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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The specification contains language which is similar to claim language subject to a 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 7-26 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 7 recites: “a ratio of macro brittle fracture surface in a Charpy impact test at room temperature is 35.0% or less”. At [0063] of the specification, the measurement method of the ratio of macro brittle fracture surface is explained as:
“If the thickness of the steel sheet after removal of the surface layer parts is more than 2.5 to 5 mm, two sheets are superposed and fastened together by bolts to obtain the thickness of the test piece. If the thickness of the steel sheet is 2.5 mm or less, three sheets are superposed and fastened together by bolts to obtain the thickness of the test piece.”
This is indefinite because the meaning of “more than 2.5 to 5 mm” is unclear. If “more than 2.5 to 5 mm” is interpreted to mean “more than the range of 2.5-5 mm” (i.e., more than 5 mm), the specification fails to explain the measurement method for steel sheets having a thickness between 2.5 mm and 5 mm. If “more than 2.5 to 5 mm” is interpreted to mean between 2.5 mm and 5 mm, the specification fails to explain the measurement method for steel sheets having a thickness greater than 5 mm.
Accordingly, the claim is indefinite because the specification is indefinite. Even when interpreting the claim according to either of the two possible interpretations, the specification is indefinite because it fails to provide a full definition. For purposes of examination, the latter interpretation is adopted, and it is further presumed the claimed steel sheet has a thickness of at most 5 mm.
Claims 15-22 recite: “an amount of segregation of P at prior austenite grain boundaries from a 1/8 position of sheet thickness to a 1/2 position of sheet thickness is 3.50 atm% or less”. This limitation is indefinite. It is unclear what “amount of segregation of P” refers to. Is it the P concentration at prior austenite grains? Is it the amount of P in the overall steel sheet which can be found at prior austenite grains? For purposes of examination, the former is presumed.
Claims 23-26 recite: “a coated layer containing at least one of zinc, aluminum, magnesium, and alloys thereof”. This limitation is indefinite. First, given the definition of alloy, “at least one of zinc, aluminum, magnesium” already implies alloys thereof. Second, the wording of the claim implies the presence of at least one of zinc, aluminum, and magnesium, in addition to alloys thereof. Third, what does it mean for a coated layer to contain “at least one of…alloys thereof”? Does this require more than one alloy to be present in the coated layer? For purposes of examination, “and alloys thereof” is ignored.
Dependent claims not addressed are indefinite by virtue of dependence from an indefinite claim.
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 7-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishio et al. (US 2024/0309482).
Regarding claims 7-22, Nishio teaches a steel sheet having the following composition as compared to the claimed composition:
Claim 1
Claim 2 (at least one)
Nishio, ¶ 23
C
0.15%-0.40%
-
0.18%-0.35%
Si
0.01%-2.00%
-
0%-1.00%
Mn
0.80%-3.50%
-
2.0%-4.0%
P
0.0001%-0.0200%
-
≤0.100%
S
0.0001%-0.0200%
-
≤0.010%
Al
0.001%-1.000%
-
≤0.10%
N
0.0001%-0.020%
-
≤0.01%
O
0.0001%-0.020%
-
-
Co
0-0.5000%
0.010%-0.500%
-
Ni
0-1.000%
0.010%-1.00%
≤1.0%
Mo
0-1.000%
0.010%-1.00%
≤.50%
Cr
0-2.000%
0.001%-2.00%
≤1.0%
Ti
0-0.500%
0.001%-0.500%
≤0.050%
B
0-0.0100%
0.0001%-0.010%
≤0.010%
Nb
0-0.500%
0.001%-0.500%
≤0.050
V
0-0.500%
0.001%-0.500%
≤0.50%
Cu
0-0.500%
0.001%-0.500%
≤1.0%
W
0-0.100%
0.001%-0.100%
-
Ta
0-0.100%
0.001%-0.100%
-
Sn
0-0.100%
0.001%-0.100%
-
Sb
0-0.100%
0.001%-0.100%
-
As
0-0.100%
0.001%-0.100%
-
Mg
0-0.0500%
0.0001%-0.0500%
≤0.010%
Ca
0-0.050%
0.001%-0.0500%
≤0.010%
Y
0-0.050%
0.001%-0.0500%
0.0005%-0.050% (REM)
Zr
0-0.050%
0.001%-0.0500%
-
La
0-0.050%
0.001%-0.0500%
0.0005%-0.050% (REM)
Ce
0-0.050%
0.001%-0.0500%
0.0005%-0.050% (REM)
Fe
Balance
-
Balance
The prior art composition overlaps the claimed composition. Nishio also teaches a tensile strength of at least 1400 MPa (¶ 18), and a softer surface region (¶ 103). The microstructure of the steel sheet contains 80%-98% tempered martensite (¶¶ 81-82), 0-5% fresh martensite (¶ 87), and 0-15% ferrite and bainite, preferably 0-10% (¶¶ 83-86). Nishio does not teach the claimed Vickers hardness ratio between surface and center regions, the claimed ratio of macro brittle fracture surface, C content ratio, or P segregation amount. However, the process for making the steel sheet of Nishio is substantially similar to the process for making the claimed steel sheet:
Instant Process [0071] - [0084]
Nishio
Heat slab to 1100°C -1300°C
Heat slab to at least 1100°C (¶ 138)
Hot roll with finish temperature of 850°C -1050°C
Hot roll with a finish temperature of Ar3 temperature of higher (¶ 138)
Cool at 20°C/s or more to a temperature of 500°C or less
Cool from Ar3 temperature to coiling temperature within 10 hours, pref. 5 hours (¶¶ 146-148). This implies a cooling rate of at least 0.02°C/s.
Coiling at 500°C or less
Coiling at 550°C or lower (¶ 143)
Pickling
Pickling (¶ 150)
Cold roll at rate of 35%-80%
Cold rolling at 40%-70% (¶¶ 150-151)
Anneal by heating to 700°C or more with dew point of -30°C to 10°C and a hydrogen concentration of 1%-10%
Heating to at least 700°C at a dew point of -20°C to 20°C and a hydrogen concentration of 1%-20% (¶ 152)
Hold for 20s-150s at maximum temperature of 830°C-900°C
Hold for 30s-200s at 820°C -900°C (¶¶ 155-156)
Hold at a temperature between 400°C-600°C for 2s-350s
Hold at temperature between 425°C -600°C for 200s-700s (¶ 157)
Cool at 20°C/s or more from annealing temperature
Cool at 10°C/s or faster (¶¶ 160, 165)
The prior art process is substantially similar to the process for making the claimed product. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect the prior art steel sheet to exhibit the claimed properties, absent objective evidence to the contrary. See MPEP 2112.
Regarding claims 23-26, Nishio teaches hot-dip galvanizing the steel sheet (¶ 30); thus, a coating layer comprising Zn or Zn alloy is applied to the steel sheet.
Claims 7-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishio et al. (US 2024/0309482) in view of Takashima et al. (US 2022/0275471).
Regarding claims 7-22, Nishio teaches a steel sheet having the following composition as compared to the claimed composition:
Claim 1
Claim 2 (at least one)
Nishio, ¶ 23
C
0.15%-0.40%
-
0.18%-0.35%
Si
0.01%-2.00%
-
0%-1.00%
Mn
0.80%-3.50%
-
2.0%-4.0%
P
0.0001%-0.0200%
-
≤0.100%
S
0.0001%-0.0200%
-
≤0.010%
Al
0.001%-1.000%
-
≤0.10%
N
0.0001%-0.020%
-
≤0.01%
O
0.0001%-0.020%
-
-
Co
0-0.5000%
0.010%-0.500%
-
Ni
0-1.000%
0.010%-1.00%
≤1.0%
Mo
0-1.000%
0.010%-1.00%
≤.50%
Cr
0-2.000%
0.001%-2.00%
≤1.0%
Ti
0-0.500%
0.001%-0.500%
≤0.050%
B
0-0.0100%
0.0001%-0.010%
≤0.010%
Nb
0-0.500%
0.001%-0.500%
≤0.050
V
0-0.500%
0.001%-0.500%
≤0.50%
Cu
0-0.500%
0.001%-0.500%
≤1.0%
W
0-0.100%
0.001%-0.100%
-
Ta
0-0.100%
0.001%-0.100%
-
Sn
0-0.100%
0.001%-0.100%
-
Sb
0-0.100%
0.001%-0.100%
-
As
0-0.100%
0.001%-0.100%
-
Mg
0-0.0500%
0.0001%-0.0500%
≤0.010%
Ca
0-0.050%
0.001%-0.0500%
≤0.010%
Y
0-0.050%
0.001%-0.0500%
0.0005%-0.050% (REM)
Zr
0-0.050%
0.001%-0.0500%
-
La
0-0.050%
0.001%-0.0500%
0.0005%-0.050% (REM)
Ce
0-0.050%
0.001%-0.0500%
0.0005%-0.050% (REM)
Fe
Balance
-
Balance
The prior art composition overlaps the claimed composition. Nishio also teaches a tensile strength of at least 1400 MPa (¶ 18), and a softer surface region (¶ 103). The microstructure of the steel sheet contains 80%-98% tempered martensite (¶¶ 81-82), 0-5% fresh martensite (¶ 87), and 0-15% ferrite and bainite, preferably 0-10% (¶¶ 83-86). Nishio does not teach the claimed Vickers hardness ratio between surface and center regions, the claimed ratio of macro brittle fracture surface, C content ratio, or P segregation amount. However, the process for making the steel sheet of Nishio is substantially similar to the process for making the claimed steel sheet:
Instant Process [0071] - [0084]
Nishio
Heat slab to 1100°C -1300°C
Heat slab to at least 1100°C (¶ 138)
Hot roll with finish temperature of 850°C -1050°C
Hot roll with a finish temperature of Ar3 temperature of higher (¶ 138)
Cool at 20°C/s or more to a temperature of 500°C or less
Cool from Ar3 temperature to coiling temperature within 10 hours, pref. 5 hours (¶¶ 146-148). This implies a cooling rate of at least 0.02°C/s.
Coiling at 500°C or less
Coiling at 550°C or lower (¶ 143)
Pickling
Pickling (¶ 150)
Cold roll at rate of 35%-80%
Cold rolling at 40%-70% (¶¶ 150-151)
Anneal by heating to 700°C or more with dew point of -30°C to 10°C and a hydrogen concentration of 1%-10%
Heating to at least 700°C at a dew point of -20°C to 20°C and a hydrogen concentration of 1%-20% (¶ 152)
Hold for 20s-150s at maximum temperature of 830°C-900°C
Hold for 30s-200s at 820°C -900°C (¶¶ 155-156)
Hold at a temperature between 400°C-600°C for 2s-350s
Hold at temperature between 425°C -600°C for 200s-700s (¶ 157)
Cool at 20°C/s or more from annealing temperature
Cool at 10°C/s or faster (¶¶ 160, 165)
Except for the cooling rate after hot rolling and before coiling, Nishio teaches a process which is substantially similar to the process for making the claimed product. Takashima discloses a steel sheet having a similar composition and teaches that cooling at hot rolling should be performed at a rate of 30°C/s or faster to avoid ferrite coarsening and a non-homogeneous microstructure (¶ 163). It would have been obvious at the effective time of filing for the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to adopt the cooling rate taught by Takashima in the process of Nishio to avoid the formation of coarse ferrite, leading to a non-homogeneous microstructure. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect the steel sheet of the prior art combination to exhibit the claimed properties, absent objective evidence to the contrary. See MPEP 2112.
Regarding claims 23-26, Nishio teaches hot-dip galvanizing the steel sheet (¶ 30); thus, a coating layer comprising Zn or Zn alloy is applied to the steel sheet.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Minami et al. (US 2021/0381075) and Kawamura (US 2013/0048151) disclose a steel sheet having similar properties with respect to tensile strength and Vickers hardness profile. However, Minami and Kawamura do not teach or suggest the claimed ratio of macro brittle fracture surface, nor does Minami or Kawamura teach or suggest the process for making the claimed steel sheet.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XIAOBEI WANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5705. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-5PM EST.
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.
/XIAOBEI WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Prosecution Insights