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 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 11-15, 17 and 20-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (CN 105087981-A, hereafter “Wang”, see attached document) in view of Tian et al. (CN 102676867-A, hereafter “Tian”, see attached document), and further as evidenced by Heat Treating of Copper and Its Alloys (ASM Handbook, vol. 4E, 2016, see attached NPL).
Regarding claims 11 and 29, Wang discloses a method for preparing a nanoparticle dispersion strengthened copper alloy (abstract, tech. field, [0010]), comprising the steps of: S1: preparing Cu-Al2O3 dispersed copper powder from Cu-Al alloy powder by internal oxidation and reduction [0018]; and S2: mixing the Cu-Al2O3 dispersed copper powder prepared with Cr powder to obtain a composite powder [0013, 0019], and subjecting the composite powder to press forming into a blank and hot press sintering; wherein the hot press sintering is conducted at a temperature of 1060°C for 5 hours, which meets within recited range of 900 to 1070°C and a duration range of 2-8 hours (examples 1-3).
Wang is silent concerning sheath moulding, hot extrusion, solid solution treatment, cold deformation, and then aging treatment; Wang also does not mention an approximate pressure of 40 to 80 MPa for the hot press sintering. However, such sintering pressure and subsequent steps are known in the art. Analogous to Wang, Tian (also drawn to alumina particle dispersion-strengthened copper composite material- abstract) discloses mixing raw material powder and hot press sintering in a furnace at temperature of 950-1000 °C under deformation pressure within 30-100 MPa (meets 40-80 MPa) for a duration of 2 to 4 hours (claim 2, [0012]), which also meets recited range of 2-8 hours. 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. After the sintering, Tian teaches further performing moulding, hot extrusion to obtain a rod material [0014, 0033], cold drawing deformation [0016, 0035], thereby resulting in a composite rod having high-strength, high-conduction and high temperature-resistance advantages to satisfy applications in aerospace or microelectronics such as power wire (abstract, Background- [0002]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to perform subsequent sheath moulding, hot extrusion, and cold deforming after sintering in the method of Wang with a motivation to produce a composite rod/wire having high-strength, high-conduction and high temperature-resistance advantages for applications in microelectronics such as power wire, as suggested by Tian.
With respect to solid solution treatment & aging, examiner notes these techniques are common knowledge and also known as “precipitation hardening” for desired properties adaption. As evidence, ASM Handbook teaches that typical solution heat treatment temperatures ranges from about 800-1000 °C and aging temperature of about 300-550 °C (pg. 315, pg. 316- Table 6). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement solid solution and aging hardening treatments in the method of Wang sinch such mechanism is conventional for strengthening copper alloys, as shown by ASM handbook.
Thus, Wang as modified by teachings of Tian & ASM above discloses producing a dispersion-strengthened copper (DSC) alloy comprising the recited steps and renders the claim obvious.
As to claims 12 and 22, Wang discloses that the main components of the nanoparticle dispersion-strengthened copper alloy are copper, Al2O3 and Cr, wherein the DSC alloy contains Al2O3 of about 1.2 wt% (meets 0.23 to 4.5 vol%) and Cr of about 5 wt% [0029], which overlaps with the claimed range.
As to claim 13, Wang discloses that the internal oxidation includes steps of melting Al and Cu at 1200°C to prepare the alloy powder by atomization using a protective gas, and then mixing the resulting alloy powder with an oxidizing agent for oxidation reaction, wherein the oxidizing agent is at least one of Cu2O ([0018], example 3).
As to claim 14, Wang teaches proportioning of the oxidizing agent (Cu2O) to the alloy powder based on interior oxygen in the container [0018]. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select suitable mass ratio, including 0.5:1 to 2:1, in the method of Wang in order to achieve desired oxidation.
As to claim 15, examiner takes official notice with respect to using nitrogen or inert gas as the protective gas- see Li reference below.
As to claim 17, Wang discloses, in example 1, that the internal oxidation is conducted at a temperature of 960°C for 2.5 hours [0029], which falls within the claimed range.
As to claim 20, Tian discloses that the hot extrusion is conducted in a temperature range of 900-1000°C, wherein the extruding ratio is more than 10:1 ([0014], claim 2), which overlaps with 900-920°C and extrusion ratio of no less than 8:1. 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.
As to claim 21, Wang as modified in light of ASM handbook above discloses aging treatment conducted at a temperature within approximate range of 300°C to 500°C for a duration of about 1-4 hours, (ASM, pg. 316- Table 6), which overlaps with recited ranges.
As to claim 23, Wang teaches proportioning of the oxidizing agent (Cu2O) to the alloy powder based on interior oxygen in the container [0018]. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select suitable mass ratio including O:AI range from 0.5:1 to 2:1 in the method of Wang in order to achieve desired degree of oxidation.
As to claim 24, Tian discloses that the hot extrusion is conducted in a temperature range of 900-1000°C ([0014], claim 2), which encompasses claimed range of 900-920°C.
As to claim 25, Wang as modified by ASM handbook above discloses that solid solution treatment is conducted at a temperature ranging from 900°C to 1000°C for a duration ranging from 2 to 4 hours, and encompasses water-quenching (ASM- pg. 315, pg. 316- Table 6). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists.
As to claims 26-28, Wang as modified by Tian above discloses that the cold drawing deformation is conducted to a ratio of 80% or more (see Tian – [0016, 0036]), which meets 80% to 85%.
Claims 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Tian & ASM as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Li et al. (CN 101240387-A, see attached document, hereafter “Li”).
As to claim 16, Wang or Tian fails to mention a step of sieving the alloy powder obtained by atomization. However, such feature is known in the art. Li (also directed to producing nano-alumina DSC copper alloy- abstract) teaches that in preparing the Cu-Al2O3 nano-dispersion strengthening alloy, the Cu-Al alloy melt is atomized with a high-purity nitrogen gas, then alloy powder is crushed and sieved to use particle size of 70-100 µm as an internal oxide powder [0016, 0022], wherein resulting nano-sized particles dispersed in the matrix and provide high heat-resistance, strength stability and high conductivity [0030]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to carry out step of sieving the atomized alloy powder to sieve out the powder with a target particle size in the method of Wang in order to produce nano-sized particles provide high heat-resistance, strength stability and high conductivity, as suggested by Li.
As to claim 17, Li also discloses that the internal oxidation is conducted at a temperature of 850-920°C for 1 hr [0018], which falls within the claimed range.
As to claims 18-19, Wang mentions performing reduction after the internal oxidation, but does not mention temperature or time. However, such conditions are known in the art. Li discloses producing nano-alumina DSC copper alloy by internal oxidation followed by reduction [0005], wherein the reduction includes crushing the alloy powder obtained by the internal oxidation and then conducting hydrogen reduction at 800°C to 900°C for 1.5 hr [0022-0023, 0026-0027]. This overlaps with recited conditions. Li discloses the process is particularly suitable for the manufacture of high-precision components such as microwave tube grid, instrument sensor or particle accelerator [0030]. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to tailor the reduction treatment in the method of Wang, Tian & ASM with a motivation to fabricate specific component such as microwave tube grid, instrument sensor or particle accelerator.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/16/24 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
