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 .
Status of Application
Claims 1-13 are pending. Claims 6-13 are withdrawn. Claims 1-5 are presented for examination.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-5 in the reply filed on 4/16/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 6-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 4/16/2026.
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.
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.
1. Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka et al. (JP2004285385, reference is made to the provided English translation) in view of Takeda et al. (U.S. PGPUB No. 2019/0161880).
I. Regarding claims 1-3 and 5, Tanaka teaches a method comprising: providing a steel sheet having a carbon content of 0.04-0.25 % (abstract) and a content of Si and Mn in 0.7-5 % (abstract and note that overlapping ranges are prima facie evidence of obviousness); electroplating the steel sheet with an iron based plating solution to a coating weight of 3-15 g/m2 (abstract and 0016); then annealing (0017); and then hot dip galvanizing (abstract and 0020). Tanaka fails to teach the electroplating step conducted by electroplating in a gap between a continuously running steel sheet and an electrode by passing current using the electrode plate as an anode and the steel sheet as cathode while supplying the plating solution toward the steel sheet. Tanaka also fails to teach the plating solution discharge rate.
However, Takeda teaches a method for electroplating on a continuously running steel sheet (abstract) comprising: conducting electroplating in a gap between an electrode serving as an anode and the steel sheet serving as a cathode by providing a plating solution toward the steel sheet in the gap and passing current to the electrode (Figure 1, Table 1, 0046, and 0089). Additionally, as Takeda teaches the cell being a horizontal cell and provided as shown in Figure 1 with no holes in the electrode plate, all the plating solution will flow down and horizontally and there will be no flow to the back side of the electrode plate, such that the plating solution discharge rate will be 0%. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tanaka’s method by performing the electroplating step on a continuously running steel sheet using the process disclosed by Takeda. One would have been motivated to make this modification as it would allow for a continuous and more efficient process and Takeda teaches the process yields uniform coating thickness and good aesthetic appearance (0049).
II. Regarding claim 4, Tanaka in view of Takeda make obvious claim 1 (see above), but fail to teach a plating solution flow rate as claimed. However, the flow rate will need to be adjusted based on the distance from the sheet, the desired coating weight, and the width of the sheet to provide an optimal coating with a desired thickness and uniformity. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose the instantly claimed range through process optimization, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Conclusion
Claims 1-13 are pending.
Claims 6-13 are withdrawn.
Claims 1-5 are rejected.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT S WALTERS JR whose telephone number is (571)270-5351. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5.
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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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.
/ROBERT S WALTERS JR/
April 29, 2026Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1717
Prosecution Insights