B in the steel composition of Jung with a motivation to provide effects of precipitation-strengthening of the steel and suppressing the formation & growth of ferrite from austenite grain boundaries, as suggested by Matsuda.
Concerning martensite, Jung discloses martensite area fraction of 95% more [0006]. Similarly, Matsuda teaches autotempered martensite fraction that contributes to achieve high tensile strength of 1400 MPa or higher, the area ratio being 80% or more, even up to 100% (meets at least 90% vol. fraction) to provide desired workability (col. 4, line 65 thru col. 5, line 4); the microstructure is preferable composed of the autotempered martensite with other phases under tolerable range of less than 5%, including 0% (col. 5, lines 5-10). The iron-based carbide in the autotempered martensite has a thickness of 5 nm or more (col. 5, lines 35-37), which overlaps with claimed range of 15 nm or less. Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to tailor the microstructure to at least 90% volume fraction autotempered martensite in the steel of Jung because doing so would result in good workability and high tensile strength of 1400 MPa as suggested by Matsuda, useful for mechanical and automotive parts [Jung- 0002].
As to claims 2-3, Jung as modified by Matsuda above discloses the steel part composition having carbides with an average thickness of 15 nm or less in the autotempered martensite and tensile strength of 1400 MPa, which meets at least 1200 MPa.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/13/26, 11/12/25, 5/9/24 complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVANG R PATEL whose telephone number is (571) 270-3636. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8am-5pm, EST.
To schedule an interview, Applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/laws/interview-practice. Communications via Internet email are at the discretion of Applicant. If Applicant wishes to communicate via email, a written authorization form must be filed by Applicant: Form PTO/SB/439, available at www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The form may be filed via the Patent Center and can be found using the document description Internet Communications, see https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/forms. In limited circumstances, the Applicant may make an oral authorization for Internet communication. See MPEP § 502.03.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Keith Walker can be reached on 571-272-3458. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Center. For more information, see https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. For questions, technical issues or troubleshooting, please contact the Patent Electronic Business Center at ebc@uspto.gov or 1-866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/DEVANG R PATEL/
Primary Examiner, AU 1735
Prosecution Insights