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 1-6 are pending and are presented for this examination.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 06/24/2024 and 09/03/2025 and is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
The terms “slowly” and “rapidly” in claim 1 is relative terms which renders the claim indefinite. The terms “slowly” and “rapidly” are 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.
As a result of rejected claim 1, all dependent claims are also rejected under the same statue.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by JP’539 (JP6627539B2).
As for claims 1 and 6, JP’539 discloses a manufacturing method of carburized and hardened parts (title) performed on the steel member that has been cold forged (English translation Page 1 Background art Section paragraph 2). The method comprising:
Carburizing treatment by permeating and diffusing carbon into a pressed parts for about 30 minutes(English translation Page 4 paragraph 5) in which the Carbon concentration is about 0.7% which suggests steel member and the permeated carbon have a hypoeutectoid composition,
Slow cooling the carburized pressed part so as to infiltrate the carbon,
After the carburizing and slow cooling, induction hardening by reheating to equal to or high than the A3 transformation temperature followed by rapid cooling. (English translation Page 5)
Hence, JP’539 anticipated claims 1 and 6.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 2-3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP’539 in view of Rigo (US20190194793).
As for claims 2 and 5, JP’539 does not disclose nitriding step between carburizing and quenching step such that nitrogen concentration is <=0.5%.
Rigo discloses nitriding a carburized steel which suggests nitriding step between carburizing and quenching step [00027] such that nitrogen concentration on the surface of the steel is 0.05-0.5% at a nitriding temperature of 260-600 degree C. [0032] 260-600 degree C is expected to be lower than the Ac3 as claimed.
Hence, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art, at the time the invention is made to apply a nitriding step after the carburizing step and before the quench step as suggested by Rigo, in the process of JP’539 for the benefit of increasing the surface hardness.
As for claim 3, JP’539 Figure 5 discloses quenching is heating the steel member from lower than Ac3 to above Ac3 and then rapidly cooling the steel that has been heated.
Hence, combined JP’539 would have suggested instant claimed wherein clause.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is 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.
Claim 4 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNY R WU whose telephone number is (571)270-5515. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 AM-5:00 PM.
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 on (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 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.
/JENNY R WU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733
Prosecution Insights