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 following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sartisson (EP4513045).
Claim 1: Sartisson provides a self-piercing rivet (12, Fig. 2) for connecting at least two elements (Fig. 3a), wherein the self-piercing rivet has a coating ([0040]), and wherein: at least one component of the coating has a melting temperature of at least 450° C (PURE Ni coating, paragraph [0040]), and the coating comprises nickel (paragraph [0040]), and an outer surface of the self-piercing rivet is provided with the coating ([0040], a one layer system of PURE Ni coating would make the coating on the outermost layer of the rivet).
Claim 2: Sartisson provides the self-piercing rivet is a solid self- piercing rivet, a semi-hollow self-piercing rivet or a hollow self-piercing rivet (Fig. 2, [0041]).
Claim 3: Sartisson provides the melting temperature of the at least one component of the coating is at least 1300°C (nickel, paragraph [0040], melting point of nickel is 1455°C).
Claim 4: Sartisson provides the melting temperature of the coating is at least 850° C (nickel, paragraph [0040], melting point of nickel is 1455°C).
Claim 5: Sartisson provides the coating contains nickel to an extent of at least 80% by weight (PURE Ni, paragraph [0040]).
Claim 15: Sartisson provides a self-piercing rivet (12, Fig. 2) for connecting at least two elements (Fig. 3a), wherein the self piercing rivet has a coating [0013;0040]) and wherein: the coating has a melting temperature of at least 450° C (PURE Ni coating, paragraph [0040]; melting point of nickel is 1455°C), and the coating comprises nickel (paragraph [0040], a one layer system of PURE Ni coating would make the coating on the outermost layer of the rivet).
Claim 16: Sartisson provides the coating has a melting temperature of at least 750° C (nickel, paragraph [0040], melting point of nickel is 1455°C).
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) 6-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sartisson (EP4513045) in view of HOLZAPFEL GROUP (submitted by the applicant on the IDS 4/1/25).
Claim 6: Sartisson provides a coating containing nickel but fails to explicitly disclose the coating also containing phosphorus to an extent of at least 12% by weight.
However, HOLZAPFEL GROUP teaches a coating that contains nickel, and phosphorous to an extent of at least 12% by weight (Page 2; ‘phosphorus concentrations of approximately 10% provide a high level of corrosion protection’; ‘phosphorus rate 9-13%’).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the coating provided by Sartisson for the coating as taught by HOLZAPFEL GROUP in order to provide a rivet with a high level of corrosion protection on the outermost layer of the rivet because it is prima facie obvious to substitute one known prior art element for another to achieve predictable results (MPEP 2143(B)).
Claim 7: HOLZAPFEL GROUP provides the coating is applied by a chemical coating method (Page 1).
Claim 8: Sartisson provides a method for producing a self-piercing rivet (12, Fig. 2), the method comprising: providing a self-piercing rivet blank; applying a coating to the self-piercing rivet blank by a chemical coating method ([0013]; and obtaining the self-piercing rivet (Fig. 2-3a); wherein an outer surface of the self-piercing rivet is provided with the coating ([0040], a one layer system of PURE Ni coating would make the coating on the outermost layer of the rivet); but fails to explicitly disclose comprising a redox reaction.
However, HOLZAPFEL GROUP teaches a method of applying a coating that contains nickel, by an electroless chemical process (Page 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the coating method provided by Sartisson for the coating method as taught by HOLZAPFEL GROUP in order to provide a rivet with a high level of corrosion protection on the outermost layer of the rivet comprising a redox reaction because it is prima facie obvious to substitute one known prior art element for another to achieve predictable results (MPEP 2143(B)).
Claim 9: Sartisson fails to disclose the chemical coating method comprises electroless nickel plating.
However, HOLZAPFEL GROUP teaches a coating that contains nickel and a chemical coating method comprises electroless nickel plating (Page 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the coating method provided by Sartisson for the coating method as taught by HOLZAPFEL GROUP in order to provide a coating with a high degree of durability and corrosion protection as well as withstanding dimensional stability because it is prima facie obvious to substitute one known prior art element for another to achieve predictable results (MPEP 2143(B)).
Claim(s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sartisson (EP4513045) in view of HOLZAPFEL GROUP (submitted by the applicant on the IDS 4/1/25) and Feldstein (US 2007/0184271).
Claim 10: Sartisson/HOLZAPFEL GROUP fails to disclose the self-piercing rivet blank is thermally treated after the application of the coating at a temperature of at most 350° C. and for a duration of at most 48 hours.
However, Feldstein teaches electroless nickel phosphorous coatings are heat treated to a temperature of about 350° C for one or more hours to achieve maximum hardness of the metal matrix [0035]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method provided by Sartisson/HOLZAPFEL GROUP to include the heat treatment step as taught by Feldstein in order to achieve maximum hardness of the coating.
Claim 11: Feldstein teaches the thermal treatment begins at most 24 hours after the application of the coating to the self-piercing rivet blank (paragraph [0038]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference 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 Amanda J Kreiling whose telephone number is (571)272-6091. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 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, Sunil Singh can be reached at 571-272-3460. 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.
/Amanda Kreiling/Examiner, Art Unit 3726 3/5/26
/JASON L VAUGHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726