HIGH-STRENGTH STEEL WITH GOOD WEATHER RESISTANCE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFOR

§103 §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 . Response to Election/Restrictions and Status of Claims Applicant’s timely election without traverse of Group I, Claims 1-6, drawn to a steel, in the reply filed on September 23, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 7-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, Group II, Claims 7-14, drawn to a method of manufacturing, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Claims 1-14 are pending and Claims 1-6 are currently considered in this office action. Priority Applicant’s claim to foreign priority in application no. CN202111382933.8, filed November 22, 2021, 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. Claim 1, and dependent Claims 2-6, 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 1, the claim recites the transitional language ‘consisting of’; however, dependent Claim 2 requires the inclusion of at least one of Ti and Nb and Claim 3 recites 0-0.015 P%, 0-0.01% S and 0-0.002% O. It is unclear if the composition being claimed is to be limited the elements recited in claim 1 or not. Examiner interprets wherein Claim 1 requires the elements recited, and optionally one of Ti and Nb, and optionally 0-0.015 P%, 0-0.01% S and 0-0.002% O. Regarding Claim 2, the claim requires the inclusion of at least one of Ti and Nb; however, Claim 1 recites the transitional language ‘consisting of’ regarding the composition. It is unclear if Ti and Nb are permitted in the steel. Regarding Claim 3, the claim recites 0-0.015 P%, 0-0.01% S and 0-0.002% O; however, Claim 1 recites the transitional language ‘consisting of’ regarding the composition. It is unclear if amounts of P, S and O are permitted in the steel. 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. Claim 2 and Claim 3 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 Claim 2 and Claim 3, the Claim recites additional elements (see Claim 2 – Nb and/or Ti; see Claim 3 0-0.015 P%, 0-0.01% S and 0-0.002% O); however, Claim 1 requires the composition to be limited to exclude additional elements by use of the transitional language ‘consisting of’. 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao (previously cited, CN 109136737 A, updated English machine translation provided). Regarding Claim 1, Claim 2 and Claim 3, Zhao discloses a steel comprising: Element Claim 1 (wt%) Claim 2 (wt%) Claim 3 (wt%) Zhao, Abstract (wt%) C 0.22-0.33 0.245-0.350 Si 0.1-1.0 0.10-0.50 Mn 0.3-1.5 0.20-1.20 Cr 0.2-1.6 0.30-1.20 Ni 2.2-3.8 2.00-3.70 Mo 0.1-0.7 0.20-0.80 Cu 0.02-0.3 0-0.30 Al 0.01-0.045 0.01-0.08 V 0.01-0.25 0-0.12 N 0-0.013 0-0.0120 Nb >0 to 0.04 0-0.08 Ti >0 to 0.03 0.003-0.06 P 0-0.015 0-0.015 S 0-0.01 0-0.003 O 0-0.002 0-0.003 Balance Fe+imp. Fe+imp. Fe+imp. Fe+imp. (12C+0.3Mn+Ni)/ (Cr+2Mo+2Si) 2.5-3.2 1.3-9.2 The ranges of Ca and H disclosed by Zhao are inclusive of 0%, and therefore the composition of Zhao reads on the claimed transitional language ‘consisting of’ (Abstract; para. [0026]-[0027]). Additionally: Zhao teaches wherein Mn and Ni exist in solid solution, and are included to increase hardenability and to improve low-temperature impact toughness by reducing stacking fault energy, respectively, while balancing for the amount of retained austenite which reduces yield strength (para. [0015]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included 1.2% Mn and 3.7% Ni, as disclosed and taught by Zhao, in order to maximize hardenability and low temperature toughness through solid solution elements, while balancing for the amount of retained austenite and therefore yield strength (see teaching above). Zhao teaches wherein Cr is included to increase hardenability and strength by promoting martensite, while balancing for the formation of coarse carbides and therefore low-temperature toughness (). Zhao teaches that Si is included in order to hinder dislocation movement and to prevent coarse carbides, thereby increasing strength, while balancing for low-temperature impact toughness (see teaching above). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included 1.2% Cr and 0.5% Si, as disclosed and taught by Zhao, in order to maximize strength through martensite formation and pinning of dislocations, while balancing for coarse carbide formation and therefore low-temperature toughness (see teaching above). Zhao teaches wherein Mo is included to enhance hardenability through bainite and martensite formation, and increase strength through solid solution strengthening and fine carbide formation, while balancing for cost. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included 0.2% Mo, as disclosed and taught by Zhao, in order to enhance hardenability and strength through bainite/martensite, solid solution strengthening and fine carbide formation, while maximizing cost (see teaching above). A steel comprising 1.2% Mn, 3.7% Ni, 1.2% Cr, 0.5% Si and 0.2% Mo comprises a (12C+0.3Mn+Ni)/(Cr+2Mo+2Si) value of 2.69-3.18, depending on C content, which further reads on the claimed 2.5-3.2 range. 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 Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP § 2144.05.I. Regarding Claim 4, the compositional ranges of Zhao equate to a weather resistance Index I, wherein I=26.01*Cu+3.88*Ni+1.20*Cr+1.49*Si+17.28*P-7.29*Cu*Ni- 9.10*Ni*P-33.39*Cu2, ranging from 8.26-16.54, which overlaps and reads on the claimed range of 10 or more. Further, the steel comprising 1.2% Mn, 3.7% Ni, 1.2% Cr, 0.5% Si and 0.2% Mo (see Claim 1 above), comprises a weather index of 13-16.54 for 0-0.3% Cu and 0-0.015% P. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP § 2144.05.I. Regarding Claim 5, Zhao discloses tempered martensite, tempered bainite and dispersed fine carbides throughout the steel matrix (para. [0045]). One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that dispersed carbides throughout the matrix of the steel would include carbides distributed between lamellae as claimed because the matrix includes the lamellae. Further, Zhao discloses the claimed composition (see Claim 1 above), and Zhao discloses the same quenching and tempering process after reheating and hot-rolling(see table below). Process step Instant Invention (pg. 19-20) Zhao Para. Zhao Ex. 4, para. [0065] Quench/aust. T 860-1000C 840-1050C [0037] 930C Quench/aust. time 2-6 hr 2.5 hr (150 min) Cooling Water Quenching* Temper T 400-600 500-650C [0039] 590C Temper time 1-4hr 3 hr Cooling Air Air [0039] air *one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the quenching to be water quenching unless otherwise specified Because the steel of Zhao comprises the claimed composition and the quenching and tempering method is the same as the instant invention, one or ordinary skill in the art would appreciate Zhao to comprise the claimed microstructure. When the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP 2112.01. Regarding Claim 6, Zhao discloses the following mechanical properties, which read on and overlap the claimed ranges: Property Claim 6 Zhao (Abstract) Yield strength 1100 MPa or more 900 MPa or more Tensile strength 1250 MPa or more 1150 MPa or more Charpy impact energy (-20C) 70 J or more 70 J or more Elongation 15% or more 15% or more Reduction of area 50% or more 50% or more *one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the quenching to be water quenching unless otherwise specified Zhao is silent towards the Charpy impact energy at room temperature; however, the Charpy impact values of Zhao at -20C are above 80J (see Table 2 of Zhao), and one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that Charpy impact values increase with increasing temperature. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that the steel of Zhao would comprise a Charpy Impact value of 80J or more at room temperature as claimed because room temperature is a higher temperature than -20C. Further, Zhao discloses the claimed composition (see Claim 1 above), and Zhao discloses the same quenching and tempering process after reheating and hot-rolling(see table below). Process step Instant Invention (pg. 19-20) Zhao Para. Zhao Ex. 4, para. [0065] Quench/aust. T 860-1000C 840-1050C [0037] 930C Quench/aust. time 2-6 hr 2.5 hr (150 min) Cooling Water Quenching* Temper T 400-600 500-650C [0039] 590C Temper time 1-4hr 3 hr Cooling Air Air [0039] air *one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the quenching to be water quenching unless otherwise specified Because the steel of Zhao comprises the claimed composition and the quenching and tempering method is the same as the instant invention, one or ordinary skill in the art would appreciate Zhao to comprise the claimed mechanical properties. When the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP 2112.01. Claims 5 and 6 are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao (previously cited, CN 109136737 A, updated English machine translation provided), applied to Claim 1 above, in further view of Yuan (CN 104480406 A, English machine translation provided). Regarding Claim 5, Zhao discloses tempered martensite, tempered bainite and dispersed fine carbides throughout the steel matrix (para. [0045]). While one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that dispersed carbides throughout the matrix of the steel would include carbides distributed between lamellae as claimed because the matrix includes the lamellae, Zhao does not expressly disclose that the carbides are interlamellar (i.e., between lamellae). However, Zhao discloses the claimed composition (see Claim 1 above), and Zhao and Yuan disclose the instant method (see details below). Zhao discloses the instant steps of reheating, hot-rolling, austenizing (quenching) and tempering (see table below), but is silent towards the reheating time and initial rolling temperature during hot-rolling. Yuan teaches reheating at 1000-1250C for 1-5 hours in order to achieve a uniform austenized microstructure while preventing austenite grain growth, thereby facilitating smooth rolling and preventing cracking (para. [0038]). Yuan teaches an initial rolling temperature of 1000-1150C and a finish rolling temperature of 780-980C in order to facilitate the homogenization of deformed austenite and to yield a uniform microstructure and uniform plate thickness after water cooling (para. [0039]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have reheated the steel slab for a time of 1-5 hours and to have comprised an initial rolling temperature of 1000-1150C, as taught by Yuan, for the invention disclosed by Zhao, in order to achieve a uniform austenized microstructure while preventing austenite grain growth, thereby facilitating smooth rolling and preventing cracking, and in order to facilitate the homogenization of deformed austenite and to yield a uniform microstructure and uniform plate thickness after water cooling (see teachings above). Therefore, Zhao and Yuan disclose the instant method (see Table below). Process step Instant Invention (pg. 19-20) Zhao Para. Zhao Ex. 4, para. [0065] Yuan, para. [0038]-[0039] Reheat T 1150-1250C 1050-1250C [0033] 1150C 1000-1250C Reheat time 3-12 hr 1-5 hr Initial rolling T 1050C+ 1000-1150C Final rolling T 900C+ 760C+ [0035] 980C 780-980C Rolling steps Roll-in-one Roll directly to final spec. [0054] Quench/aust. T 860-1000C 840-1050C [0037] 930C Quench/aust. time 2-6 hr 2.5 hr (150 min) Cooling Water Quenching* Temper T 400-600 500-650C [0039] 590C Temper time 1-4hr 3 hr Cooling Air Air [0039] air *one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the quenching to be water quenching unless otherwise specified Because the steel of Zhao comprises the claimed composition and the method of Zhao and Yuan is the same as the instant invention, one or ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the microstructure of Zhao and Yuan to comprise the claimed interlamellar carbides distributed between lamellae. When the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP 2112.01. Regarding Claim 6, Zhao discloses the following mechanical properties, which read on and overlap the claimed ranges: Property Claim 6 Zhao (Abstract) Yield strength 1100 MPa or more 900 MPa or more Tensile strength 1250 MPa or more 1150 MPa or more Charpy impact energy (-20C) 70 J or more 70 J or more Elongation 15% or more 15% or more Reduction of area 50% or more 50% or more *one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the quenching to be water quenching unless otherwise specified Zhao is silent towards the Charpy impact energy at room temperature; however, the Charpy impact values of Zhao at -20C are above 80J (see Table 2 of Zhao), and one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that Charpy impact values increase with increasing temperature. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that the steel of Zhao would comprise a Charpy Impact value of 80J or more at room temperature as claimed because room temperature is a higher temperature than -20C. Further, Zhao discloses the claimed composition (see Claim 1 above), and Zhao and Yuan disclose the instant method (see details below). Zhao discloses the instant steps of reheating, hot-rolling, austenizing (quenching) and tempering (see table below), but is silent towards the reheating time and initial rolling temperature during hot-rolling. Yuan teaches reheating at 1000-1250C for 1-5 hours in order to achieve a uniform austenized microstructure while preventing austenite grain growth, thereby facilitating smooth rolling and preventing cracking (para. [0038]). Yuan teaches an initial rolling temperature of 1000-1150C and a finish rolling temperature of 780-980C in order to facilitate the homogenization of deformed austenite and to yield a uniform microstructure and uniform plate thickness after water cooling (para. [0039]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have reheated the steel slab for a time of 1-5 hours and to have comprised an initial rolling temperature of 1000-1150C, as taught by Yuan, for the invention disclosed by Zhao, in order to achieve a uniform austenized microstructure while preventing austenite grain growth, thereby facilitating smooth rolling and preventing cracking, and in order to facilitate the homogenization of deformed austenite and to yield a uniform microstructure and uniform plate thickness after water cooling (see teachings above). Therefore, Zhao and Yuan disclose the instant method (see Table below). Process step Instant Invention (pg. 19-20) Zhao Para. Zhao Ex. 4, para. [0065] Yuan, para. [0038]-[0039] Reheat T 1150-1250C 1050-1250C [0033] 1150C 1000-1250C Reheat time 3-12 hr 1-5 hr Initial rolling T 1050C+ 1000-1150C Final rolling T 900C+ 760C+ [0035] 980C 780-980C Rolling steps Roll-in-one Roll directly to final spec. [0054] Quench/aust. T 860-1000C 840-1050C [0037] 930C Quench/aust. time 2-6 hr 2.5 hr (150 min) Cooling Water Quenching* Temper T 400-600 500-650C [0039] 590C Temper time 1-4hr 3 hr Cooling Air Air [0039] air *one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the quenching to be water quenching unless otherwise specified Because the steel of Zhao comprises the claimed composition and the method of Zhao and Yuan is the same as the instant invention, one or ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the steel of Zhao and Yuan to comprise the claimed mechanical properties. When the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP 2112.01. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CATHERINE P SMITH whose telephone number is (303)297-4428. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00-4:00 MT. 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 Walker can be reached at (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 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. CATHERINE P. SMITH Patent Examiner Art Unit 1735 /CATHERINE P SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 1735 /KEITH WALKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1735