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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/20/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 8 and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lancsek et al. (US 2006/0251910).
Regarding claims 1-2, 8 and 11-12, Lancsek discloses components such as high wear, abrasive impact, cutting, grinding, sliding applications, i.e. turbomachine, (paragraph 0039) comprising a substrate coated with a coating material (paragraph 0039), deposited via electroless nickel plating, (paragraph 0042) comprising a nickel (paragraph 0023), particulate matter such as ceramic material, graphite and/or PTFE with particles size from nanometers, i.e. less than 1 microns, (paragraphs 0026-0027), boron and phosphorus (paragraphs 0027, 0041-0042) wherein the coating has a thickness of 35 microns (paragraph 0049) or 14-15 microns (paragraph 0058) or 40-45 microns (paragraph 0063).
Lancsek discloses that particulate matter such as ceramic, graphite and ptfe impart specific properties of the coating such as wear resistance, lubrication and stabilizer (paragraphs 0027-0031). Further, Lanscek discloses that ptfe is used in an amount of 24-27 % by volume in the coating (paragraph 0049). Since the instant specification is silent to unexpected results, the specific amount of ceramic, graphite and/or ptfe particles is not considered to confer patentability to the claims. As the wear resistance, lubrication and stabilizer is a variable that can be modified, among others, by adjusting the amount of ceramic, graphite and/or ptfe particles, the precise amount would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. As such, without showing unexpected results, the claimed amount cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have optimized, by routine experimentation, the amount of ceramic, graphite and/or ptfe particles in coating to obtain the desired wear resistance, lubrication and stabilization (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d. 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 223).
Regarding claims 3 and 10, Lanscek discloses the component of claim 1, wherein the ceramic material is silicon carbide (paragraph 0029), the graphite material is graphite oxide (paragraph 0027) and fluoropolymer is PTFE (paragraph 0030).
Regarding claim 5, Lanscek discloses the component of claim 1, wherein Lancsek discloses that the particles size may be from nanometers to up to 100 microns which would encompass values including that being claimed. As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “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).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lancsek et al. (US 2006/0251910) in view of Li et al. (CN 106086827).
Regarding claim 6, Lanscek discloses the component of claim 1, but fails to disclose one coating layer between the substrate and the coating layer.
Li discloses Ni-P-PTFE coating on stainless steel substrate wherein a pre-plating nickel layer, deposited via chemical nickel plating, is used between the substrate and Ni-P-PTFE coating to obtain tight adhesive and uniform grain size (pages 7-8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the pre-plating nickel layer of Li between the substrate and the coating layer of Lancsek to obtain tight adhesive and uniform grain size.
Claim(s) 8 and 13-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lancsek et al. (US 2006/0251910) in view of Appleby et al. (US 2011/0189440).
Regarding claims 8 and 13-18, Lanscek discloses the component of claim 1, Lancsek discloses components such as high wear, abrasive impact, cutting, grinding, sliding applications but does not disclose turbomachine, gas turbine, compressor, pump, subsea equipment and well intervention.
Appleby discloses castings for turbomachine (0780), compressor (0625), turbine, i.e. gas turbine, (0779), pump, i.e. completion equipment, (0741), flow passage or fluid coextrusion, i.e. subsea equipment, (0656, 0657) and well interventional equipment (0741, 0789).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use article of Lancsek in the turbomachine, compressor, gas turbine, pump, subsea equipment, and well interventional equipment as taught in Appleby to obtain heavy metals free coating and to meet end users requirements.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/20/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Lanscek does not disclose coated layer composition as presently claimed. However, it is noted that Lanscek does disclose amended claim 1 as explained above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMIR SHAH whose telephone number is (571)270-1143. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Callie Shosho can be reached at 571-272-1123. 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.
/SAMIR SHAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1787