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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1,3-4,6-11,13-14,16 and 21-25 are pending and are presented for this examination. Claims 1, 16 are amended. Claims 2, 5, 12, 15 and 17-20 are cancelled. Claims 21-25 are newly added.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 07/09/2021 and is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Status of Previous Rejection
All art and 112 rejections are withdrawn from previous office action of 06/06/2025 in view of amendment of claim 1.
A new ground of art rejection is rendered as follows.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6-7, 13 and 21-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chmielus (Wo2018218199A1 using US20200118742A1 as English Translation) in view of Wendhausen (NPL document “Additive Manufacturing of bonded NdFeB, process Parameters Evaluation on Magnetic Properties”)
As for independent claim 1, Chmielus discloses alignment of magnetic materials during powder deposition or spreading in additive manufacturing. (Title) The method comprising (Abstract and claim 1) Figure 2(G) Example 6 is a gradually changing magnetization direction through neighboring layers (paragraph [0058]) as illustrated by large arrows on the right labeled as “33 which suggest a permanent magnet array is formed having a defined magnetic inhomogeneity.
Providing or forming a layer of magnetic/ferromagnetic particles
Applying a magnetic field to the layer of particles to align the magnetic moments of the magnetic particles.
Bonding the layer with a binder material and then subsequently cured and sintered using electron beam (paragraph [0068])
Providing or forming a next layer of magnetic/ferromagnetic particles on to the previous layer
Applying a magnetic field to the next layer of particles to align the magnetic moments of the magnetic particles in the next layer.
Bonding the next layer with a binder material and then subsequently cured and sintered using electron beam (paragraph [0068])
Repeating steps (d) through (f) until an final shape is complete
Chmielus expressly discloses the magnetic moment of the particles in each layer have 3D magnetic field vector that are different from layer to layer (paragraph [0017] and claim 5, Figure 2(G)) Hence, instant claimed defined magnetic inhomogeneity is met in view of gradually changing magnetization direction from bottom layer 31 to top layer 37 as illustrated in Figure 2(G). The layer of magnetic particles is anisotropic. (paragraph [0070])
Chmielus differs from instant claim 1 such that it does not disclose disposing the layer of magnetic particles and a binder within a bed. However, Chmielus explicitly discloses magnetic material embedded in a polymer matrix is well known in the art as a bonded magnet.
Wendhausen discloses additive manufacturing of bonded NdFeB by mixing magnetic powder with polymeric binder in a ball milling for 2 hours to make a bonded NdFeB magnet. (Col 1 Materials and methods section)
Hence, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art, at the time the invention is made to dispose a layer of magnetic particles and a binder within a bed as suggested by Wendhausen, in the process of Chmielus for the purpose of making a bonded magnet.
As for claim 3, Chmielus’s laser or electron beam (paragraph [0076])suggests the energy beam is a laser beam or electron beam.
As for claim 4, Chmielus’s powder bed binder jet printing (paragraph [0003]) suggests binder is a binder powder.
As for claim 6, the fact Wendhausen disclose the mixing process of magnet powder and polymer binder is mixed in a ball-mill for 2 hours (Col 1 Materials and Methods section lines 1-2) suggests a core shell particle with the magnetic powder coated with the binder.
As for claim 7, Chmielus discloses orienting the magnetic powder particles by applying an external magnetic field to the magnetic powder particles. (paragraph [0002])
As for claim 13, Wendhausen’s disclosed bonded NdFeB (Title) which suggests Nd-Fe-B magnetic powder.
As for newly added claim 21, Wendhausen discloses in Figure 1 a Halbach array.
As for newly added claim 22, Chmielus discloses the 3D magnetic field vectors of the magnetic moments of the particles gradually change over a plurality of layers. (paragraphs [0021]-[0023]) Figure 2(G) shows gradually changing magnetization direction through layers as illustrated by large arrows on the right labelled as “33”. (paragraph [0034]). Hence, instant claimed continuous is also met.
As for newly added claim 23, Wendhausen discloses a ring shape magnet array in Figure 1.
As for newly added claim 24, Figure 2(G) suggests magnetic field on an upper side that is larger than magnetic field on a lower side.
As for newly added claim 25, Figure 6(A) shows an exemplary Ni-Mn-Ga (paragraph [0048]) which suggests magnetic power comprising plurality of materials of Ni, Mn and Ga.
Claims 8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chmielus in view of Wendhausen as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Nlebedim (NPL document “Studies on in situ magnetic alignment of bonded anisotropic Nd-Fe-B alloy powders”)
As for claim 8, Nlebedim disclose anisotropic Nd-Fe-B alloy powders can be magnetically aligned within the binder provides an avenue for enhancing (BH)max by increasing the remanent magnetization. Page 169 Col 2 Section 2 Experimental Approach discloses an external magnetic field were applied to the magnetic powder by DC external magnetic field to magnetically align the anisotropic powder.
Hence, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art, at the time the invention is made to apply a well known C external magnetic field to magnetically align the anisotropic powder as suggested by Nlebedim, in the process of Chmielus in view of Wendhausen with expected success.
As for claim 16, Nlebedim discloses compact electronic device (Page 168 Col 1 Section 1 Introduction line 1) which suggests claimed an electric machine.
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chmielus in view of Wendhausen as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Compton (US20180236724A1).
As for claims 10-11, neither Chmielus nor Wendhausen discloses use of epoxy as polymer binder.
Compton discloses novel 3D printing method to fabricate bonded magnets of complex shape. The binder is polymer binder such as epoxy. (paragraph [0026]) In view of epoxy meeting claimed binder material, it is expected to melt below 800 degree C as required by instant claim 11.
Hence, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art, at the time the invention is made to apply epoxy as polymer binder as disclosed by Compton, in the process of process of Chmielus in view of Wendhausen for the benefit of undergoing a cross-linking process.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chmielus in view of Wendhausen as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Huang (US 6,042,780).
As for claim 9, neither Wendhausen nor Compton discloses tapping, sonicating or rolling the bed to increase packing density of mixed powder.
Huang discloses a manual tapping is used to assist the flow of powders and increase the packing density is well known in the art, (Col 11 lines 20-25)
Hence, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art, at the time the invention is made to apply manual tapping as disclosed by Huang, in the process of Chmielus in view of Wendhausen for the benefit of assisting the flow of powders to increase the packing density.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chmielus in view of Wendhausen as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Yasui (NPL document “Temperature dependence of post-sintered annealing on magnetic properties of intergranular phase in Nd-Fe-B permanent magnet”).
As for claim 14, Yasui discloses the coercivity of the sintered Nd-Fe-B permanent magnet annealed at 500 degree C increased to be 0.75 T, about 40% larger than 0.52 T of the as sintered magnet. (Page 3 III Results and Discussion and Figure 1a)
That is, Yasui suggests annealing the magnet after sintering at 500 degree C as required by instant claim.
Hence, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art, at the time the invention is made to anneal the sintered magnet at 500 degree C as disclosed by Yasui, in the process of Chmielus in view of Wendhausen for the benefit of 40% increase of coercivity.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chmielus in view of Wendhausen as applied to claim 1, and further in view of APA (Applicant admitted prior art).
As for claim 21, applicant admitted prior art (Instant PGPUB background paragraph [0004]) discloses magnet array such as Halbach array produce a strong concentrated and spatially periodic magnetic field.
Hence, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art, at the time the invention is made make a magnet Halbach array as suggested by APA, in the process of Chmielus in view of Wendhausen for the benefit of producing a strong concentrated and spatially periodic magnetic field.
Response to argument
In response to applicant’s argument filed on 09/05/2025 that combination of Wendhausen and Nlebedium teach repeated steps of disposing, aligning and bonding layers of magnetic powder in which the magnetic alignment is varying or different between layers to product a magnet with a defined magnetic inhomogeneity as required by amended claim 1, argument is moot since art rejection of Wendhausen and Nlebedium is withdrawn. Newly cited Chmielus explicitly discloses steps of disposing, aligning and bonding layers of magnetic powder in which the magnetic alignment is varying or different between layers to product a magnet with a defined magnetic inhomogeneity.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNY R WU whose telephone number is (571)270-5515. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 AM-5:00 PM.
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 Hendricks can be reached on (571)272-1401. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JENNY R WU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733