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.
Claim(s) 12-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hardwick et al. (2020/0306869A1) in view of Larsson et al. (10,661,379) and Sato et al. (2009/0090700A1).
Regarding claim 12, Hardwick discloses an additive friction stir deposition device comprising: a shoulder 303a configured to rotate about a central axis, the shoulder comprising a channel 304a-b extending from a first end of the shoulder to a second end of the shoulder, the channel configured to allow a filler material 319 to pass through the shoulder from the first end towards the second end, the shoulder further configured to deposit the filler material as the device is advanced along a deposition surface (paragraphs 0093-0124, figure 3A-3AM).
Hardwick does not disclose a wire brush skirt configured to co-rotate with the shoulder and contact the deposition surface as the device is advanced along the deposition surface; and a gas shroud configured to direct pressurized gas toward the deposition surface and remove contaminants as the device is advanced along the deposition surface, the wire brush skirt being permeable or semi-permeable to brushed particles.
However, Larsson discloses a friction stir tool using a brush (bottom portion of 430) configured to co-rotate with the shoulder and contact the deposition surface as the device is advanced along the deposition surface (column 8 line 50-63, column 13 line 51 to column 14 line 3, figure 3A). To one skilled in the art at the time of the invention it would have been obvious to use a brushing unit in order to remove any contaminates or excess material left on the surface after the friction stir process. While Larsson does not disclose that the brush skit is wire, it would have been obvious to use wire as the brush is used to move plasticized material. The brush would have to be suitable to be able to withstand the temperature of the plasticized metal. The invention is directed to an apparatus. The particles do not further limit the apparatus. With that being said, Larsson does disclose that the brush is permeable to air. Particles can be smaller than air particles. The brush of Larsson can be permeable or semi-permeable to small particles on the surface of the workpiece.
Hardwick does not disclose a gas shroud configured to direct pressurized gas toward the deposition surface and remove contaminants as the device is advanced along the deposition surface. However, Sato discloses a friction stir tool with a gas shroud 3 that surrounds the friction stir apparatus an applies an inert shielding gas to shield the workpiece at an area of the stirring (paragraph 0019, figure 1). To one skilled in the art at the time of the invention it would have been obvious to use a shroud as taught by Sato to prevent oxidation during the stirring (paragraph 0019). Since the brush is air permeable (column 2 lines 31-50 of Larsson), it would necessarily flow that the gas would enter at the plurality of openings of the collar.
Regarding claim 13, Larsson discloses that fixtures are used to couple the collar and the shoulder comprising an adapter (resilient or adjustable connection) configured to couple the collar to the shoulder (column 13 line 50 to column 14 line 3).
Regarding claim 14, Larsson discloses a collar 430 configured to couple the wire brush skirt to the shoulder (figure 3A).
Regarding claims 15, 16, Larsson discloses connecting by a resilient or adjustable connection. Based on the current specification, there can be many ways to join the collar and shoulder. There is no criticality to any of the embodiments. It would appear that this is a design choice. With that being said, it would have been obvious to determine the ideal/best way to connect the collar and shoulder to prevent any movement or misalignment that would prevent the friction stirring process from being performed correctly.
Regarding claim 17, Hardwick discloses that shoulder comprises an outer diameter that decreases from an upper portion to a lower portion, the upper portion of the shoulder having a first diameter, a middle portion of the shoulder having a second diameter, and the lower portion of the shoulder having a third diameter (figure 3G).
Regarding claim 18, Hardwick with Larsson and Sato disclose that the collar is coupled to the lower portion of the shoulder and the gas shroud is positioned around the middle portion of the shoulder (figure 3A of Larsson and figure 1 of Sato). Since the collar is coupled to the tool, it would be coupled to the lower portion of the shoulder.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-11 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: prior art was not found that taught or suggested the apparatus as claimed that included a wire brush skirt comprising a plurality of wires arranged in an overlapping pattern.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/4/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues that Larsson states that the brush contains the flash and would not be permeable or semi-permeable to brushed particles.
The Examiner disagrees. The brushed particles are material worked upon and do not further limit the apparatus. Larsson does disclose that the brush is permeable to air. Extremely small brushed particles can be present that would be move through the brush the same way the air particles would. The brush of Larsson can be permeable or semi-permeable to small particles on the surface of the workpiece.
Claims 1-11 are allowable.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIN B SAAD whose telephone number is (571)270-3634. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30a-6p.
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, Keith Walker can be reached at 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 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.
/ERIN B SAAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights