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
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 11 May 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 15-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 11 May 2026.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: Regarding Claim 2, at line 2, “at” is superfluous. 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 1-14 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.
Regarding Claim 1, it is unclear what is meant by “constituent area” and “constituent particle area”. Firstly, it is unclear what is a “constituent”. Is this a grain, an inclusion, a precipitate, an additive, any or all of the above. Secondly, it is unclear whether it could be “Mg2Si”. This rejection applies to Claims 10 and 11.
Regarding Claim 1, it is unclear, both instances, what is meant by “average . . . particle area of . . . particles per square micrometer”. A measure of “particles per square micrometer” is not a particle area. Rather, it is an area density, or the like. This rejection applies to Claims 9 and 11.
Regarding Claims 12 and 13, it is unclear what method is being claimed for assessing claimed properties.
Regarding Claim 14, it is unclear what is “conventional AA3004”.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 2-14 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding Claims 1-14, the reviewed prior art does not teach or suggest the subject matter of these claims. Particularly, the reviewed prior art does not teach or suggest the claimed sheet composition and thickness with the further characteristics of at least one of (i)-(v) in the claimed context. For example, Dorward USPN 6,004,409 teaches or suggests aluminum sheet of claimed composition (Alloy B: col. 5, line 56) and thickness (col. 2, line 34) but does not expressly teach or suggest any characteristics of (i)-(v) or provide basis for establishing inherency of these characteristics. It is noted that Dorward does not teach applicant’s method of tempering to obtain these characteristics either. See Specification (paragraph 71) and see Dorward (entire document).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL E. LA VILLA whose telephone number is (571)272-1539. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. through Fri. from 9:00 a.m. ET to 5:30 p.m. ET.
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 N. 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.
/MICHAEL E. LA VILLA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784
29 July 2026
Prosecution Insights