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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Japan on 6 July 2022. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the Japanese application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 27 February 2025 was considered by the examiner.
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 1-15 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.
In regards to independent claim 1, the term “discontinuous region” renders the claim indefinite since the metes and bounds of this particular limitation cannot be determined. First, the instant claims utilizes a laser microscope image for the bonding interface, however there is no guidance as to the magnification or other properties utilized in measuring the bonding interface. The magnification of the laser microscope can range from low magnification to very high magnification. Greater magnification provides for greater detail as to the structure of the bonding interface. In such a situation, a lower magnification may show an interface that has more uniform structure versus a higher magnification that indicates greater variance.
This term is also unclear since it is not clear how the discontinuous region length is measured. It is not clear if the length is determined by the pitch of the perpendicular lines (viz. the total of where the perpendicular lines cross line of the bonding interface line), taken as the length between certain perpendicular lines, is measured in a straight line between these components or follows along the interface (which may not be perfectly straight), etc.
This claim further sets forth the term “the remaining bonding interface” in the twelfth and thirteenth lines of the claim. This limitation lacks proper antecedent basis. Further, it is not clear what would be considered to be a remaining bonding interface. For example, such a term could refer to the other parts of the bonding interface that are not part of a discontinuous region or it could mean that this is where the bonding interface is present amid portions wherein the bonding interface is not present. It is also not clear at what point a bonding interface would be considered to be present versus not present.
Further, it is not clear within the claim what is intended by the phrase “a position wherein the bonding interface was present” in the ninth line of the claim. It is not clear how when such a feature is not present that its location would be determined. It is also not clear if this use of the past tense indicates that the bonding interface is still present or is no longer present.
Claims 2-15 depend from claim 1 and incorporate the limitations therein. Accordingly, claims 2-15 are rejected for the reasons set forth above in regards to independent claim 1.
As to claims 13 and 14 these claims set forth age-hardenable copper alloys with limitations included within parentheses following the items on the list. It is not clear whether these limitations set forth in the parentheses are intended to be further limiting or merely exemplary. For the purposes of examination the Office is interpreting these to be merely exemplary. If Applicant intended such limitations to be further limiting, Applicant is encouraged to remove the items from the parentheses and properly incorporate such limitations within the list of age-hardenable copper alloys set forth within the instant claims.
Citation of Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2024/0269744 is directed to a bonded body of copper alloy and steel material that has high bonding property at the interface of the copper alloy and the steel material, and is capable of maintaining a high strength without carrying out the subsequent precipitation hardening process accompanied by solution annealing (or by carrying out only the precipitation hardening process that is not accompanied by the solution annealing). (Abstract) The bonded body, when the cross section perpendicular to the bonding interface is observed by a scanning electron microscope (SEM), is free of voids having a length of 50 μm or more at the bonding interface in a direction parallel to the bonding interface. (Abstract) This reference does not teach the discontinuous region as set forth within the instant claims.
U.S. Patent Number 12,337,407 is directed to a copper alloy bonded body composed of a plurality of members made of an age-hardenable copper alloy, the members diffusion-bonded to one another. (Abstract) A treatment is provided so that a bonding interface between the members has disappeared. (Claim 1) This reference includes common inventors as the instant application.
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