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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 2-4 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on December 16, 2025.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on December 16, 2025 is acknowledged. Claim 1 is pending and independent.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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, the language “Provided is”, is language that can be implied.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102((a)(1)) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Sengoku et al. (US20200032360A1), hereinafter Sengoku (of record in the application).
Regarding claim 1, Sengoku teaches hot-stamped body including a base metal and a plated layer formed on a surface of the base metal, wherein the plated layer includes an interface layer, an intermediate layer and an oxide layer in order from a base metal side ([0014]-[0015]), the base metal is steel ([0100]), the interface layer contains an Fe—Al alloy having a microstructure which contains one or more kinds selected from αFe, Fe3Al and FeAl, a total area fraction of the Fe—Al alloy being 90% or more and the intermediate layer contains an Fe—Al—Zn phase which contains one or more kinds selected from Fe(Al, Zn)2, Fe2(Al, Zn)5 and Fe(Al, Zn)3 ([0016]-[0017]; i.e. including Al-Fe intermetallic compounds, interface with intermediate layer comprises the compound layer of the claim), and further the oxide layer contains Mg as Mg oxide ([0083]-[0084]). Figure 2 is an example of an image of a cross section of the hot stamped body according to one embodiment of the present invention obtained by performing SEM observation ([0033]) and it shows the interface layer +intermediate layer to be ~20 microns thick on one side of the steel (measured by the grid layout shown below in the annotated version of the Figure below) (Fig. 2), and Fig 2. shows the oxide layer on the Al-Fe-based layer is 4 microns thick and 11 oxide particles (white in the oxide layer) between the 2 arrows added by the examiner indicating 20 microns and a particle size of ≤5 microns (i.e. 11 particles/80microns squared which calculates to 137,500 particles/mm2) (Fig. 2). The examiner notes that Cr, Ca, Sr, Ti or the like may also be contained as oxides ([0086]), which indicates to one of ordinary skill in the art that alternatively, the oxides may solely contain Mg.
Annotated Fig. 2
PNG
media_image1.png
535
1045
media_image1.png
Greyscale
This specific example of Figure 2 is a prior art specific example, within the claimed range, which anticipates the range (MPEP 2131.03 I).
Additionally/alternatively, the particle size, thickness and number density are of an example but are approximations to the best of the examiner’s ability based on the prior art of record, and therefore they also are considered to also render the claimed ranges obvious. 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.
Conclusion
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