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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12 February 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hesse et al. (US 6,641,640) in view of Yokoi et al. (JP2008303413 – machine translation).
Considering claim 21, Hesse teaches hard sintered moldings having a nitrogen-containing steel for powder injection molding (abstract). The molding comprises a hard material and a metallic binder (Column 4 lines 30-39) where the metallic binder imparts corrosion resistance (Column 4 lines 9-20). A preferred metallic binder is an austenitic iron alloy which comprises by weight Cr: 11-24%, Mn: 2-26%, 2.5-10% Mo, C: not more than 0.5%, Si: up to 2%, N: 0.55-1.2%, Ni: up to 0.5%, the balance iron and inevitable impurities (Column 4 lines 21-33) (e.g. an austenitic stainless-steel powder) with a particularly preferred composition of Cr: at least 11% and not more than 20%, Mn: at least 6% and not more than 20%, Mo: at least 2.5% and not more than 6%, C: not more than 0.1%, N: at least 0.55% and not more than 1.1%, the balance Fe and impurities (Column 3 lines 34-52). The mean particle size (e.g. D50) of the metallic binder is preferably less than 20 µm and in general is approximately 0.1 µm (Column 3 lines 30-35). While not taught at a diameter D90, the average size taught by Hesse has an open-ended range of less than 20 µm which necessarily overlaps the claimed diameter range. However, Hesse does not teach the claimed oxygen content.
In a related field of endeavor, Yokoi teaches high nitrogen stainless steel powders for solidification molding (abstract). The powder comprises by mass Cr: 10.0-40.0% (Paragraph 17), Mn: 0.1-15.0% (Paragraph 18), Mo: 0.1-20.0% (Paragraph 19), C: 0.2% or less (Paragraph 21), Si: 0.3-2.0% (Paragraph 21), 0.5% or more N (Paragraph 22), Ni: 0-5.0% (Paragraph 16), O: 0.2% or less as amounts larger than this decreases corrosion resistance (Paragraph 22).
As both Hesse and Yokoi teach steel alloy powders for molding they are considered analogous. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the teachings of Hesse with the oxygen content taught by Yokoi as this is known to prevent a decrease in corrosion resistance and one would have had a reasonable expectation of success. Further, the composition and particle size taught by modified Hesse overlaps that which is claimed and the courts have held that where claimed ranges overlap or lie inside of those disclosed in the prior art a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks pp.6-7, filed 08 January 2026, with respect to the 35 USC 103 rejection of claim 21 in view of Katou and Porret have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claim 21 has been withdrawn. Applicant has amended the claims to recite a 0% Cu content and primary reference Katou requires the presence of Cu.
Applicant’s request for rejoinder (p.7, 2nd section) is noted, but cannot be accommodated at this time as no subject matter has been identified as allowable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SETH DUMBRIS whose telephone number is (571)272-5105. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:00 AM - 3:30 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, Humera Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-0604. 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.
SETH DUMBRIS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1784
/SETH DUMBRIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784