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(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.
Claim 9 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. Claim 9 is indefinite because it is unclear what other alternatives are intended to be encompassed by the claim. A Markush grouping is a closed group of alternatives, i.e., the selection is made from a group "consisting of" (rather than "comprising" or "including") the alternative members. MPEP 2173.05(h).
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the second duration" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Benedictus et al. (US 2005/0189044), hereinafter (“Benedictus”), and provided by applicant.
Re claim 1, Benedictus discloses an armor component comprising a metal product, the metal product comprising a 7xxx series aluminum alloy (p. [0002]), wherein the metal product exhibits a yield strength of from about 400 MPa to 495 MPa (Table 3), wherein the metal product exhibits an ultimate tensile strength of from about 450 MPa to 545 MPa (Table 12), wherein the metal product exhibits an elongation of about 9% to 16% (Table 6), and wherein the 7xxx series aluminum alloy comprises: about 7.1 wt.% to 7.5 wt.% Zn (Abstract), about 1.90 wt.% to 2.25 wt.% Mg (Abstract), about 1.3 wt.% to 1.8 wt.% Cu (Abstract), about 0.05 wt.% to 0.4 wt.% of a dispersoid forming element (p. [0026]), about 0.01 wt.% to 0.06 wt.% Ti (Abstract), up to about 0.15 wt.% Si (p. [0034]), up to 0.15 wt.% Fe (p. [0019]), and Al (Abstract).
Re claim 2, Benedictus discloses the armor component of claim 1, wherein the metal product exhibits an absorbed impact energy of from 40 J/cm2 to 100 J/cm2 (inherent).
Re claim 3, Benedictus discloses the armor component of claim 1, wherein the yield strength is from about 410 MPa to about 470 MPa (Table 3), wherein the ultimate tensile strength is from about 470 MPa to about 530 MPa (Table 12), and the elongation is from about 12% to 16% (Table 6).
Re claim 4, Benedictus discloses the armor component of claim 1, wherein the metal product exhibits ballistic properties that meets a US military specification (inherent), or wherein the metal product meets Type B mechanical and ballistic requirements of a US military specification (inherent).
Re claim 5, Benedictus discloses the armor component of claim 4, wherein the US military specification is a MIL-DTL-32375B specification or a MIL-DTL-32375C specification (inherent).
Re claim 6, Benedictus discloses the armor component of claim 1, wherein the metal product exhibits an exfoliation corrosion susceptibility of EA or EB according to an ASTM G34 standard (p. [0091]).
Re claim 7, Benedictus discloses the armor component of claim 1, wherein the metal product exhibits a stress-corrosion cracking resistance of at least 30 days according to an ASTM G64 standard (inherent).
Re claim 8, Benedictus discloses the armor component of claim 1, wherein the yield strength is along a LT direction, wherein the ultimate tensile strength is along a LT direction, and wherein the elongation is along a LT direction.
Re claim 9, Benedictus discloses the armor component of claim 1, wherein the dispersoid forming element comprises one or more of Zr, Sc, V, Hf, Ti, Cr, or Mn (p. [0006]).
Re claim 10, Benedictus discloses the armor component of claim 1, wherein the metal product is a plate having a thickness of from 12.7 mm to 76.2 mm (p. [0010]).
Re claim 11, Benedictus discloses the armor component of claim 1, wherein the 7xxx series aluminum alloy comprises a ratio of Zn to Mg of less than or about 4 (Abstract).
Re claim 12, Benedictus discloses the armor component of claim 1, wherein the dispersoid forming element comprises Zr in a range of from 0.06 wt.% to 0.15 wt.% (p. [0014]).
Re claim 13, Benedictus discloses the armor component of claim 1, wherein the 7xxx series aluminum alloy comprises impurities of up to 0.15 wt.% and a balance Al (p. [0019]).
Re claim 14, Benedictus discloses the armor component of claim 1, having been subjected to an over-aging treatment comprising heating to a first temperature of from 110 °C to 130 °C for a first duration of from 4 hours to 12 hours, and followed by heating to a second temperature of from 160 °C to 200 °C for a second duration of from 4 hours to 40 hours (product-by-process; see MPEP 2113).
Re claim 15, Benedictus discloses the armor component of claim 1, wherein the second duration is from 10 hours to 18 hours (product-by-process; see MPEP 2113).
Re claim 16, Benedictus (p. [0058+]) discloses a method of producing an armor component, the method comprising: casting a 7xxx series aluminum alloy into an ingot; homogenizing the ingot; hot rolling the ingot to obtain a metal product; solution heat treating the metal product; quenching the metal product; stretching the metal product to obtain a permanent elongation from 1% to 6%; and subjecting the metal product to an over-aging treatment, wherein the over-aging treatment comprises heating the metal product to a first temperature of from 110 °C to 130 °C for a first duration of from 4 hours to 12 hours and followed by heating the metal product to a second temperature of from 160 °C to 200 °C for a second duration of from 4 hours to 40 hours, wherein the metal product exhibits a yield strength of from about 400 MPa to 495 MPa, wherein the metal product exhibits an ultimate tensile strength of from about 450 MPa to 545 MPa, wherein the metal product exhibits an elongation of about 9% to 16%, and wherein the 7xxx series aluminum alloy comprises: about 7.1 wt.% to 7.5 wt.% Zn, about 1.90 wt.% to 2.25 wt.% Mg, about 1.3 wt.% to 1.8 wt.% Cu, about 0.05 wt.% to 0.4 wt.% of a dispersoid forming element, about 0.01 wt.% to 0.06 wt.% Ti, up to about 0.15 wt.% Si, up to 0.15 wt.% Fe, and Al.
Re claim 17, Benedictus discloses the method of claim 16, further comprising cold rolling the metal product (p. [0048]).
Re claim 18, Benedictus discloses the method of claim 16, wherein the over-aging treatment generates a microstructure in the metal product providing the yield strength, the ultimate tensile strength, and the elongation.
Re claim 19, Benedictus discloses the method of claim 16, wherein the second duration is from 10 hours to 18 hours.
Re claim 20, Benedictus discloses the method of claim 16, wherein the metal product exhibits ballistic properties that meets a US military specification, or wherein the metal product meets Type B mechanical and ballistic requirements of a US military specification.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REGINALD S TILLMAN, JR whose telephone number is (571)270-7010. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 830-530.
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, Troy Chambers can be reached at 571-272-6874. 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.
/REGINALD S TILLMAN, JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3641
Prosecution Insights