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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 2, 9, 11, 14, 15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Harima (US 2022/0037750 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Harima discloses:
A welding horn [horn (42); 0036 and figures 5 and 6] comprising:
a body portion [horizontal portion of the horn] extending in a first direction; and
an extension portion [vertical portion of the horn] extending in a second direction crossing the first direction from an end of the body portion, and is configured to pressurize a welding object connected to an electrode assembly, the extension portion comprising:
a lower surface [surface upon which knurls (40) extend from] facing the welding object;
a first corner portion [left corner] connected to one end of the lower surface and facing the electrode assembly;
a first side surface [left side of the vertical portion] extending from the first corner portion to the body portion; and
a tip portion [knurls (40)] protruding from the lower surface and contacting the welding object, the tip portion being offset from a center of the lower surface toward the first corner portion [the first row knurls on the left is offset from the center; figures 5 and 6],
wherein the tip portion directly contacts an edge of the first corner portion [see figure 5].
Regarding claim 14, Harima discloses:
A welding device [device (100); 0036 and figure 5 and 6] comprising:
an anvil [anvil (45); figure 5] on which a lead tab and a strip terminal are arranged to overlap each other; and
a welding horn [horn (42); 0036 and figure 5] configured to apply ultrasonic waves while pressurizing an overlapping surface of the lead tab and the strip terminal arranged on the anvil, the welding horn comprising:
a body portion [horizontal portion of the horn] extending in a first direction; and
an extension portion [vertical portion of the horn] extending in a second direction crossing the first direction from an end of the body portion, and is configured to pressurize a welding object connected to an electrode assembly, the extension portion comprising:
a lower surface [surface upon which knurls (40) extend from] facing the overlapping surface;
a first corner portion [left corner] connected to one end of the lower surface and facing the lead tab;
a first side surface [left side of the vertical portion] extending from the first corner portion to the body portion [see figure 1]; and
a tip portion [knurls (40)] protruding from the lower surface and contacting the overlapping surface, the tip portion being offset from a center of the lower surface toward the first corner portion [the first row knurls on the left is offset from the center],
wherein the tip portion directly contacts an edge of the first corner portion [see figure 5].
Regarding claims 2 and 15, Harima discloses:
wherein the first corner portion is in a form of a curved surface having a curvature [see figure 5].
Regarding claim 9, Harima discloses:
wherein the extension portion further comprises:
a second corner portion [right corner in figure 5] connected to another end of the lower surface; and
a second side surface [right side of the vertical portion] extending from the second corner portion to the body portion [see figure 5], and opposite to the first side surface [see figure 5], and
wherein the second corner portion is in a form of a curved surface having a curvature [see figure 5].
Regarding claim 11, Harima discloses:
wherein the tip portion comprises a plurality of protrusions arranged in at least one row [see figure 6].
Regarding claim 17, Harima discloses:
wherein the tip portion is positioned to be spaced from the first side surface by a length corresponding to a radius of curvature of the first corner portion [see figure 5].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 2, 7-9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong et al. (US 2024/0100622 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Zhong teaches:
A welding horn [welding head (30); figures 1 and 3] comprising:
a body portion [welding head body (32)] extending in a first direction; and
an extension portion [second action portion (34)] extending in a second direction crossing the first direction from an end of the body portion, and is configured to pressurize a welding object connected to an electrode assembly, the extension portion comprising:
a lower surface [surface upon which welding teeth (341) extend from] facing the welding object;
a first corner portion [the longer front facing corner facing the observer in figure 3] connected to one end of the lower surface and facing the electrode assembly;
a first side surface [front facing surface in figure 3] extending from the first corner portion to the body portion; and
a tip portion [front row of welding teeth (341)] protruding from the lower surface and contacting the welding object.
Zhong does not teach:
the tip portion being offset from a center of the lower surface toward the first corner portion,
wherein the tip portion directly contacts an edge of the first corner portion.
However, Zhong teaches the working surface of first action portion (14) is an 3X10 array of teeth wherein the outside row of teeth are in direct contact with an edge of the corner portion; see figure 2.
Since Zhong does not depict a similar view of the second action portion it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to construct the working surface of the second action portion in a similar manner. In doing so, the second action portion would have three rows teeth, wherein the outside row of teeth would be in direct contact with an edge of the corner portion. One would have also been motivated to do so in order to increase the size of the weld.
Regarding claim 14, Zhong teaches:
A welding device [ultrasonic welding machine; 0005] comprising:
an anvil [welding base (10); figure 1] on which a lead tab and a strip terminal are arranged to overlap each other; and
a welding horn [welding head (30)] configured to apply ultrasonic waves while pressurizing an overlapping surface of the lead tab and the strip terminal arranged on the anvil, the welding horn comprising:
a body portion [welding head body (32)] extending in a first direction; and
an extension portion [second action portion (34)] extending in a second direction crossing the first direction from an end of the body portion, and is configured to pressurize a welding object connected to an electrode assembly, the extension portion comprising:
a lower surface [surface upon which welding teeth (341) extend from; figure 3] facing the overlapping surface;
a first corner portion [the longer front facing corner facing the observer in figure 3] connected to one end of the lower surface and facing the lead tab;
a first side surface [front facing surface in figure 2] extending from the first corner portion to the body portion [see figure 1]; and
a tip portion [front row of welding teeth (341)] protruding from the lower surface and contacting the overlapping surface.
Zhong does not teach:
the tip portion being offset from a center of the lower surface toward the first corner portion,
wherein the tip portion directly contacts an edge of the first corner portion.
However, Zhong teaches the working surface of first action portion (14) is an 3X10 array of teeth wherein the outside row of teeth are in direct contact with an edge of the corner portion; see figure 2.
Since Zhong does not depict a similar view of the second action portion it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to construct the working surface of the second action portion in a similar manner. In doing so, the second action portion would have three rows teeth, wherein the outside row of teeth would be in direct contact with an edge of the corner portion. One would have also been motivated to do so in order to increase the size of the weld.
Regarding claims 2 and 15, Zhong teaches:
wherein the first corner portion is in a form of a curved surface having a curvature [see figure 3].
Regarding claims 6 and 19, Zhong does not teach:
wherein a width of the lower surface along the first direction is 0.9 mm to 1.6 mm.
Zhong does teach the diameter of each tooth is 0.7-1.0 mm; 0020, and that there is a small piece of surface between each tooth in the first direction. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make the pitch between centers of the teeth 0.9-1.6 mm in order to achieve a desired tooth pattern, minus any unexpected results.
Regarding claim 7, Zhong teaches:
wherein a width of the tip portion along the first direction is 0.3 mm to 0.8 mm [the second welding teeth have diameter of 0.7-1.0 mm; 0020].
Zhong and the claims differ in that Zhong does not teach the exact same ranges as recited in the instant claims.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time/before the effective filing date of the invention would have considered the invention to have been obvious because the ranges taught by Zhong overlap the instantly claimed ranges and therefore are considered to establish a prima facie case of obviousness. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select any portion of the disclosed ranges including the instantly claimed ranges from the ranges disclosed in the prior art reference, particularly in view of In re Peterson 65 USPQ2d 1379 (CAFC 2003); In re Geisler 43 USPQ2d 1365 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In re Woodruff, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (CCPA 1976); In re Malagari, 182 USPQ 549, 553 (CCPA 1974), and MPEP 2144.05. This reasoning applies to any claim and limitation in this action where a range is being claimed.
Regarding claims 8 and 20, Zhong does not teach:
wherein a width of the lower surface along the first direction is 1.125 to 5.34 times a width of the tip portion.
Zhong teaches the second welding teeth have diameter of 0.7-1.0 mm and that there may be two or more; 0020, 0029, 0055.
Thus, one wanting a surface with a plurality of 2-4 welding teeth in a row would have a surface width with that is about 2-5 times longer than the width of a single tooth.
Regarding claim 9, Zhong does not explicitly teach:
wherein the extension portion further comprises:
a second corner portion connected to another end of the lower surface; and
a second side surface extending from the second corner portion to the body portion, and opposite to the first side surface, and
wherein the second corner portion is in a form of a curved surface having a curvature.
While one of ordinary skill would assume this is taught as this is the most logical and reasonable structure for the second action portion it is not explicitly taught. Even so, one constructing the second action portion as noted in the rejection of claim 1 would result in these limitations.
Regarding claim 11, Zhong teaches:
wherein the tip portion comprises a plurality of protrusions arranged in at least one row [front row of welding teeth (341)].
Regarding claim 12, Zhong teaches:
wherein each of the plurality of protrusions has a convexly curved shape [the teeth are spherical; 0046 and figure 2].
Regarding claim 17, Zhong does not teach:
wherein the tip portion is positioned to be spaced from the first side surface by a length corresponding to a radius of curvature of the first corner portion.
However, one constructing the second action portion as noted in the rejection of claim 1 would result in this limitation.
Claims 3, 10, 13, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong et al. (US 2024/0100622 A1) in view of as applied to claims 2, 9, 11, and 15 above, and further in view of Wu et al. (CN 119864580 A).
Regarding claims 3, 10, and 16, Zhong does not teach:
wherein a radius of the curvature of the first/second corner portion is 0.1 mm to 0.5 mm.
Wu teaches ultrasonic head (400) having projections (91) with radii R1 and R2 that are 0.2-0.5 mm which prevents cracking of the workpiece; pg. 26, and figures 13 and 14 depict the left and right corners of the head having a radius similar to that of the radii of the first surface.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make all corners of the second action portion with a radius as taught by Wu in order to prevent cracking in the workpiece, due to aesthetics, and/or because the figures suggest all curvatures are about the same size.
Regarding claim 13, Zhong does not teach:
wherein a height of each of the plurality of protrusions along the second direction is 0.15 mm to 0.4 mm.
Wu teaches the height of the projections (91) may be 0.05-0.2 mm; pg. 27.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make the teeth any height, including that taught by Wu, in order to weld the materials at hand, minus any unexpected results.
Claims 5 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong et al. (US 2024/0100622 A1) in view of as applied to claims 1 and 14 above, and further in view of Wu et al. (CN 119864580 A) and Harima (US 2022/0037750 A1).
Regarding claims 5 and 18, Zhong does not teach:
wherein the tip portion is spaced from the first side surface by 0.1 mm to 0.5 mm, based on the first direction.
Concerning the corner being based on the first direction:
While Wu teaches the teeth may directly contact an edge of a corner he does show space between the teeth and the edge of the shorter side corner; figure 3.
Harima teaches horn (42) having projections (40) that directly contact the edge of the corners in the first direction; figure 16.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to also place teeth so as to contact the edge of the shorter side corner as taught by Harima because it is known to do so and/or due to aesthetics. Note in doing so the first corner is now considered to be the shorter side corner.
Concerning the space/corner distance:
Wu teaches ultrasonic head (400) having radii R1 and R2 that are 0.2-0.5 mm and this prevents cracking of the workpiece; pg. 26, and figures 13 and 14 depict the left and right corners of the head having a radius similar to that of the radii of the first surface.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make all corners of the second action portion with a radius as taught by Wu in order to prevent cracking in the workpiece, due to aesthetics, or because the figures suggest all curvatures are about the same size. In doing so, the teeth would be spaced from the shorter side vertical surface as claimed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference as applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 CARLOS J GAMINO whose telephone number is (571)270-5826. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6.
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 5712723458. 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.
/CARLOS J GAMINO/Examiner, Art Unit 1735
/KEITH WALKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights