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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claims 18-19 depend from claim 2 and further limit the composition of the claimed steel by introducing newly recited elements. However, the composition of claim 2 is close-ended and cannot contain the newly recited elements. Applicant may cancel the claims, amend the claims to place the claims in proper dependent form, rewrite the claims in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claims comply with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
Claims 1 and 3-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as anticipated by, or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Ichie et al. (US 2025/0179619).
Regarding claims 1 and 3-7, Ichie discloses a non-oriented electrical steel sheet (¶ 1) having the following composition and B50M:
Claim 1
Ichie, ¶ 17
C
≤0.003% (Claim 3: ≤0.002%)
0.0005%-0.0030%
Si
3.0%-4.5%
1.5%-3.5%
Al
0.15%-2.5%
0.10%-2.00%
Mn
0.15%-2.5%
0.1%-2.0%
Fe
Balance
Balance
Impurities
(Claims 4-5)
P
≤0.03% (≤0.02%)
≤0.180%
S
≤0.003%
0.0005%-0.0030%
N
≤0.005% (≤0.0035%)
0.0005%-0.0030%
O
≤0.003%
-
B (claim 6)
0.0005%-0.010%
Claim 7
0.02%-4.0%
0.02%-0.25%
B50M
≥1.60T
≥1.54T (see Table 3B)
Table 1, Ex. A4
Table 1, Ex. A12
Table 1, Ex. A14
C
0.0010%
0.0021%
0.0025%
Si
3.5%
3.1%
3.3%
Al
0.56%
0.92%
1.21%
Mn
0.6%
1.6%
1.6%
Fe
Balance
Balance
Balance
Impurities
P
0.090%
0.150%
0.12%
S
0.0008%
0.0015%
0.0022%
N
0.0008%
0.0005%
0.0011%
O
-
-
-
B (claim 6)
0.0012
0.0015
0.0009
Claim 7
0.11%
0.050%
0.09%
B50M
1.6375T (C4)
1.62T (C12)
1.60T (C14)
Table 1, Ex. A20
Table 1, Ex. A22
Table 1, Ex. A26
C
0.0017%
0.0017%
0.0030%
Si
3.2%
3.2%
3.33
Al
0.66%
0.66%
0.74
Mn
1.8%
1.8%
1.01
Fe
Balance
Balance
Balance
P
0.16%
0.160%
0.01%
S
0.0009%
0.0009%
0.0005%
N
0.0011%
0.0011%
0.0019%
O
-
-
-
B (claim 6)
0.0014
0.0014
-
Claim 7
0.10%
0.10%
0.05%
B50M
1.615T (C20)
1.608T (C22)
1.625T (c26)
The B50M value in Ichie is based off B50 in the rolling direction, B50 perpendicular to the rolling direction, and B50 at a 45° direction, which is expected to correlate to the claimed B50X absent objective evidence to the contrary. This overlaps the claimed composition, creating a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05 I. Alternatively, Ex. A26 anticipates claims 1, 4-5, and 7; Ex. A12 and A14 anticipate claims 1 and 6-7; and Ex. A4, A20, and A22 anticipate claims 1, 3, and 6-7.
Regarding claim 8, Ichie teaches the steel has a thickness of 0.20-0.50 mm (¶ 116). This overlaps the claimed range, creating a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05 I. Additionally, Ex. C12, C20, and C22 (corresponding to compositions A12, A20, and A22, respectively) have sheet thicknesses of 0.30 mm (see Tables 2B&3A).
Claims 1-5, 7-8, 15-17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Fukuchi et al. (US 2023/0106818).
Regarding claims 1-5 and 7, Fukuchi discloses a non-oriented electrical steel sheet (¶ 1) having the following composition and B50M:
Claims 1-2
Fukuchi, ¶ 43
C
≤0.003% (Claim 3&15: ≤0.002%)
≤0.010%
Si
3.0%-4.5%
1.5%-4.0%
Al
0.15%-2.5%
0.001%-1.0%
Mn
0.15%-2.5%
2.5%-5.0%
Fe
Balance
Balance
Impurities
(Claims 4-5&16-17)
P
≤0.03% (≤0.02%)
≤0.4%
S
≤0.003%
≤0.010%
N
≤0.005% (≤0.0035%)
≤0.010%
O
≤0.003%
-
Claim 7
0.02%-4.0%
2.5%-6.8%
B50M
≥1.60T
≥1.58T
Table 3-1, Ex. 213
Table 5-1, Ex. 307
C
0.0012%
0.0022%
Si
3.1%
3.43%
Al
1.0%
0.95%
Mn
0.2%
2.2%
Fe
Balance
Balance
Impurities
P
0.01%
0.006%
S
0.0015%
0.0042%
N
0.0014%
0.0023%
O
-
-
Claim 7
2.4%
-
B50M
1.65T
1.60T
Table 7-1, Ex. 404
Table 7-1, Ex. 405
C
0.0013%
0.0013%
Si
3.3%
3.3%
Al
0.95%
0.95%
Mn
2.5%
2.5%
Fe
Balance
Balance
B50M
1.66T
1.63T
The B50M value in Fukuchi is based off B50 in the rolling direction, B50 perpendicular to the rolling direction, and B50 at 45° and 135° directions, which is expected to correlate to the claimed B50X absent objective evidence to the contrary. This overlaps the claimed composition, creating a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05 I. Alternatively, Ex. 213 anticipates claims 1-5, 7, and 15-17; Ex. 307 anticipates claims 1-2, 4-5, and 16-17; and Ex. 404 and 405 anticipate claims 1-3 and 15.
Regarding claims 8 and 20, Fukuchi teaches the steel has a thickness of 0.25-0.50 mm (¶ 98). This overlaps the claimed range, creating a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05 I. Alternatively, Ex. 213, 307, 404 and 405 all have sheet thicknesses of 0.30 mm (see Tables).
Claims 1 and 4-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Lee et al. (KR 2019-0078167).
Regarding claims 1 and 4-7, Lee discloses a non-oriented electrical steel sheet (¶ 1) having the following composition and B50M:
Claim 1
Lee, ¶ 8
C
≤0.003%
≤0.005%
Si
3.0%-4.5%
2.6%-3.6%
Al
0.15%-2.5%
0.2%-1.3%
Mn
0.15%-2.5%
0.1%-1.5%
Fe
Balance
Balance
Impurities
(Claims 4-5)
P
≤0.03% (≤0.02%)
0.005%-0.1%
S
≤0.003%
≤0.005%
N
≤0.005% (≤0.0035%)
≤0.005%
O
≤0.003%
-
B (claim 6)
0.0005%-0.010%
≤0.002% (¶ 59)
Claim 7
0.02%-4.0%
0.02%-0.2%
B50M
≥1.60T
See Table 3
Table 1, Ex. C1
Table 1, Ex. C3
Table 1, Ex. C5
C
0.0028%
0.0027%
0.0029%
Si
3.1%
3.1%
3.1%
Al
0.8%
0.8%
0.8%
Mn
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
Fe
Balance
Balance
Impurities
P
0.04%
0.07%
0.02%
S
0.0023%
0.0021%
0.0024%
N
0.0027%
0.0029%
0.0027%
O
-
-
Claim 7
0.051%
0.193%
0.072%
B50M
1.637T
1.642T
1.638T
The B50M value in Lee is based off B50 in the rolling direction, B50 perpendicular to the rolling direction, and the lesser of B50 at a 45° and 60° direction, which is expected to correlate to the claimed B50X absent objective evidence to the contrary. This overlaps the claimed composition, creating a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05 I. Additionally, Ex. C1 and C2 anticipate claims 1 and 6-7; Ex. C5 anticipates claims 1 and 4-7.
Regarding claim 8, Lee teaches the steel has a thickness of 0.1-0.65 mm (¶ 12). This overlaps the claimed range, creating a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05 I. Alternatively, all the examples of Table 1 have a thickness of 0.27 mm (¶ 92).
Regarding claims 9-10, Lee does not expressly teach the non-oriented electrical steel has the claimed properties. However, Lee does teach the steel has an average grain size of 70-150 μm (¶ 11), which overlaps the claimed ranges, creating a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05 I. Also, Table 3 discloses an average grain size of 58 μm for C1 and C3. In addition, the process for making the electrical steel sheet of Lee is substantially similar to the process for making the claimed steel sheet (see discussion of claim 11 below). Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect the prior art steel sheet to exhibit the same properties as those claimed, absent objective evidence to the contrary. See MPEP 2112.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Lee et al. (KR 2019-0078167), as applied to claim 1.
Regarding claim 3, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed above. Lee teaches the C content of the steel sheet is at most 0.005% (¶ 8), which overlaps the claimed range, creating a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05 I.
Claims 11-12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Lee et al. (KR 2019-0078167), as applied to claim 1, further in view of Ichie et al. (US 2025/0179619).
Regarding claim 11, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed above. Lee implies the electrical steel sheet is cast (see ¶¶ 44, 82). The slab is then hot rolled to a thickness of 2-2.3 mm (¶ 84). The hot-rolled steel sheet is annealed at a temperature of 850-1150°C (¶ 85) (corresponding to the claimed normalizing annealing). The steel is then cold rolled, followed by annealing (¶ 87). This annealing is performed for 80 seconds (see ¶ 92), which one of ordinary skill in the art would understand is a continuous annealing step based on the annealing duration.
Lee does not expressly teach forming an insulation coating on the electrical steel sheet. Ichie teaches that after final annealing, it is conventional to apply an insulation coating on a non-oriented electrical steel sheet (¶ 118). It would have been obvious at the effective time of filing for one of ordinary skill in the art to apply an insulation coating, as taught by Ichie, on the non-oriented electrical steel sheet of Lee because this is known as a conventional step in the prior art.
Regarding claim 12, Lee teaches the annealing of the hot-rolled steel sheet is performed for 100 seconds (see ¶ 92), which one of ordinary skill in the art would understand is a continuous annealing step based on the annealing duration. Modified Lee does not expressly disclose the annealing is a horizontal furnace. However, a horizontal furnace is one of a very limited number of possible furnace arrangements. Accordingly, it would have been obvious at the effective time of filing for one of ordinary skill in the art to use a horizontal continuous furnace to carry out the annealing after hot rolling.
Regarding claim 14, Lee teaches the cold rolling step may be a double cold rolling step with an intermediate annealing interposed therebetween (¶ 87).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Lee et al. (KR 2019-0078167) in view of Ichie et al. (US 2025/0179619), as applied to claim 11, further in view of Kubota et al. (US 2021/0062286).
Regarding claim 13, the limitations of claim 11 have been addressed above. Modified Lee does not expressly teach a tension of the strip steel in an annealing furnace. Kubota teaches that controlling tension of strip steel during annealing is necessary to prevent texture deformation in the steel, which may negatively affect magnetic characteristics of the steel, and that tension should be less than 3 MPa (¶ 68), which overlaps the claimed range. It would have been obvious at the effective time of filing for the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to determine, through routine optimization, the ideal tension of the strip steel during annealing to ensure the magnetic characteristics of the non-oriented electrical steel sheet are not negatively affected. See MPEP 2144.05.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XIAOBEI WANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5705. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-5PM 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, 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.
/XIAOBEI WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Prosecution Insights