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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 27 November 2024 was considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 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.
Claims 1-7 and 10-15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Number 10,737,332 (Hirano).
In regards to independent claim 1 and dependent claims 2-7 and 11-12, Hirano is directed to a coated cutting tool comprising a substrate and a coating layer formed on a surface of the substrate. (Abstract) Hirano found that an improvement of fracture resistance can be achieved without a reduction in wear resistance by improving the layer configuration of a coating layer and the composition thereof. (1:60-67) By this method, the tool life of the coated cutting tool can be extended. Id.
The coated cutting tool includes an alternating laminate structure of an alternating laminate of a first composite nitride layer and a second composite nitride layer. (2:1-29) The first composite nitride layer has a composition of (TixAl1-x)N, wherein x denotes an atomic ratio of the Ti element based on a total of the Ti element and the Al element and satisfies 0.10≤x≤0.35. Id. The second composite nitride layer has a composition of (TiyAlzM1-y-z)N, wherein: M denotes an element of at least one kind selected from the group consisting of Zr, Hf, V, Nb, Ta, Cr, Mo, W, Si and Y; y denotes an atomic ratio of the Ti element based on a total of the Ti element, the Al element and an element denoted by M; z denotes an atomic ratio of the Al element based on a total of the Ti element, the Al element and the element denoted by M; y satisfies 0.30≤y≤0.90; z satisfies 0.10≤z≤0.70; and y and z satisfy y+z≤1. Id. These ranges overlap or are sufficiently close that one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected them to have the same properties. Accordingly, a prima facie case of obviousness exists.
The average thickness of each of the layers of the first composite nitride layer is from 4 nm to 200 nm. (2:40-43) The average thickness of each of the layers of the second composite nitride layers is from 4 nm to 200 nm. (2:44-47) Therefore, the resulting average layer period thickness would overlap the claimed range. Accordingly, a prima facie case of obviousness exists.
As to claim 10, the average thickness of the alternating laminate structure is from 1.5 microns to 12 microns. (2:58-60) This range falls within the claimed range.
As to claim 13, the method of manufacturing the coating layer in the coated cutting tool is not limited, and may include PVD methods such as an ion plating method, an arc ion plating method, a sputtering method, and an ion mixing method. (9:16-26) Therefore, the resulting product would not be patentably distinct from that of the prior art.
As to claim 14, the substrate of the cutting tool can be a cemented carbide, cermet, ceramic, or cubic boron nitride sintered body. (3:16-18)
As to claim 15, the coated cutting tool can include an indexable cutting insert for milling or turning, a drill, and an end mill. (11:13-16)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-9 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel Schleis whose telephone number is (571)270-5636. The examiner can normally be reached 10 AM to 4 PM Monday through Friday.
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.
Daniel J. Schleis
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1784
/Daniel J. Schleis/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Prosecution Insights