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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on May 15, 2026+ has been entered.
Response to Amendment and Status of Claims
Applicant’s amendments to the claims, filed May 15, 2026, are acknowledged. Claims 2, 7-8 and 21 are amended, and Claim 9 is cancelled. No new matter has been added.
Claims 12-16, and 18, drawn to a process for fabricating a bulk magnet, Claim 19, drawn to a MnBi feedstock powder, and Claim 20, drawn to a bulk magnet, remain withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected Inventions II, III and IV, respectively, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely elected without traverse in the reply filed on December 12, 2022.
Claims 2-3, 5, 7-8, 11-16 and 18-21 are pending, and Claims 2-3, 5, 7-8, 11 and 21 are currently considered in this office action.
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 5 is 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.
Regarding Claim 5, the claim recites wherein the comminuted powder is ball milled or jet milled; however, Claim 1 recites comminuting the ingot body or the melt-spun ribbon flakes including a ball or jet milling step. It is unclear how many milling steps are required. It is unclear if two ball milling steps are required, or if Claim 5 refers to the ball milling step in Claim 1, and/or if the ball milling step in Claim 1 is to be extended. In the case of separate milling steps, it is unclear what differentiates the first milling step (Claim 1) from the second milling step (Claim 5).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 2-3, 7 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim882 (previously cited, US 20160314882 A1) in view of Li (previously cited and cited by Applicant in IDS filed August 20, 2021, “Preparation and magnetic properties of anisotropic MnBi powders”), Lee (previously cited, US 20210183547 A1), Kim134 (previously cited, US 20160322134 A1) and Irie451 (JP 2018170451 A, English Machine Translation provided).
Regarding Claim 2, Kim882 discloses a process for fabricating a quantity of MnBi feedstock powder (Fig. 1; para. [0033]-[0034]), comprising:
melting a Mn metal and Bi metal to provide an alloy comprising the composition MnxBi100-x, wherein x is 50-55at%, including the composition Mn50Bi50, which reads on the claimed x range of 48.5-53.5at% (para. [0018]); and
melt-spinning the melted alloy at a wheel speed as low as 10m/s to form as-melt-spun, solidified ribbon flakes (para. [0025]; para. [0027]-[0029]; 10m/s reads on the claimed 8-20m/s range; one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate forming ribbons by melt-spinning creates solidified ‘ribbon flakes’).
While Kim882 does not expressly disclose forming a crystallized LTP MnBi phase in the solidified as-melt-spun ribbon, the composition (Mn50Bi50) and the wheel speed (as low as 10m/s) are the same as claimed, and one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the process to result in the claimed presence of a crystallized LTP MnBi phase. When the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP 2112.01. Examiner further notes the claims do not currently require a particular amount of LTP MnBi phase formed in the as-spun ribbon, and trace amounts of LTP MnBi phase read on the claimed limitations.
Kim882 further discloses:
annealing the as-cast melt-spun ribbon flakes to promote the formation of LTP MnBi phase therein to at least a purity of 95% (para. [0032]); and
comminuting the alloy including a ball milling step after annealing to obtain comminuted powder particles with particle sizes of 0.5-5um, which reads on the claimed 3-5um, for use in bulk permanent magnet manufacture by powder consolidation (para. [0018]; para. [0036]-[0037]; Abstract).
Kim882 discloses annealing the as-spun ribbon flakes at about 280-340C, which reads on the claimed 270-350C, for up to 1 day (para. [0032]), but does not disclose annealing for 2-6 days.
Li teaches wherein the amount of LTP MnBi (alpha-MnBi) may be improved by increasing the annealing times (see Abstract; see Table 1).
For example, Lee teaches annealing a rapidly solidified Mn-Bi based ribbon at 270-330C for as long as 48 hours (2 days) in order to obtain the hard magnetic phase (see para. [0070]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have increased the annealing time to 2 days, as taught by Lee, for the invention disclosed by Kim882, in order to maximize and realize the largest amount of LTP MnBi phase possible (see teaching by Li and Lee above).
Regarding the alloy composition, the wheel speed, the particle size and the annealing time, in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP § 2144.05.I. Additionally, Applicant has not provided a showing of criticality for claimed ranges.
Kim882 fails to disclose depositing a coating consisting of non-magnetic metallic Sb or polymeric material on and covering exterior surfaces of the comminuted 3-5um powder particles. Therefore, Kim882 also fails to disclose wherein such a coating provides the non-magnetic material between LTP MnBi grains at grain boundaries after bulk magnet manufacture by powder consolidation.
Kim134 teaches adding a low melting point metal to the interface between particles by further milling the pulverized (comminuted) powder with 0-10wt%, such as 1wt% and 2wt%, of a low melting point metal powder, such as Sn, Zn and Bi or an alloy thereof, prior to bulk consolidation, in order to improve coercive force, improve maximum energy product at a high temperature and improve thermal stability (para. [0017]-[0022]; para. [0051]-[0052]; para. [0058]; Fig. 1-2; Claim 11; Table 1, 1wt% and 2wt%). One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that ball milling the MnBi comminuted powder with a low-melting point metal powder would coat and deposit/cover the surface of the MnBi powder with the low melting point metal because the low melting point metals are much softer materials than the MnBi powder.
Kim134 further teaches wherein the low-melting point metal remains as a grain boundary phase after consolidation at the interface between grains/crystal particles, preventing reversal of the magnetic field produced from a crystal particle from propagating to adjacent crystal particles (para. [0017]-[0018]).
Kim134 does not disclose wherein the low melting point metal is Sb.
Irie451 teaches mixing 1-20wt% of a low melting point metal to cover MnBi particles in order to prevent penetration of oxygen and moisture, thereby increasing corrosion resistance, while also increasing the saturation magnetization (para. [0058]). Like Kim134, Irie451 also teaches wherein the metallic binder produces a diffusion phase at the interface between magnetic particles in the formed magnet (para. [0058]).
Irie451 further teaches wherein the binder metal includes selections of Bi, Sn, Zn, and alloys thereof (options disclosed by Kim134), and also Sb (para. [0058]). Therefore, Irie451 recognizes the art equivalence of using Sb as the low melting point metal for one of Bi, Sn, Zn and alloys thereof, for coating a MnBi particle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have ball milled the pulverized MnBi particles with 1-10wt%, such 1wt% and 2wt% which reads on the claimed range of 2wt% or less, of a low melting point metal powder, such as Sb, and thereby formed a coating of the low melting point powder covering the exterior surfaces of the pulverized(comminuted) MnBi powder particles prior to bulk magnet consolidation, and to have further formed a grain boundary phase of the low melting point metal at the interface between MnBi grains in the consolidated product, as taught by Kim134 and Irie451, for the invention disclosed by Kim288.
One would be motivated to do this in order to prevent reversal of the magnetic field produced from a crystal particle from propagating to adjacent crystal particles, thereby improving coercive force, maximum energy product at a high temperature and thermal stability (see teaching above by Kim134), and in order to improve corrosion resistance and saturation magnetization (see teaching by Irie451). One would be motivated to use Sb because Irie teaches the art equivalence of using Sb for one of Sn, Bi, Zn or alloys thereof which are metals disclosed by Kim134 (see explanation above).
Further, regarding the limitations “wherein the particle sizes correspond substantially to grain size of the bulk permanent magnet” (see line 14-15 of Claim 2) and “provide the non-magnetic material between MnBi grains at grain boundaries after bulk magnet manufacture by powder consolidation” (lines 21-24 of Claim 2), these limitations are directed to the intended use of the feedstock powder and the manufacture of a bulk permanent magnet using the feedstock powder. The claim limitations directed to a process for fabricating a MnBi feedstock powder, including the structure (composition, particle size and the deposited non-magnetic coating) of the feedstock powder, have been met (see above).
Regarding Claim 3, Kim882 discloses wherein the melted alloy is rapidly solidified by melt spinning to form ribbon flakes (Kim882, para. [0027]).
Kim882 does not expressly disclose composition-uniform ribbon flakes, but Kim882 desires a specific composition and obtaining a uniform LTP magnetic phase (para. [0027]; para. [0030]).
It would have been obvious to have formed ribbon flakes with the desired composition throughout each ribbon, and therefore to have formed uniform compositioned ribbon flakes for the invention disclosed by Kim882, in order to subsequently form the uniform LTP magnetic phase.
Further, the method of forming the rapidly solidified ribbon flakes and the composition of the alloy melt is the same as claimed. When the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP 2112.01.
Regarding Claim 7, Irie451 and Kim134 discloses wherein the non-magnetic coating is metallic Sb and is deposited on and covering the exterior surfaces of the pulverized (comminuted) powder particles (Irie451, para. [0018]; see explanation in Claim 2 above, wherein ball milling would produce deposition of the low melting point metal and cover the exterior surfaces of the pulverized MnBi particles).
Regarding Claim 11, Kim882 discloses wherein the feedstock powder is incorporated as a component of a permanent magnet (Abstract).
Claims 2-3, 7 and 11 are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim882 (previously cited, US 20160314882 A1) in view of Nguyen2018 (“Enhancement of exchange coupling interaction of NdFeB/MnBi hybrid magnets”), Li (previously cited and cited by Applicant in IDS filed August 20, 2021, “Preparation and magnetic properties of anisotropic MnBi powders”), Lee (previously cited, US 20210183547 A1), Kim134 (previously cited, US 20160322134 A1) and Irie451 (JP 2018170451 A, English Machine Translation provided).
Regarding Claim 2, Kim882 discloses a process for fabricating a quantity of MnBi feedstock powder (Fig. 1; para. [0033]-[0034]), comprising:
melting a Mn metal and Bi metal to provide an alloy comprising the composition MnxBi100-x, wherein x is 50-55at%, including the composition Mn50Bi50, which reads on the claimed x range of 48.5-53.5at% (para. [0018]); and
melt-spinning the melted alloy at a wheel speed as low as 10m/s to form as-melt-spun, solidified ribbon flakes (para. [0025]; para. [0027]-[0029]; 10m/s reads on the claimed 8-20m/s range; one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate forming ribbons by melt-spinning creates solidified ‘ribbon flakes’).
While Kim882 does not expressly disclose the narrower range of 8-20m/s, Nguyen further teaches melt spinning ribbons at 10-25m/s, wherein speeds such as 20m/s produce 100nm grains which are desired by Kim882 (see Kim882, para. [0028]), and wherein the wheel speed is a result effective variable, the effect being the amount of LTP phase formed in the as-melt spun ribbon (sect. 2, experimental; sect. 3.1, preparation of melt-spun MnBi ribbons, para. 1-2 and para. 6; Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further used a wheel speed of 10-20m/s, as taught by Nguyen, for the invention disclosed Kim882, because Kim882 already discloses these wheel speeds, and Nguyen teaches they are appropriate to produce the grain sizes desired by Kim882. Additionally, Nguyen teaches that wheel speed is a result effective variable, the effect being LTP phase fraction, and it has been held that it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art absent a showing of criticality or unexpected results. See MPEP 2144.05.I. Applicant has not currently provided a showing of criticality for claimed wheel speed.
Nguyen further discloses forming a crystallized LTP MnBi phase in the melt-spun ribbon (see Fig. 1). Additionally, the composition (Mn50Bi50) and the wheel speeds (10-20m/s) of Kim882 and Nguyen are the same as claimed, and one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the process to result in the claimed presence of a crystallized LTP MnBi phase. When the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP 2112.01. Examiner also further notes that the claims do not currently require a particular amount of LTP MnBi phase formed in the as-spun ribbon, and trace amounts of LTP MnBi phase read on the claimed limitations.
Kim882 further discloses:
annealing the as-cast melt-spun ribbon flakes to promote the formation of LTP MnBi phase therein to at least a purity of 95% (para. [0032]); and
comminuting the alloy including a ball milling step after annealing to obtain comminuted powder particles with particle sizes of 0.5-5um, which reads on the claimed 3-5um, for use in bulk permanent magnet manufacture by powder consolidation (para. [0018]; para. [0036]-[0037]; Abstract).
Kim882 discloses annealing the as-spun ribbon flakes at about 280-340C, which reads on the claimed 270-350C, for up to 1 day (para. [0032]), but does not disclose annealing for 2-6 days.
Li teaches wherein the amount of LTP MnBi (alpha-MnBi) may be improved by increasing the annealing times (see Abstract; see Table 1).
For example, Lee teaches annealing a rapidly solidified Mn-Bi based ribbon at 270-330C for as long as 48 hours (2 days) in order to obtain the hard magnetic phase (see para. [0070]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have increased the annealing time to 2 days, as taught by Lee, for the invention disclosed by Kim882, in order to maximize and realize the largest amount of LTP MnBi phase possible (see teaching by Li and Lee above).
Regarding the alloy composition, the wheel speed, the particle size and the annealing time, in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP § 2144.05.I. Additionally, Applicant has not provided a showing of criticality for claimed ranges.
Kim882 fails to disclose depositing a coating consisting of non-magnetic metallic Sb or polymeric material on and covering exterior surfaces of the comminuted 3-5um powder particles. Therefore, Kim882 also fails to disclose wherein such a coating provides the non-magnetic material between LTP MnBi grains at grain boundaries after bulk magnet manufacture by powder consolidation.
Kim134 teaches adding a low melting point metal to the interface between particles by further milling the pulverized (comminuted) powder with 0-10wt%, such as 1wt% and 2wt%, of a low melting point metal powder, such as Sn, Zn and Bi or an alloy thereof, prior to bulk consolidation, in order to improve coercive force, improve maximum energy product at a high temperature and improve thermal stability (para. [0017]-[0022]; para. [0051]-[0052]; para. [0058]; Fig. 1-2; Claim 11; Table 1, 1wt% and 2wt%). One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that ball milling the MnBi comminuted powder with a low-melting point metal powder would coat and deposit/cover the surface of the MnBi powder with the low melting point metal because the low melting point metals are much softer materials than the MnBi powder.
Kim134 further teaches wherein the low-melting point metal remains as a grain boundary phase after consolidation at the interface between grains/crystal particles, preventing reversal of the magnetic field produced from a crystal particle from propagating to adjacent crystal particles (para. [0017]-[0018]).
Kim134 does not disclose wherein the low melting point metal is Sb.
Irie451 teaches mixing 1-20wt% of a low melting point metal to cover MnBi particles in order to prevent penetration of oxygen and moisture, thereby increasing corrosion resistance, while also increasing the saturation magnetization (para. [0058]). Like Kim134, Irie451 also teaches wherein the metallic binder produces a diffusion phase at the interface between magnetic particles in the formed magnet (para. [0058]).
Irie451 further teaches wherein the binder metal includes selections of Bi, Sn, Zn, and alloys thereof (options disclosed by Kim134), and also Sb (para. [0058]). Therefore, Irie451 recognizes the art equivalence of using Sb as the low melting point metal for one of Bi, Sn, Zn and alloys thereof, for coating a MnBi particle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have ball milled the pulverized MnBi particles with 1-10wt%, such 1wt% and 2wt% which reads on the claimed range of 2wt% or less, of a low melting point metal powder, such as Sb, and thereby formed a coating of the low melting point powder covering the exterior surfaces of the pulverized(comminuted) MnBi powder particles prior to bulk magnet consolidation, and to have further formed a grain boundary phase of the low melting point metal at the interface between MnBi grains in the consolidated product, as taught by Kim134 and Irie451, for the invention disclosed by Kim288.
One would be motivated to do this in order to prevent reversal of the magnetic field produced from a crystal particle from propagating to adjacent crystal particles, thereby improving coercive force, maximum energy product at a high temperature and thermal stability (see teaching above by Kim134), and in order to improve corrosion resistance and saturation magnetization (see teaching by Irie451). One would be motivated to use Sb because Irie teaches the art equivalence of using Sb for one of Sn, Bi, Zn or alloys thereof which are metals disclosed by Kim134 (see explanation above).
Further, regarding the limitations “wherein the particle sizes correspond substantially to grain size of the bulk permanent magnet” (see line 14-15 of Claim 2) and “provide the non-magnetic material between MnBi grains at grain boundaries after bulk magnet manufacture by powder consolidation” (lines 21-24 of Claim 2), these limitations are directed to the intended use of the feedstock powder and the manufacture of a bulk permanent magnet using the feedstock powder. The claim limitations directed to a process for fabricating a MnBi feedstock powder, including the structure (composition, particle size and the deposited non-magnetic coating) of the feedstock powder, have been met (see above).
Regarding Claim 3, Kim882 discloses wherein the melted alloy is rapidly solidified by melt spinning to form ribbon flakes (Kim882, para. [0027]).
Kim882 does not expressly disclose composition-uniform ribbon flakes, but Kim882 desires a specific composition and obtaining a uniform LTP magnetic phase (para. [0027]; para. [0030]).
It would have been obvious to have formed ribbon flakes with the desired composition throughout each ribbon, and therefore to have formed uniform compositioned ribbon flakes for the invention disclosed by Kim882, in order to subsequently form the uniform LTP magnetic phase.
Further, the method of forming the rapidly solidified ribbon flakes and the composition of the alloy melt is the same as claimed. When the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP 2112.01.
Regarding Claim 7, Irie451 and Kim134 discloses wherein the non-magnetic coating is metallic Sb and is deposited on and covering the exterior surfaces of the pulverized (comminuted) powder particles (Irie451, para. [0018]; see explanation in Claim 2 above, wherein ball milling would produce deposition of the low melting point metal and cover the exterior surfaces of the pulverized MnBi particles).
Regarding Claim 11, Kim882 discloses wherein the feedstock powder is incorporated as a component of a permanent magnet (Abstract).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim882 (previously cited, US 20160314882 A1), alternatively in further view of Nguyen2018 (“Enhancement of exchange coupling interaction of NdFeB/MnBi hybrid magnets”), and in view of Li (previously cited and cited by Applicant in IDS filed August 20, 2021, “Preparation and magnetic properties of anisotropic MnBi powders”), Lee (previously cited, US 20210183547 A1), Kim134 (US 20160322134 A1) and Irie451 (JP 2018170451 A, English Machine Translation provided), as applied to Claim 2 and alternative Claim 2 above, and in further view of Xie (previously cited, “Effect of ball milling and heat treatment process on MnBi powders magnetic properties”) and Choi (previously cited, US 20150110664 A1).
Regarding Claim 5, Kim882, Li and Lee disclose wherein the alloy is annealed at 270-350C for 2 days (see Claim 2 above), and wherein the pulverized (comminuted) powder is ball milled or jet milled (Kim882, para. [0036]), but fail to disclose also annealing the comminuted powder at 270-350C for 2-5 days.
Xie teaches wherein MnBi powders subjected to ball milling are susceptible to decomposition. Xie teaches wherein annealing at 290C for 24hours after ball milling improves recovery of the magnetization (see Abstract).
Choi similarly teaches wherein heat treating milled MnBi powders at 250-300C (para. [0027]) increases the magnetic phase, alpha-MnBi (para. [0032]), and produces recovery of an alpha-MnBi phase after milling to greater than 90% or more (para. [0034] and para. [0027]). Choi further teaches iteratively performing ball milling and annealing in order to produce a purity of greater than 95wt%, up to 99wt% (para. [0014]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have annealed the milled powder at 250-300C, such as 290C, as taught by Xie and Choi, and further to have applied the annealing of Li and Lee (annealing for 2 days at 270-350C) to the comminuted/milled powder, for the invention disclosed by Kim882, Li and Lee, in order to recover magnetization lost to decomposition during milling and to obtain an MnBi-phase fraction of more than 90% (see teaching by Xie and Choi above). One would be motivated to use the times of Lee and Li (2 days) in order to recover and maximize the hard magnetic phase fractions, and therefore magnetization (see teaching above in Claim 2 wherein additional annealing time increases hard magnetic phase fraction).
Additionally, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have iteratively performed the milling and annealing steps, as taught by Choi, in order to achieve a LTP phase powder with a purity of up to 99wt% (see teaching above).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim882 (previously cited, US 20160314882 A1) in view of Li (previously cited and cited by Applicant in IDS filed August 20, 2021, “Preparation and magnetic properties of anisotropic MnBi powders”), Lee (previously cited, US 20210183547 A1), Kim134 (US 20160322134 A1) and Irie451 (JP 2018170451 A, English Machine Translation provided), as applied to Claim 2 above, in further view of Cui (previously cited, “Effect of composition and heat treatment on MnBi magnetic materials”) and Jin376 (previously cited, US 20140132376 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, Kim882 discloses milling the powder from the as-cast material, and wherein the material before milling comprises a purity of 95% or more (para. [0032]; para. [0036]).
While Kim882 discloses wherein the powder is formed by milling a rapidly solidified ribbon formed by casting (para. [0025]), Kim882 fails to disclose wherein the powder is produced from comminuting an as-cast solidified ingot, and does not disclose a solidified ingot formed by cooling in a metallic ingot mold (see limitation requirements of option a) above in Claim 2).
Cui teaches wherein MnBi powder may be produced by casting an ingot, annealing the ingot, and subsequently pulverizing the powder (Sect. 2.1-2.2). Cui teaches wherein ribbon manufacturing is smaller scale (10g), wherein conventional arc or induction melting casting is preferred for larger capacity (kilogram or higher) setups and over ribbon manufacturing in terms of feasibility and cost effectiveness (Introduction, Pg. 375; section 2.1, sample preparation, arc melted and cast into buttons; section 2.2, heat treatment, “buttons were crushed, ground and sieved to powders and further heat treated”; section 2.3, ingots; Fig. 1, as-cast ingots).
Cui does not expressly disclose solidifying in a cooled metallic ingot mold.
Jin376 further teaches wherein an ultrafine grained MnBi starting material may be melted, casted, and rapidly solidified using a chilled metallic mold, which enables a compositionally more uniform MnBi phase (para. 0072]). One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that casting and rapidly chilling in a mold would produce an ingot.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have casted and rapidly solidified the MnBi material into an ingot, as taught by Cui and Jin376, and further to have rapidly solidified the MnBi melt with a chilled metallic mold, as taught by Jin376, for the invention disclosed by Kim882. One would be motivated to do this in order to produce larger (kilogram or higher) capacity setup with improved feasibility and cost effectiveness, and to also produce an ultrafine grained MnBi starting material which is compositionally more uniform (see teachings by Cui and Jin above).
Cui discloses wherein ingot casting enables larger capacity setups of a kilogram or higher (Pg. 375, para. 2), which reads on the claimed limitation (Claim 8) wherein the ingot is at least 1kg in weight. Additionally, one of routine skill in the art would be easily capable of forming differently sized and weighted ingots as a known and conventional method to tailor the amount of yield and/or production amount of powder. See MPEP 2144.04.A.IV.
Claim 2 and Claim 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim882 (previously cited, US 20160314882 A1) in view of Li (previously cited and cited by Applicant in IDS filed August 20, 2021, “Preparation and magnetic properties of anisotropic MnBi powders”), Lee (previously cited, US 20210183547 A1), Cui (“Effect of composition and heat treatment on MnBi magnetic materials”), Jin376 (US 20140132376 A1), Kim134 (US 20160322134 A1) and Irie451 (JP 2018170451 A, English Machine Translation provided).
Regarding Claim 2 and Claim 21, Kim882 discloses a process for fabricating a mass quantity of MnBi feedstock powder (Fig. 1; para. [0033]-[0034]; see Abstract wherein sufficient powder is produced to form a sintered magnet), comprising:
melting a Mn metal and Bi metal to provide an alloy comprising the composition MnxBi100-x, wherein x is 50-55at%, including the composition Mn50Bi50, which reads on the claimed x range of 48.5-53.5at% (para. [0018]);
rapidly solidifying the melted alloy by casting to form a solidified material that includes a crystalized MnBi phase (para. [0025]; para. [0027]-[0029]);
annealing the solidified material to promote the formation of LTP MnBi phase therein to at least a purity of 95% (para. [0032]); and
comminuting the alloy including a ball milling step after annealing to obtain comminuted powder particles with particle sizes of 0.5-5um, which reads on the claimed 3-5um, for use in bulk permanent magnet manufacture by powder consolidation (para. [0018]; para. [0036]-[0037]; Abstract).
Regarding the composition and particle size, in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP § 2144.05.I. Additionally, the criticality has not been provided for the claimed ranges.
Kim882 discloses annealing the alloy material at about 270-350C and for up to 1 day (para. [0032]), but does not disclose annealing for 2-6 days.
Li teaches wherein the amount of LTP MnBi (alpha-MnBi) maybe be improved by increasing the annealing times (see Abstract; see Table 1).
For example, Lee teaches annealing a rapidly solidified Mn-Bi based material at 270-330C for as long as 48 hours (2 days) in order to obtain the hard magnetic phase (see para. [0070]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have increased the annealing time to 2 days, as taught by Lee, for the invention disclosed by Kim882, in order to maximize and realize the largest amount of LTP MnBi phase possible (see teaching by Li and Lee above). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP § 2144.05.I. Additionally, the criticality has not been provided for the claimed range.
Kim882 discloses rapid solidification by casting to form the MnBi material in the form of a ribbon (para. [0025]), but does not disclose solidifying in a cooled metallic ingot mold to form an as-cast solidified ingot body.
Cui teaches wherein MnBi powder may be produced by casting an ingot, annealing the ingot, and subsequently pulverizing the powder (Sect. 2.1-2.2). Cui teaches wherein ribbon manufacturing is smaller scale (10g), wherein conventional arc or induction melting casting is preferred for larger capacity (kilogram or higher) setups and over ribbon manufacturing in terms of feasibility and cost effectiveness (Introduction, Pg. 375; section 2.1, sample preparation, arc melted and cast into buttons; section 2.2, heat treatment, “buttons were crushed, ground and sieved to powders and further heat treated”; section 2.3, ingots; Fig. 1, as-cast ingots).
Cui does not expressly disclose solidifying in a cooled metallic ingot mold.
Jin376 further teaches wherein an ultrafine grained MnBi starting material may be melted, casted, and rapidly solidified using a chilled metallic mold, which enables a compositionally more uniform MnBi phase (para. 0072]). One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that casting and rapidly chilling in a mold would produce an ingot.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have casted and rapidly solidified the MnBi material into an ingot, as taught by Cui and Jin376, and further to have rapidly solidified the MnBi melt with a chilled metallic mold, as taught by Jin376, for the invention disclosed by Kim882. One would be motivated to do this in order to produce larger (kilogram or higher) capacity setup with improved feasibility and cost effectiveness, and to also produce an ultrafine grained MnBi starting material which is compositionally more uniform (see teachings by Cui and Jin above).
Cui discloses wherein ingot casting enables larger capacity setups of a kilogram or higher (Pg. 375, para. 2), which reads on the claimed limitation wherein the ingot is at least 1kg in weight. Additionally, one of routine skill in the art would be easily capable of forming differently sized and weighted ingots as a known and conventional method to tailor the amount of yield and/or production amount of powder. See MPEP 2144.04.A.IV.
While Cui does not expressly disclose forming a crystallized LTP MnBi phase in the solidified ingot, the composition (Mn50Bi50) and the casting process are the same as claimed, and one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the process to result in the claimed presence of a crystallized LTP MnBi phase. When the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP 2112.01. Examiner also notes the claims do not currently require a particular amount of LTP MnBi phase formed in as-cast ingot, and trace amounts of LTP phase read on the claimed limitations.
Kim882 fails to disclose depositing a coating consisting of non-magnetic metallic Sb or polymeric material on and covering exterior surfaces of the comminuted 3-5um powder particles. Therefore, Kim882 also fails to disclose wherein such a coating provides the non-magnetic material between LTP MnBi grains at grain boundaries after bulk magnet manufacture by powder consolidation.
Kim134 teaches adding a low melting point metal to the interface between particles by further milling the pulverized (comminuted) powder with 0-10wt%, such as 1wt% and 2wt%, of a low melting point metal powder, such as Sn, Zn and Bi or an alloy thereof, prior to bulk consolidation, in order to improve coercive force, improve maximum energy product at a high temperature and improve thermal stability (para. [0017]-[0022]; para. [0051]-[0052]; para. [0058]; Fig. 1-2; Claim 11; Table 1, 1wt% and 2wt%). One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that ball milling the MnBi comminuted powder with a low-melting point metal powder would coat and deposit/cover the surface of the MnBi powder with the low melting point metal because the low melting point metals are much softer materials than the MnBi powder.
Kim134 further teaches wherein the low-melting point metal remains as a grain boundary phase after consolidation at the interface between grains/crystal particles, preventing reversal of the magnetic field produced from a crystal particle from propagating to adjacent crystal particles (para. [0017]-[0018]).
Kim134 does not disclose wherein the low melting point metal is Sb.
Irie451 teaches mixing 1-20wt% of a low melting point metal to cover MnBi particles in order to prevent penetration of oxygen and moisture, thereby increasing corrosion resistance, while also increasing the saturation magnetization (para. [0058]). Like Kim134, Irie451 also teaches wherein the metallic binder produces a diffusion phase at the interface between magnetic particles in the formed magnet (para. [0058]).
Irie451 further teaches wherein the binder metal includes selections of Bi, Sn, Zn, and alloys thereof (options disclosed by Kim134), and also Sb (para. [0058]). Therefore, Irie451 recognizes the art equivalence of using Sb as the low melting point metal for one of Bi, Sn, Zn and alloys thereof, for coating a MnBi particle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have ball milled the pulverized MnBi particles with 1-10wt%, such 1wt% and 2wt% which reads on the claimed range of 2wt% or less, of a low melting point metal powder, such as Sb, and thereby formed a coating of the low melting point powder covering the exterior surfaces of the pulverized(comminuted) MnBi powder particles prior to bulk magnet consolidation, and to have further formed a grain boundary phase of the low melting point metal at the interface between MnBi grains in the consolidated product, as taught by Kim134 and Irie451, for the invention disclosed by Kim288.
One would be motivated to do this in order to prevent reversal of the magnetic field produced from a crystal particle from propagating to adjacent crystal particles, thereby improving coercive force, maximum energy product at a high temperature and thermal stability (see teaching above by Kim134), and in order to improve corrosion resistance and saturation magnetization (see teaching by Irie451). One would be motivated to use Sb because Irie teaches the art equivalence of using Sb for one of Sn, Bi, Zn or alloys thereof which are metals disclosed by Kim134 (see explanation above).
Further, regarding the limitations “wherein the particle sizes correspond substantially to grain size of the bulk permanent magnet” (see line 14-15 of Claim 2) and “provide the non-magnetic material between MnBi grains at grain boundaries after bulk magnet manufacture by powder consolidation” (lines 21-24 of Claim 2), these limitations are directed to the intended use of the feedstock powder and the manufacture of a bulk permanent magnet using the feedstock powder. The claim limitations directed to a process for fabricating a MnBi feedstock powder, including the structure (composition, particle size and the deposited non-magnetic coating) of the feedstock powder, have been met (see above).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed May 15, 2026, with respect to Claim 2, and dependent claims thereof, and Claim 21, rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Kim882 in view of Li, Lee, and Kim134 (see Claim 2), and over Kim882 in view of Li, Lee, Cui, Jin376 and Kim134 (see Claim 21), have been fully considered and are persuasive in view of Applicant’s amendments to the claims further limiting the coating composition. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made over Kim882 in view of Li, Lee, Kim134 and Irie451 (see Claim 2, see also alternatively rejected Claim 2 over Nguyen2018), and over Kim882 in view of Li, Lee, Cui, Jin376, Kim134 and Irie451 (see Claim 2 and Claim 21), as detailed above.
Regarding the wheel speed of Kim882:
Applicant argues that Kim882 discloses 10-300m/s but prefers a range of 60-70m/s, in order to produce 50-100nm grains of a non-magnetic phase.
Applicant argues that Kim134 teaches away from using a wheel speed of less than 55m/s, and like Kim882, teaches acquiring a non-magnetic phase grain of 50-100nm.
Applicant argues that Kim882 does not yield a MnBi LTP magnetic phase from melt-spinning or casting because Kim882 discloses forming a non-magnetic phase.
These arguments are not found persuasive.
The broader disclosure of Kim882 discloses the claimed range (10-300m/s reads on the claimed 8-20m/s). “Patents are relevant as prior art for all the contain” and “disclosed examples and preferred embodiments do not constitute a teaching away from a broader disclosure or nonpreferred embodiments” (see MPEP 2123.I&II). The wheel speed of 60-70m/s is a preferred embodiment of Kim882 (para. [0029], “10 to 300m/s…may be preferably 60 to 70m/s”). The grain size of 50-100nm is also a preferred embodiment of Kim882 (para. [0028], “in an exemplary embodiment, when the crystal size on crystal grains of the MnBi ribbon…is 50 to 100nm”). Further, it is noted that Applicant has not provided criticality or unexpected results for the claimed wheel speed.
Regarding Kim134, this reference is not relied upon for wheel speed parameters. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Regarding MnBi LTP phase formation vs non-magnetic phase formation, the presence of a non-magnetic phase does not negate the presence of the LTP phase in the as-spun ribbon. The method steps of Kim882 (or Kim882 in view of Cui and Jin376) are the same as claimed, and one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that using a wheel speed of 10m/s for example, or casting an ingot in a chilled mold, would result in the same microstructure as the instant invention (see Claim 2 rejection above). Examiner notes the claims do not currently require a particular amount of LTP phase formed in the as-spun ribbon or ingot, and trace amounts of LTP phase reads on the claimed limitations.
Applicant argues that Kim882 teaches that the non-magnetic phase grain structure of 50-100nm facilitates Mn diffusion to avoid grain growth, and one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that this would shorten the required annealing time required for LTP phase transformation.
Applicant further argues that Kim882 expressly discloses an annealing time range of 3-24 hours.
This argument is not found persuasive.
The recited teachings by Applicant in Kim882 cannot be located. Kim882 does not appear to recite the desire to shorten annealing times by achieving a 50-100nm grain structure, and merely teaches that annealing causes diffusion of Mn. Kim882 does not relate Mn diffusion to the grain size. Further, Kim does not provide any teaching for the disclosed range, and therefore does not teach away from expanding beyond the disclosed range.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Cao2018 (previously cited, “Effects of intergranular phase on the coercivity for MnBi magnets prepared by spark plasma sintering”): teaches wherein MnBi powder used for bulk permanent magnets comprises non-magnetic intergranular (at the grain boundary) phases of Bi, which improves coercivity due to magnetic isolation effects (Introduction; Abstract).
Guo (previously cited and cited by Applicant in IDS filed August 20, 2021, “Formation of MnBi ferromagnetic phases through crystallization of the amorphous phase): teaches wherein rapidly solidified melt quenched MnBi may be transformed from the as-quenched amorphous state to form 95wt% or more alpha MnBi phase (LTP phase), with the remaining 5wt% being Bi phase, by annealing at 543K (see Abstract; see Pg. 6067-6068, Results and Discussion, Para. 1; 543K is 270C). One of ordinary skill in the art would be able to convert between weight% and volume%, and appreciate that 95wt% or more LTP phase would read on the claimed 90vol% or more LTP phase.
Guo also teaches melt quenching an ingot in the same manner of the instant invention, wherein MnBi ingots may be prepared by melting the appropriate amounts of Mn and Bi and water-cooling on a copper boat (i.e., mold) (see Pg. 6068, Experimental Methods, Para. 1).
Cao (previously cited, “Microstructure and magnetic properties of MnBi alloys with high coercivity and significant anisotropy prepared by surfactant assisted ball milling”): teaches wherein MnBi powders may be used for bonded MnBi permanent magnets as an alternative to rare earth magnets, which use critical rare earth elements (see Introduction).
Ramlam (previously cited, “Preparation and characterization of bakelite bonded magnet NdFeB used for electric generator”): teaches wherein Bakelite may be used as a suitable binder for bonded permanent magnets because it has superior heat resistance and produce magnetic materials with higher heat resistance (see Pg. 2, Introduction).
Jin (cited above, US 20140291296 A1, teachings previously but not currently relied upon): teaches a hard magnetic particle, including MnBi, and also teaches decorating the hard magnetic NdFeB particles with nonmagnetic grain boundary barrier material, such as Zn, Sn and Bi, and further Sb, in order to impede domain wall movement, thereby enhancing magnetic properties such as coercivity (para. [0063]-[0064]). One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that decorating reads on coating (see para. [0066]-[0067], wherein particles are decorated ‘or coated’ with smaller size particles; see Fig. 9, coating method 910).
Jensen (“Optimizing composition in MnBi permanent magnet alloys”): teaches annealing MnBi melt-spun ribbons at 290C for five days (2.1, Sample Preparation).
Kishimoto (previously cited, US 5648160 A): teaches wherein MnBi particles are coated with an inorganic compound, including a carbide or nitride of Bi or Mn, in an amount of at least 1wt%, in order to improve corrosion resistance (Col. 10, lines 45-47 and 55-60; Col. 3, lines 5-8, 1-50wt%). Kishimoto further teaches wherein CVD, and other conventional methods such as sol-gel, precipitation, microcapsulation, pyrolysis and mechanochemical methods, may be further used to coat MnBi particles with other substances such as an inorganic compound of a metal (Col. 10, lines 61- Col. 11, lines 13).
Yokota (previously cited, JP 2019054128 A, English Machine Translation provided): teaches wherein MnBi alloys may comprise 0.1-5wt% of an additive element or alloy, including Zn, which improves magnetic properties and corrosion resistance, and wherein the additive alloy may be added at the time of pulverization and present as a coating on the MnBi-based alloy particle (para. [0017]-[0018]). Yokota further teaches a metallic binder metal of Bi, Sn, Z, an alloy thereof, and also Sb, in an amount of 1-20wt% (para. [0032]).
Irie (previously cited, JP 2017135267 A1, see updated English machine translation): teaches the addition of a nonmagnetic metal binder to feedstock powder in order to increase the relative density of the magnet, and increase residual magnetic flux density without reducing the coercive force (para. [0011]-[0013]). Irie teaches wherein, prior to bulk consolidation, comminuted MnBi powder is mixed with the non-magnetic metal binder powder, such as one comprising Bi, Sn and Zn, and wherein that metal binder is disposed between MnBi particles, and further, exists as a grain boundary phase between particles to magnetically separate the magnetic particle (Abstract; para. [0011]; para. [0024]-[0025]; para. [0034]; see para. [0035] wherein mixing occurs prior to bulk consolidation).
Irie teaches mixing MnBi magnetic powders with the low-melting point metal by mixing at a temperature, such as 50-400C, and above the melting point of the low-melting point metal, in order to provide a powder with good fluidity (para. [0034]; see para. [0035], wherein heated milling process produces a powder used to fill a mold which is then consolidated). One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that mixing with a melted low-melting point metal would produce a coating of low-melting point metal over the entire exterior surface of the magnetic particles because the magnetic particles will have remained unmelted.
Wang (US 20130266473 A1): teaches forming a metallic coating on a magnetic particle prior to bulk consolidation wherein the coating is formed via mechanical milling, physical vapor deposition (PVD) or chemical vapor deposition (CVD) (para. [0005]). Thus, Wang recognizes the art equivalence of mechanical milling with PVD and CVD for coating a particle with a metal powder.
Zhang (“High energy product of MnBi by field annealing and Sn alloying”): demonstrates wherein a wheel speed of 20m/s for forming a MnBi ribbon results in grains of 59nm and 62nm (Pg. 2, Col. 1, para. 3, 20m/s; Pg. 3, Col. 1, Para. 1).
Choi (cited above, US 20150110664 A1, further teachings): teaches forming MnBi material at scalable and industrial quantities greater than about 1kg in a single process batch by forming an ingot, annealing, milling, and further heat treatment (para. [0015]; Fig. 1). Choi discloses annealing at 266C (which is very close to the claimed 270) for 8 hours or more and at 266-350C for 5 hours or more (which is inclusive of 2-6 days as Choi does not disclose an upper limit), and then repeating annealing at 250-300C after milling to increase LTP phase fraction (para. [0011]-[0014]).
Nguyen2020 (previously cited, “Effect of pre-alloy composition on the content of ferromagnetic phase of MnBi melt spun ribbons”): teaches a melt-spinning wheel speeds of 20m/s for a Mn50Bi50 melt composition, wherein the as-spun ribbon comprises an MnBi LTP phase fraction of 29.25%.
Kanzaki (JP H10261514 A): teaches the art equivalence of ball mill mixing and jet milling to that of a Henschel mixer for mixing MnBi powder (Abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CATHERINE P SMITH whose telephone number is (303)297-4428. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00-4:00 MT.
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 on (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.
CATHERINE P. SMITH
Patent Examiner
Art Unit 1735
/CATHERINE P SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 1735
/KEITH WALKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights