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 .
Claim Status
Applicants’ September 23, 2026 response to the June 23, 2026 Non-Final Rejection is acknowledged. Any rejections and/or objections, made in the previous Office Action, and not repeated below, are hereby withdrawn. Claims 1-3, 5 and 6 are pending; claim 1 is independent.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided. Specifically, “An embodiment of the present invention discloses” is language that can be implied.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoichi et al. (J6715399B1, herein referring to the Google Patents June 18, 2026 translation and original figures), hereinafter Yoichi (of record).
Regarding claim 1, Yoichi teaches a plated steel sheet hot-dipped (plated on a surface) with a plating layer of Al: 40-70 mass%, Si: 0.6-5 mass%, Mg: 0.1-10 mass%, Sr: 0.001-1 mass%, balance Zn and impurities (Abstract; Zn includes14 to 59.3 mass% as calculated) and Mg2Si in a cross section in the thickness direction of the plating layer with an area ratio of 50% or more in the thickness from range of 50% or more from the surface of the main layer (a surface layer) and 50% or less area ratio from the main surface to the interface alloy layer (Abstract) and this layer is shown to have Zn phase (Fig. 2). Examiner notes that Zinc rich is subject to broadest reasonable interpretation to any degree of Zinc, as the surface layer is shown to have Mg2Si and zinc in a surface layer, and the prior art teaches potentially all (at least 50%) of the Mg2Si is in the surface layer, which overlaps with the claimed limitations. (Mg2Si is an intermetallic compound of Mg).
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists, (MPEP 2144.05 I). The proportions disclosed by the prior art overlap applicants claimed proportions and therefore establish a prima facie case of obviousness, where one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to select from the proportions disclosed by the prior art, including those proportions, which satisfy the presently claimed requirements (MPEP 2144.05 I). As of the writing of this Office Action, no objective evidence of criticality to the claimed ranges has been presented.
With regards to “for hot pressing”, this occurs before the transitional phrase and lacks sufficient structure to further limit the claim and is therefore considered an intended use of the semifinished product. See MPEP 2111.02. Yoichi teaches a substantially identical product as that which is claimed and is considered to meet the claimed intended use.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 3, 5 and 6 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 to the instant claims is Yoichi et al. (J6715399B1, herein referring to the Google Patents June 18, 2026 translation and original figures), hereinafter Yoichi (of record), as applied to claim 1 above. Yoichi does not teach or suggest, alone or in combination with the prior art the plated layer has a Sr-based oxide layer on a surface of the plated layer, nor the Mg-based intermetallic compound comprises a Mg2Si phase.
Response to Arguments
Examiner notes that the specification objection is unaddressed and remains above.
Applicants’ amendments and related arguments, see Pgs. 5 and 6, filed September 23, 2026, with respect to claim objection and 112(b) rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim objection and 112(b) rejections of June 23, 2026 have been withdrawn.
Applicants’ amendments and related arguments, see Pgs. 6, 7 and 10, filed September 23, 2026, with rejections in view of Sengoku and Liu have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections in view of Liu and in view of Sengoku of June 23, 2026 have been withdrawn. Specifically, they do not teach magnesium of a surface layer of the plated layer is distributed as an Mg-based intermetallic compound and 80% or more of the Mg-based intermetallic compound is distributed in a Zn rich region located in the surface layer of the plated layer.
Applicant's arguments filed September 23, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive regarding the obviousness rejections in view of Yoichi. Applicant is importing further limitations not recited in the claims as they argue to attempt to distinguish the claim over Yoichi. For example, the argument that the Mg-based intermetallic compound is located laterally on the surface layer is not commensurate in scope with the claim limitation presently recited, and therefore not persuasive. Similarly, applicant is interpreting zinc rich region more narrowly than warranted under broadest reasonable interpretation (any amount of zinc makes a region “zinc rich” compared to having no zinc). Therefore, this argument is also not persuasive.
For these reasons, and for those reasons as advanced in the rejections above, the present claims are not found to distinguish over the prior art and this action is made FINAL.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHERINE CHRISTY whose telephone number is (303)297-4363. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 7am-4pm 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, Humera Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-0604. 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.
/KATHERINE A CHRISTY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784
