DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
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 1-6 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 1, 4 and 6, the term "determined" are relative term which render the claims indefinite. The term "determined" 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 invention.
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 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagai. (JP 2008190001 with English translation attached).
Regarding claim 1, Nagai teaches a gas wiping nozzle that is configured to blow gas to a steel strip pulled up from a molten metal bath to adjust a coating weight of a molten metal on a surface of the steel strip as shown in Fig. 1 ([0002], [0009], Fig. 1), wherein: at least a surface of the gas wiping nozzle is made of a ceramic with a rough surface ([0030]). However, it is the position of the examiner that disclosure the properties or function of the surface roughness with the formula (1) in the claim is expected, is expected, given the same material of the surface of the gas wiping nozzle is made of a ceramic meet the required material disclosed by Nagai and the present application having the same material.
Regarding claim 2, Nagai teaches wherein the entire gas wiping nozzle is made of a ceramic ([0030]).
Regarding claim 3, Nagai teaches a method for manufacturing a hot-dip metal-coated steel strip as shown in Fig. 1 ([0001], [0002], Fig. 1), the method comprising: continuously dipping a steel strip in a bath of molten metal bath as shown in Fig. 1 ([0002], [0020], Fig. 1); and adjusting a coating weight of the molten metal on both sides of the steel strip by blowing a gas to the steel strip from a plurality of the gas wiping nozzle according to Claim 1 that are disposed to face each other with the steel strip, which is pulled up from the bath, therebetween to continuously manufacture the hot-dip metal- coated steel strip as shown in Fig. 1 ([0002], [0011], [0014]-[0020], [0030], Fig. 1). However, it is the position of the examiner that disclosure the properties or function of the surface roughness with the formula (1) in the claim is expected, is expected, given the same material of the surface of the gas wiping nozzle is made of a ceramic meet the required material disclosed by Nagai and the present application having the same material.
Regarding claim 4, Nagai teaches a method for manufacturing the gas wiping nozzle according to Claim 1, the method comprising: selecting a material of the gas wiping nozzle or of a surface of the gas wiping nozzle; selecting a processing method and processing conditions for the surface of the gas wiping nozzle; and manufacturing the gas wiping nozzle according to the selected processing method and processing conditions, wherein the material and/or the processing method and the processing conditions are selected ([0002], [0010], [0011], [0030], [0031]). However, it is the position of the examiner that disclosure the properties or function of the surface roughness with the formula (1) in the claim is expected, is expected, given the same material of the surface of the gas wiping nozzle is made of a ceramic meet the required material disclosed by Nagai and the present application having the same material.
Regarding claim 5, Nagai teaches a method for manufacturing a hot-dip metal-coated steel strip as shown in Fig. 1 ([0001], [0002], Fig. 1), the method comprising: continuously dipping a steel strip in a bath of molten metal bath as shown in Fig. 1 ([0002], [0020], Fig. 1); and adjusting a coating weight of the molten metal on both sides of the steel strip by blowing a gas to the steel strip from a plurality of the gas wiping nozzle according to Claim 2 that are disposed to face each other with the steel strip, which is pulled up from the bath, therebetween to continuously manufacture the hot-dip metal- coated steel strip as shown in Fig. 1 ([0002], [0011], [0014]-[0020], [0030], Fig. 1). However, it is the position of the examiner that disclosure the properties or function of the surface roughness with the formula (1) in the claim is expected, is expected, given the same material of the surface of the gas wiping nozzle is made of a ceramic meet the required material disclosed by Nagai and the present application having the same material.
Regarding claim 6, Nagai teaches a method for manufacturing the gas wiping nozzle according to Claim 2, the method comprising: selecting a material of the gas wiping nozzle or of a surface of the gas wiping nozzle; selecting a processing method and processing conditions for the surface of the gas wiping nozzle; and manufacturing the gas wiping nozzle according to the selected processing method and processing conditions, wherein the material and/or the processing method and the processing conditions are selected ([0002], [0010], [0011], [0030], [0031]). However, it is the position of the examiner that disclosure the properties or function of the surface roughness with the formula (1) in the claim is expected, is expected, given the same material of the surface of the gas wiping nozzle is made of a ceramic meet the required material disclosed by Nagai and the present application having the same material.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAI YAN ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-7181. The examiner can normally be reached on MTTHF.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, DAH-WEI YUAN can be reached on 5712721295. 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 Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HAI Y ZHANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1717