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(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 1-7 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.
Claim 1 is indefinite because it is unclear what is meant by “forming a process-affected layer with residual tensile stress remains on one or both of a surface to be bonded of the first member and a surface to be bonded of the second member”. What is meant by “remains”? The language does not appear to be correct. Is the Applicant stating that the process-affected layer creates residual tensile stress? If so, the word “remains” does not appear to be correct. The Examiner requests that the Applicant please clarify this limitation.
The term “fine-grained superplasticity” in claim 5 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “fine-grained” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. How small do the grains have to be for them to be considered “fine”? Is there a value in which they are no longer considered fine? The Examiner requests that the Applicant please clarify this limitation.
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) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Masaki et al. (2019/00337078A1).
Regarding claims 1-4, Masaki discloses a method for bonding a first member containing a metal and a second member containing a metal, the method comprising: a first step of forming a process-affected layer with residual tensile stress remains on one or both of a surface to be bonded of the first member and a surface to be bonded of the second member (by friction stir processing, paragraph 0008), a second step of causing a surface to be bonded of the first member and a surface to be bonded of the second member to face each other, and a third step of bonding the surface to be bonded of the first member and the surface to be bonded of the second member by pressing and heating (resistance welding) (claims 1-3, paragraphs 0008, 0024-0028, 0040). Since Masaki discloses a similar process (friction stir processing) as the current invention, is the Examiner’s position that Masaki would also have a process-affected layer with residual tensile stress).
Regarding claim, 5, Masaki discloses a similar material (Fe alloy) the member on which the process-affected layer is formed mainly contains a metal that exhibits fine-grained superplasticity (paragraph 0026).
Regarding claim 6, Masaki discloses that the member on which the process-affected layer is formed contains any one of Al, Cu, Fe, Ti, Mg, and Ni as a main element (paragraphs 0008, 0024-0028, 0040).
Regarding claim 7, Masaki disclose that the third step includes heating by a method including any one of frictional heat by a rotating tool, heat by a heater, and frictional heat by application of ultrasonic vibration (resistance welding) (paragraph 0037).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIN B SAAD whose telephone number is (571)270-3634. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30a-6p.
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 571-272-3458. 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.
/ERIN B SAAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights