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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 April 14, 2026 has been entered.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I, set A-oxide, set B-spray forming, set C- iron/iron alloy (claims 1-9) in the reply filed on April 10, 2024 is acknowledged.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I-argon in the reply filed on October 3, 2024 is acknowledged.
Claims 10-67 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
First Art Rejection
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. (U.S. 2012/0082844) in view of Harada et al. (U.S. 2008/0029300).
Referring to Figures 1-2 and paragraphs [0028]-[0060], Takahashi et al. disclose a system for producing a soft magnetic material having a core- shell structure, the system, comprising: a gas supply configured to supply at least one gas (par.[0073], i.e. oxygen-containing atmosphere, inert gas); and a furnace configured to receive the at least one gas (pars.[0071]-[0072]); wherein a flow of the at least one gas is configured to be varied to provide a shell on a particle in the furnace (par.[0076], i.e. switching atmospheres of nitrogen and air or turning on or off).
Takahashi et al. is silent on a core comprising iron and the shell comprising a substantially non-iron oxide material chemically bonded to the core via an alloying element common to the core and the shell.
Referring to paragraphs [0033]-[0043], Harada et al. teach a system for producing a soft magnetic material having the core comprising iron and the shell comprising a substantially non-iron oxide material chemically bonded to the core via an alloying element common to the core and the shell since the structure exhibits high saturation magnetic flux density, high resistance, and high thermal stability (pars.[0056],[0089]). For example, Harada et al. states that the covered magnetic metal particle taken out from the solution is heated to oxidatively decompose the salt or the like on the surface of the magnetic metal particle thereby to form a first inorganic insulating layer. In other words, during heating the particle surface may partially oxidize and new oxide species nucleate at the interface between the core and the shell which creates a chemically integrated interface and not just mechanical adhesion. 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 modified the core-shell structure of Takahashi et al. to have a core comprising iron and the shell comprising a substantially non-iron oxide material chemically bonded to the core via an alloying element common to the core and the shell as taught by Harada et al. since the core-shell structure would exhibit high saturation magnetic flux density, high resistance, and high thermal stability.
The resulting apparatus of Takahashi et al. in view of Harada et al. would yield a shell chemically bonded to a core defined by a particle in the furnace the core comprising iron and the shell comprising a substantially non-iron oxide material.
With respect to claim 2, the system of Takahashi et al. further includes wherein the gas supply comprises an oxygen source (par.[0073]).
With respect to claim 3, the system of Takahashi et al. further includes wherein the furnace comprises at least one heater configured to heat the particle (par.[0072]).
With respect to claim 8, the system of Takahashi et al. further includes wherein the gas supply is further configured to deliver argon (par.[0073]); to the furnace to purge the furnace.
Claim(s) 4-7 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. (U.S. 2012/0082844) in view of Harada et al. (U.S. 2008/0029300) as applied to claims 1-3 and 8 above, and further in view of King et al. (U.S. 2019/0062914).
The teachings of Takahashi et al. in view of Harada et al. have been discussed above.
Takahashi et al. in view of Harada et al. is silent on a flow controller through which the at least one gas is fed to the furnace.
Referring to paragraphs [0207]-[0208], King et al. teach a system wherein a flow controller (i.e. mass flow controller) through which the at least one gas is fed to the furnace in order to regulate the flow of the gas into the furnace for the desired process conditions. 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 modified the system of Takahashi et al. in view of Harada et al. with a flow controller as taught by King et al. in order to regulate the flow of the gas into the furnace for the desired process conditions.
With respect to claim 5, the system of Takahashi et al. in view of Harada et al. and King et al. further comprising a pressure sensor (i.e. sensing device) downstream of the flow controller and upstream of the furnace (King et al.-pars.[0182], [0187], [0207]-[0208]).
With respect to claim 6, the system of Takahashi et al. in view of Harada et al. fail to teach a system controller, the system controller comprising at least one processor and at least one memory having software, the system controller being configured to adjust and control the supply of the at least one gas through the flow controller and being configured to control a temperature in the furnace.
Referring to paragraphs [0163]-[0166],[0181]-[0182],[0187], [0204],[0207]-[0208]), King et al. teach a system wherein a system controller (par.[0181]) comprising at least one processor and at least one memory having software, the system controller being configured to adjust and control the supply of the at least one gas through the flow controller (pars. [0182],[0208]) and being configured to control a temperature in the furnace (pars.[0182], [0204]) in order to achieve the desired process conditions. 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 modified the system of Takahashi et al. in view of Harada et al. to have a system controller comprising at least one processor and at least one memory having software, the system controller being configured to adjust and control the supply of the at least one gas through the flow controller and being configured to control a temperature in the furnace as taught by King et al. in order to achieve the desired process conditions. The modified system of Takahashi et al. in view of Harada et al. and King et al. yields a system controller comprising at least one processor and at least one memory having software, the system controller being configured to adjust and control the supply of the at least one gas through the flow controller and being configured to control a temperature in the furnace.
With respect to claim 7, the system of Takahashi et al. in view of Harada et al. and King et al. further includes wherein adjustment and control of the supply of the at least one gas through the flow controller and control of the temperature of the furnace is based on at least a pressure from the pressure sensor, the temperature in the furnace, or one or more of temperature or flow rate of the at least one gas (King et al.-pars.[0163]-[0166],[0181]-[0182],[0187], [0204],[0207]-[0208]).
With respect to claim 9, the system of Takahashi et al. in view of Harada et al. and King et al. further comprising at least one valve to control the flow of the at least one gas from the gas supply (King et al.-pars. [0207]-[0208]).
Second Art Rejection
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) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gotoh et al. (U.S. 2015/0108392).
Referring to Figure 3 and paragraphs [0069]-[0070], and [0091]-[0096], Gotoh et al. disclose a system for producing a soft magnetic material having a core- shell structure, the system, comprising: a gas supply configured to supply at least one gas (par.[0036], i.e. oxygen-containing atmosphere, inert gas); and a furnace configured to receive the at least one gas (pars.[0093]-[0094]); wherein a flow of the at least one gas is configured to be varied to provide a shell on a particle in the furnace (pars. [0069]-[0070], [0093]-[0094]), the core comprising iron and the shell comprising a substantially non-iron oxide material chemically bonded to the core via an alloying element common to the core and the shell (pars. [0069]-[0070], [0093]-[0094]).
With respect to claim 2, the system of Takahashi et al. further includes wherein the gas supply comprises an oxygen source (par.[0036]).
With respect to claim 3, the system of Gotoh et al. further includes wherein the furnace comprises at least one heater configured to heat the particle (pars. [0069]-[0070], [0093]-[0094]).
Claim(s) 4-7 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gotoh et al. (U.S. 2015/0108392) in view of King et al. (U.S. 2019/0062914).
The teachings of Gotoh et al. have been discussed above.
Gotoh et al. is silent on a flow controller through which the at least one gas is fed to the furnace.
Referring to paragraphs [0207]-[0208], King et al. teach a system wherein a flow controller (i.e. mass flow controller) through which the at least one gas is fed to the furnace in order to regulate the flow of the gas into the furnace for the desired process conditions. 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 modified the system of Gotoh et al. with a flow controller as taught by King et al. in order to regulate the flow of the gas into the furnace for the desired process conditions.
With respect to claim 5, the system of Gotoh et al. in view of King et al. further comprising a pressure sensor (i.e. sensing device) downstream of the flow controller and upstream of the furnace (King et al.-pars.[0182], [0187], [0207]-[0208]).
With respect to claim 6, the system of Gotoh et al. fail to teach a system controller, the system controller comprising at least one processor and at least one memory having software, the system controller being configured to adjust and control the supply of the at least one gas through the flow controller and being configured to control a temperature in the furnace.
Referring to paragraphs [0163]-[0166],[0181]-[0182],[0187], [0204],[0207]-[0208]), King et al. teach a system wherein a system controller (par.[0181]) comprising at least one processor and at least one memory having software, the system controller being configured to adjust and control the supply of the at least one gas through the flow controller (pars. [0182],[0208]) and being configured to control a temperature in the furnace (pars.[0182], [0204]) in order to achieve the desired process conditions. 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 modified the system of Gotoh et al. to have a system controller comprising at least one processor and at least one memory having software, the system controller being configured to adjust and control the supply of the at least one gas through the flow controller and being configured to control a temperature in the furnace as taught by King et al. in order to achieve the desired process conditions. The modified system of Gotoh et al. in view of King et al. yields a system controller comprising at least one processor and at least one memory having software, the system controller being configured to adjust and control the supply of the at least one gas through the flow controller and being configured to control a temperature in the furnace.
With respect to claim 7, the system of Gotoh et al. in view of King et al. further includes wherein adjustment and control of the supply of the at least one gas through the flow controller and control of the temperature of the furnace is based on at least a pressure from the pressure sensor, the temperature in the furnace, or one or more of temperature or flow rate of the at least one gas (King et al.-pars.[0163]-[0166],[0181]-[0182],[0187], [0204],[0207]-[0208]).
With respect to claim 9, the system of Gotoh et al. in view of King et al. further comprising at least one valve to control the flow of the at least one gas from the gas supply (King et al.-pars. [0207]-[0208]).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gotoh et al. (U.S. 2015/0108392) in view of Takahashi et al. (U.S. 2012/0082844).
The teachings of Gotoh et al. have been discussed above. Specifically, Gotoh et al. teach the gas supply is configured to provide a purge gas.
However, Gotoh et al. fail to teach wherein the gas supply is further configured to deliver argon; to the furnace to purge the furnace.
Referring to paragraph [0073], Takahashi et al. teach a system wherein the gas supply is further configured to deliver argon; to the furnace to purge the furnace. Argon is conventionally known in the art to be used as a purge gas. 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 modified the purge gas of Gotoh et al. with an argon gas as taught by Takahashi et al. since it is a conventionally known in the art to be used as a purge gas. Additionally, the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because new reference Gotoh et al.’392 teaches a core comprising iron and the shell comprising a substantially non-iron oxide material chemically bonded to the core via an alloying element common to the core and the shell. Additionally, as stated above, Harada et al. states that the covered magnetic metal particle taken out from the solution is heated to oxidatively decompose the salt or the like on the surface of the magnetic metal particle thereby to form a first inorganic insulating layer. In other words, during heating the particle surface may partially oxidize and new oxide species nucleate at the interface between the core and the shell which creates a chemically integrated interface (i.e. chemical bond) and not just mechanical adhesion. Therefore, the apparatus of Takahashi et al. in view of Harada et al. satisfies the claimed requirements.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Choi et al.’420 and Song et al.’969 teach a core comprising iron and the shell comprising a substantially non-iron oxide material chemically bonded to the core via an alloying element common to the core and the shell.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michelle CROWELL whose telephone number is (571)272-1432. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10:00am-6:00pm.
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, Parviz Hassanzadeh can be reached on 571-272-1435. 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.
/Michelle CROWELL/Examiner, Art Unit 1716
/SYLVIA MACARTHUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights