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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of JP 2019-180946, JP 2019-180947, and JP 2019-180942 all filed September 30, 2019 as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Receipt is also acknowledged of a copy of WO 2021/066056, the WIPO publication of PCT/JP2020/037278 filed September 30, 2020.
Claim Status
This Office Action is in Response to Applicant’s Remarks and Claim Amendments filed September 17, 2025.
Claims Filing Date
September 17, 2025
Amended
1-5
Pending
1-18
Withdrawn
8-11, 15-16, 18
Under Examination
1-7, 12-14, 17
The applicant argues support for the claim 1 amendment in [0046], [0048], and [0049] of the originally filed specification (Remarks p. 20 para. 2) and claims 2-5 are amended to delete now redundant language (Remarks p. 20 para. 3).
Withdrawn Specification Objection
The following objection is withdrawn due to filing larger, legible tables:
Tables 1A-8 as filed being difficult to read.
Withdrawn Double Patenting Rejection
The following double patenting rejection is withdrawn due to filing and acceptance of a Terminal Disclaimer:
Claims 1-7, 12-14, and 17 over claims 10-12, 14-19, and 21-25 of copending Application No. 17/614,397 (App ‘397) in view of Inoue (JP 2000-144349 machine translation).
The applicant traverses the double patenting rejection in view of the Terminal Disclaimer (Remarks para. spanning pp. 21-22).
The Terminal Disclaimer filed September 17, 2025 listing US App. No. 17/614,397 was approved on September 23, 2025. Therefore, the double patenting rejection over US App. No. 17/614,397 is withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Inoue
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks p. 21 paras. 2-3, filed September 17, 2025, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 102/103 rejection over Inoue have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 102/103 rejection of Inoue has been withdrawn.
The applicant persuasively argues Examples 1, 14, and 28 do not include Ta (Remarks p. 21 para. 3), whereas amended claim 1 lines 7-8 “an amount of Ta is 40 at% or more with respect to the entirety of M1”.
Sakai optionally in view of Martis and Inoue
Applicant's arguments filed September 17, 2025 that are applicable to Sakai have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues [0049] of the specification describes Ta is preferably M by 40 at% or more with reference to the Examples in Table 5b, which have relatively higher Bs and lower Hc (Remarks p. 21 para. 2), whereas Sakai lists a large number of M’ elements, M’ is not essential, only one Example and one Comparative Example include Ta at smaller than 40 at% (Remarks p. 21 para. 4).
If applicant is alleging that M being 40 at% or more Ta is unexpected and significant, then the evidence relied upon should establish “that the differences in results are in fact unexpected and unobvious and of both statistical and practical significance.” MPEP 716.02(b)(I). Further, applicants have the burden of explaining the data they proffer as evidence of non-obviousness. MPEP 716.02(b)(II). The applicant has not met this burden.
Further, a reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art, including nonpreferred embodiments. MPEP 2123(I). Disclosed examples and preferred embodiments do not constitute a teaching away from a broader disclosure or nonpreferred embodiments. MPEP 2123(II).
Sakai discloses Fe100-a-b-c-d-e-fMaM’bYcY’dXeX’f (Abstract) where M’ is at least one or more of Ta, Mo, W, Ti, and V, a is 1 to 12 at% and b is 0 to 5 at% (para. spanning pp. 1-2). Therefore, Sakai renders obvious the amended composition of claim 1.
New Grounds
In light of claim amendment and upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection over 35 U.S.C. 103 is made over Inoue.
Applicant's arguments filed September 17, 2025 that are applicable to the new rejections have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues Inoue lists Ta as one of a large number of M elements and does not describe Ta as preferable (Remarks p. 21 para. 3).
A reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art, including nonpreferred embodiments. MPEP 2123(I). Disclosed examples and preferred embodiments do not constitute a teaching away from a broader disclosure or nonpreferred embodiments. MPEP 2123(II).
Inoue discloses M is one or more of Ti, Zr, Hf, V, Nb, Ta, Mo, and W (Abstract, [0011]-[0012], [0017], [0031]), such that it is within the scope of Inoue for M to be only Ta or to include Ta, both of which render obvious amended claim 1.
Claim Interpretation
With respect to claims 1-4 and “a coefficient of determination” applicant’s specification states that “a coefficient of determination R2 can be obtained from the primary regression equation” and that it is a measure of how likely two elements are to aggregate or disperse with each other ([0035]), where Figs. 1 and 2 show examples of two different coefficients of determination between Z at% and Fe at % ([0036]).
Applicant describes using 3DAP (three-dimensional atom probe) to determine the microscopic segregation or dispersion of elements ([0037]-[0039]) and that “The inventors found an analysis method of obtaining a coefficient of determination R2 of an atomic concentration of Fe and an atomic concentration of at least one of metalloid elements. Specifically, a scatter diagram is created from the atomic concentration of Fe and the atomic concentration of the at least one of metalloid element in each grid.” ([0042]).
Applicant’s specification states that “when changing the composition of the soft magnetic alloy and the heat treatment conditions, a concentration distribution of each element included in the soft magnetic alloy varies”, where “dependency of a concentration distribution of each element on a concentration distribution of another element varies.” ([0041]).
Applicant elected for prosecution the Fe-M-Z species. The pending claims, such as claims 5-7, define the composition of the soft magnetic alloy.
Applicant’s specification describes manufacturing the soft magnetic alloy ([0126]) as a ribbon with a single roll method ([0127]-[0131]) that is then heat treated to achieved the nanohetero structure ([0132]) by heating at a rate of 100°C/min or more to 450°C to 650°C, retaining for 0.1 to 5 minutes, then temperature-lowering at 50 to 1000°C/min ([0136]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-7, 12-14, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 lines 4-5 “M is one or more of transition metals of Group 4 to Group 6,…M1 is one or more of elements selected from M” fails to comply with the written description requirement. Applicant’s specification, such as at [0013], [0017], [0048], and [0063], recite that M1 is one or more of the group consisting of Ta, V, Zr, Hf, Ti, Nb, Mo, and W. Claim 1 lines 4-5 is broader than what is supported by applicant’s specification.
Claims 2-7, 12-14, and 17 are rejected as depending from claim 1.
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.
Claims 1-7, 12-14, and 17 are 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.
Claim 1 lines 1-2 “at least one of metalloid elements” and lines 3-6 “…Fe-M-Z based composition, M is one or more of transition metals of Group 4 to Group 6, Z is two or more of C, P, Si, B, and Ge,…” renders the claim indefinite. How is the at least one metalloid element related to the Fe-M-Z-based composition? Fe is not a metalloid. M, the Group 4 to Group 6 elements, are not metalloids. Are all the elements listed in Z metalloids, such that inclusion of any two elements of Z satisfies the inclusion of at least one metalloid? Of the elements listed for Z, according to the periodic table, B, Si and Ge are metalloid elements. Therefore, does the claim require two or more of at least one of B, Si, and Ge and optionally at least one of C and P, both of which are nonmetals? According to applicant’s specification at [0034] and [0042] “the metalloid element is set as Z”. Therefore, for the purpose of examination claim 1 will be interpreted as all the elements listed in Z are metalloid elements.
Claim 1 line 3 “Fe-M-Z based composition” and line 5 “M1” renders the claim indefinite. The base composition does not include M1, such that it is unclear how M1 relates to the base composition.
Applicant’s specification discloses Fe-M-Z based compositional formulas of (Fe(1-(α+β))X1αX2β)(1-(a+b+c))M1aZbCrc ([0013], [0063]) and (Fe(1-(α+β))X1αX2β)(1-(a+b1+b2+c))M1aCb3Zb4Cre ([0017], [0100]). Further, pending dependent claim 5, elected in applicant’s 3/5/2025 response to the 1/6/25 restriction requirement, recites (Fe(1-(α+β))X1αX2β)(1-(a+b+c))M1aZbCrc, which does recite M1. Therefore, for the purpose of examination claim 1 will be interpreted as M1 being M, such that Fe-M-Z is the same as Fe-M1-Z.
Regarding claim 1, a broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c).
In the present instance, claim 1 recites the broad recitation in line 5 “M1 is one or more elements selected from M”, and claim 1 also recites in lines 5-6 “M1 is one or more of elements selected from the group consisting of Ta, V, Zr, Hf, Ti, Nb, Mo, and W” and in lines 7-8 “an amount of Ta is 40 at% or more with respect to the entirety of M1” which are two narrower statements of the range/limitation.
The claim is considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the features introduced by such narrower language are (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claims 2-7, 12-14, and 17 are rejected as depending from claim 1.
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.
Claims 1-7, 12-14, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue (JP 2000-144349 machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Inoue discloses a soft magnetic alloy ([0001]) comprising Fe and at least one of metalloid elements (B and P) (B and C) ([0011], [0037], [0048], Tables 4-5),
wherein the soft magnetic alloy has an Fe-M-Z based composition ((Fe1-aZa)BMyXz), Fe is Fe, M is M, and B+X is Z) (Abstract, [0011]-[0012], [0016]-[0017], Tables 4-5),
M is one or more of transition metals of Group 4 to Group 6 (M is one or more of Ti, Zr, Hf, V, Nb, Ta, Mo, and W), Z is two or more of C, P, Si, B, and Ge (Z is B and X, X is one or more of P and C), M1 is one or more of elements selected from M (M is one or more of Ti, Zr, Hf, V, Nb, Ta, Mo, and W), and M1 is one or more of elements selected from the group consisting of Ta, V, Zr, Hf, Ti, Nb, Mo, and W (M is one or more of Ti, Zr, Hf, V, Nb, Ta, Mo, and W) (Abstract, [0011]-[0012], [0016]-[0017], Tables 4-5),
M1 content is 3.0 to 14.0 at% (4 to 9 at%) (Abstract, [0011], [0016]-[0017], [0024], Table 4-5), and
an amorphous material and a nanocrystal having a grain size of 5 to 30 nm (30 nm or less with examples of 12 to 17 nm) (Tables 4-5) are mixed ([0018], [0033]).
Examples from Inoue Tables 4-5 are presented in the following table.
Inoue No.
Composition
Metalloid
Nanocrystal
1
Fe83.5Nb7B9P0.5
B and P
14 nm
14
Fe82Nb7B9C2.0
B and C
14 nm
28
Fe87Zr7B4C2.0
B and C
17 nm
The Table 4-5 examples of Inoue are silent to an amount of Ta being 40 at% or more with respect to the entirety of M1 in the soft magnetic alloy.
Inoue discloses that M is one or more elements selected from Ti, Zr, Hf, V, Nb, Ta, Mo, and W (Abstract, [0011]-[0012], [0016]-[0017]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the Table 4-5 examples of Inoue to replace M, such as Nb or Zr, with Ta because Ta is an art recognized equivalent of M (Abstract, [0011]-[0012], [0016]-[0017]). Therefore, upon substitution, Ta is 100 at% of M1 in the soft magnetic alloy. In order to rely on equivalence as a rationale supporting an obviousness rejection, the equivalency must be recognized in the prior art. It is prima facie obvious to substitute equivalents known for the same purpose. MPEP 2144.06(II).
Additionally, the Table 4-5 examples of Inoue include Nb or Zr as M and Inoue discloses that a portion of Zr or Nb can be substituted with Ta ([0023]). “It is prima facie obvious to combine two compositions each of which is taught by the prior art to be useful for the same purpose, in order to form a third composition to be sued for the very same purpose….[T]he idea of combining them flows logically from their having been individually taught in the prior art.” MPEP 2144.06(I). With respect to the amount of substitution of Zr or Nb in the Table 4-5 examples with Ta, generally differences in concentration will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration is critical. “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” MPEP 2144.05(II)(A).
A coefficient of determination between an atomic concentration of Fe and an atomic concentration of the at least one of metalloid elements being 0.700 or more has been considered and determined to recite a property of the claimed soft magnetic alloy.
Inoue discloses a composition that renders that claimed obvious (Abstract, [0011]-[0012], [0016]-[0017], [0037], [0048], Tables 4-5).
Inoue discloses P and C have a strong affinity for M, remaining in the amorphous phase, and do not dissolve in the bcc phase whose main component is Fe ([0013]). Therefore, Inoue discloses dispersion or segregation of Fe and P and of Fe and C (P and C are at least one of the metalloid elements).
Inoue also discloses heat treating by heating at a rate of 180°C/min to a temperature of 560°C to 660°C, holding for 5 minutes, then cooling at a rate of 180°C/min ([0033]-[0037]).
Applicant [0136]
Heating rate 100°C/min or more
To 450 to 650°C
Retain for 0.1 to 5 minutes
Cooling rate
50 to 1000°C/min
Inoue [0037]
Heating rate 180°C/min
To 560 to 660°C
Hold for 5 minutes
Cooling rate 180°C/min
The claimed composition is rendered obvious by the prior art (Inoue Abstract, [0011]-[0013], [0016]-[0017], [0037], [0048], Tables 4-5) and the process of the prior art (Inoue [0033]-[0037]) is substantially similar to the process disclosed by applicant to manufacture the soft magnetic alloy (applicant’s specification [0136]). Therefore, the claimed properties naturally flow from the disclosure of the prior art, including a coefficient of determination between an atomic concentration of Fe and an atomic concentration of the at least one of metalloid elements being 0.700 or more. In support, Inoue discloses Bs (kOe) of 1.5 T or more ([0011], [0015], [0018], Tables 4-5). Similarly, applicant’s specification at [0165] recites “with regard to Bs, 1.40 T or more was set as satisfactory and 1.50 T or more set as further satisfactory.”
Regarding claim 2, a coefficient of determination between the atomic concentration of Fe and an atomic concentration of the at least one of M is 0.700 or more has been considered and determined to recite a property of the claimed soft magnetic alloy.
Inoue discloses a composition that renders that claimed obvious (Abstract, [0011]-[0012], [0016]-[0017], [0037], [0048], Tables 4-5).
Inoue discloses P and C have a strong affinity for M, remaining in the amorphous phase, and do not dissolve in the bcc phase whose main component is Fe ([0013]). With respect to substituting Ta to be a portion of Zr and Nb ([0023]), Zr and Nb hardly form a solid solution in alpha-Fe and supersaturate in solid solution ([0021]). Therefore, Inoue discloses dispersion or segregation of Fe and M, when Nb or Zr are included as part of M.
Inoue also discloses heat treating by heating at a rate of 180°C/min to a temperature of 560°C to 660°C, holding for 5 minutes, then cooling at a rate of 180°C/min ([0033]-[0037]).
The claimed composition is rendered obvious by the prior art (Inoue Abstract, [0011]-[0013], [0016]-[0017], [0021], [0037], [0048], Tables 4-5) and the process of the prior art (Inoue [0033]-[0037]) is substantially similar to the process disclosed by applicant to manufacture the soft magnetic alloy (applicant’s specification [0136]). Therefore, the claimed properties naturally flow from the disclosure of the prior art, including a coefficient of determination between the atomic concentration of Fe and an atomic concentration of the at least one of M being 0.700 or more. In support, Inoue discloses Bs (kOe) of 1.5 T or more ([0011], [0015], [0018], Tables 4-5). Similarly, applicant’s specification at [0165] recites “with regard to Bs, 1.40 T or more was set as satisfactory and 1.50 T or more set as further satisfactory.”
Regarding claim 3, Inoue discloses an element among Z having the highest content ratio as a ratio of the number of atoms with respect to the entirety of the soft magnetic alloy is set as Z1 (B), and an element among Z having the highest content ratio except Z1 is set as Z2 (P or C) (Abstract, [0011]-[0012], [0016]-[0017], [0021]-[0022], [0026], Tables 4-5).
Examples from Inoue Tables 4-5 are presented in the following table.
Inoue No.
Composition
Z1
Z2
1
Fe83.5Nb7B9P0.5
B
P
14
Fe82Nb7B9C2.0
B
C
28
Fe87Zr7B4C2.0
B
C
A coefficient of determination between an atomic concentration of M and an atomic concentration of Z1 is 0.600 or more, or a coefficient of determination between the atomic concentration of M and an atomic concentration of Z2 is 0.600 or more, and a coefficient of determination between the atomic concentration of Z1 and the atomic concentration of Z2 is less than 0.400 has been considered and determined to recite a property of the claimed soft magnetic alloy.
Inoue renders the claimed composition obvious (Abstract, [0011]-[0012], [0016]-[0017], [0021]-[0022], [0026], [0037], [0048], Tables 4-5).
Inoue discloses B enhances amorphous forming ability ([0021]), stabilizing the amorphous phase at the grain boundaries with resulting in a strong tendency to form borides ([0022]), and P and C have a strong affinity for M, remaining in the amorphous phase, and do not dissolve in the bcc phase whose main component is Fe ([0013]). With respect to substituting Ta to be a portion of Zr and Nb ([0023]), Inoue discloses adding Zr or Nb facilitates obtaining an amorphous phase ([0023]-[0026]) and that Zr and Nb hardly form a solid solution in alpha-Fe and supersaturate in solid solution ([0021]). Therefore, Inoue discloses dispersion or segregation of Fe and M (when Nb or Zr are included as part of M).
Inoue also discloses heat treating by heating at a rate of 180°C/min to a temperature of 560°C to 660°C, holding for 5 minutes, then cooling at a rate of 180°C/min ([0033]-[0037]).
The claimed composition is rendered obvious by the prior art (Inoue [0013], [0021], [0037], [0048], Tables 4-5) and the process of the prior art (Inoue [0033]-[0037]) is substantially similar to the process disclosed by applicant to manufacture the soft magnetic alloy (applicant’s specification [0136]). Therefore, the claimed properties naturally flow from the disclosure of the prior art, including a coefficient of determination between an atomic concentration of M and an atomic concentration of Z1 being 0.600 or more, or a coefficient of determination between the atomic concentration of M and an atomic concentration of Z2 being 0.600 or more, and a coefficient of determination between the atomic concentration of Z1 and the atomic concentration of Z2 being less than 0.400. In support, Inoue discloses Bs (kOe) of 1.5 T or more ([0011], [0015], [0018], Tables 4-5). Similarly, applicant’s specification at [0165] recites “with regard to Bs, 1.40 T or more was set as satisfactory and 1.50 T or more set as further satisfactory.”
Regarding claim 4, Inoue discloses an element among Z having the highest content ratio as a ratio of the number of atoms with respect to the entirety of the soft magnetic alloy is set as Z1 (B), and an element among Z having the highest content ratio except Z1 is set as Z2 (P or C) (Abstract, [0011]-[0012], [0016]-[0017], [0021]-[0022], [0026], Tables 4-5).
Examples from Inoue Tables 4-5 are presented in the following table.
Inoue No.
Composition
Z1
Z2
1
Fe83.5Nb7B9P0.5
B
P
14
Fe82Nb7B9C2.0
B
C
28
Fe87Zr7B4C2.0
B
C
A coefficient of determination between an atomic concentration of M and an atomic concentration of Z1 is less than 0.500, or a coefficient of determination between the atomic concentration of M and an atomic concentration of Z2 is less than 0.500, and a coefficient of determination between the atomic concentration of Z1 and the atomic concentration of Z2 is less than 0.400 has been considered and determined to recite a property of the claimed soft magnetic alloy.
Inoue renders the claimed composition obvious (Abstract, [0011]-[0012], [0016]-[0017], [0021]-[0022], [0026], [0037], [0048], Tables 4-5).
Inoue discloses B enhances amorphous forming ability ([0021]), stabilizing the amorphous phase at the grain boundaries with resulting in a strong tendency to form borides ([0022]), and P and C have a strong affinity for M, remaining in the amorphous phase, and do not dissolve in the bcc phase whose main component is Fe ([0013]). With respect to substituting Ta to be a portion of Zr and Nb ([0023]), Inoue discloses adding Zr or Nb facilitates obtaining an amorphous phase ([0023]-[0026]) and that Zr and Nb hardly form a solid solution in alpha-Fe and supersaturate in solid solution ([0021]). Therefore, Inoue discloses dispersion or segregation of Fe and M (when Nb or Zr are included as part of M).
Inoue also discloses heat treating by heating at a rate of 180°C/min to a temperature of 560°C to 660°C, holding for 5 minutes, then cooling at a rate of 180°C/min ([0033]-[0037]).
The claimed composition is rendered obvious by the prior art (Inoue [0013], [0021], [0037], [0048], Tables 4-5) and the process of the prior art (Inoue [0033]-[0037]) is substantially similar to the process disclosed by applicant to manufacture the soft magnetic alloy (applicant’s specification [0136]). Therefore, the claimed properties naturally flow from the disclosure of the prior art, including a coefficient of determination between an atomic concentration of M and an atomic concentration of Z1 being less than 0.500, or a coefficient of determination between the atomic concentration of M and an atomic concentration of Z2 being less than 0.500, and a coefficient of determination between the atomic concentration of Z1 and the atomic concentration of Z2 being less than 0.400. In support, Inoue discloses Bs (kOe) of 1.5 T or more ([0011], [0015], [0018], Tables 4-5). Similarly, applicant’s specification at [0165] recites “with regard to Bs, 1.40 T or more was set as satisfactory and 1.50 T or more set as further satisfactory.”
Regarding claim 5, Inoue discloses the Fe-M-Z based composition is expressed by a compositional formula is (Fe(1-(α+β))X1αX2β)1-(a+b+c))M1aZbCrc ((Fe1-aZa)bBxMyXz) (Abstract, [0011]-[0012], [0016]-[0017]),
X1 is one or more of Co and Ni (Z is one or more of Ni and Co),
X2 is one or more of Al, Mn, Ag, Zn, Sn, Cu, Bi, N, O, S, and a rare-earth element (T is one or more of Si, Al, Ge, and Ga),
0.030 ≤ a ≤ 0.140 (0.04 ≤ y ≤ 0.09),
0.030 ≤ b ≤ 0.275 (0.005 ≤ x+z ≤ 0.23; 0.005 ≤ x ≤ 0.18, z ≤ 0.05),
0.000 ≤ c ≤ 0.030 (0.000),
0 ≤ α(1-(a+b+c)) ≤ 0.400 (0 ≤ a*b ≤ 0.186; 0 ≤ a ≤ 0.2, 75 ≤ b ≤ 93),
β ≥ 0 (T ≤ 0.05), and
0 ≤ α+β ≤ 0.50 are satisfied (Abstract, [0011]-[0012], [0016]-[0017], [0027]-[0028], Tables 4-5).
In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Examples from Inoue Tables 4-5 are presented in the following table.
Inoue No.
Composition
X1 α
X2 β
M1
a
Z
b
Cr
c
1
Fe83.5Nb7B9P0.5
0
0
Nb
0.070
B and P
0.095
0
14
Fe82Nb7B9C2.0
0
0
Nb
0.070
B and C
0.110
0
28
Fe87Zr7B4C2.0
0
0
Zr
0.070
B and C
0.060
0
Regarding claim 6, Inoue discloses 0.050 ≤ b ≤ 0.200 is satisfied (0.005 ≤ x+z ≤ 0.23; 0.005 ≤ x ≤ 0.18, z ≤ 0.05) (Abstract, [0011]-[0012], [0016]-[0017], Tables 4-5). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Examples from Inoue Tables 4-5 are presented in the following table.
Inoue No.
Composition
Z
b
1
Fe83.5Nb7B9P0.5
B and P
0.095
14
Fe82Nb7B9C2.0
B and C
0.110
28
Fe87Zr7B4C2.0
B and C
0.060
Regarding claim 7, Inoue discloses 0.730 ≤ 1-(a+b+c) ≤ 0.930 is satisfied (0.75 ≤ b ≤ 0.93) (Abstract, [0011]-[0012], [0016]-[0017], Tables 4-5). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Examples from Inoue Tables 4-5 are presented in the following table.
Inoue No.
Composition
1-(a+b+c)
1
Fe83.5Nb7B9P0.5
0.835
14
Fe82Nb7B9C2.0
0.820
28
Fe87Zr7B4C2.0
0.870
Regarding claim 12, Inoue discloses 0.050 ≤ a ≤ 0.140 is satisfied (0.04 ≤ y ≤ 0.09) (Abstract, [0011]-[0012], [0016]-[0017], Tables 4-5). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Examples from Inoue Tables 4-5 are presented in the following table.
Inoue No.
Composition
a
1
Fe83.5Nb7B9P0.5
0.070
14
Fe82Nb7B9C2.0
0.070
28
Fe87Zr7B4C2.0
0.070
Regarding claim 13, Inoue discloses the soft magnetic alloy contains Fe-based nanocrystals ([0018], [0033], [0048]).
Regarding claim 14, Inoue discloses the soft magnetic alloy has a ribbon shape ([0037], [0048], Tables 4-5).
Regarding claim 17, Inoue discloses a magnetic component (magnetic heads, transformers, choke coils) ([0002]-[0003]) comprising the soft magnetic alloy according to claim 1 ([0037], [0048], Tables 4-5).
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakai (JP H04-136139 machine translation) optionally in view of Martis (US 5,252,144) and Inoue (JP 2000-144349 machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Sakai discloses a soft magnetic alloy (p. 1 para. 2) comprising Fe and at least one of metalloid elements (P and C) (Fe84Hf7P6C3, Fe84Zr7P6C3) (Table 1),
wherein the soft magnetic alloy has an Fe-M-Z based composition (Fe84Hf7P6C3, Fe84Zr7P6C3) (Table 1),
M is one or more of transition metals of Group 4 to Group 6 (Hf or Zr), Z is two or more of C, P, Si, B, and Ge (P and C), M1 is one or more of elements selected from M (Hf or Zr), and M1 is one or more of elements selected from the group consisting of Ta, V, Zr, Hf, Ti, Nb, Mo, and W (Hf or Zr) (Fe84Hf7P6C3, Fe84Zr7P6C3) (Table 1),
M1 content is 3.0 to 14.0 at% (7 at%) (Fe84Hf7P6C3, Fe84Zr7P6C3) (Table 1), and
an amorphous material and a nanocrystal having a grain size of 5 to 30 (preferably 30 nm or less) (p. 2 para. 2) are mixed (pp. 1-2).
The example compositions in Sakai are silent to an amount of Ta being 40 at% or more with respect to the entirety of M1 in the soft magnetic alloy.
The example compositions of Sakai include 7 at% M as Hf or Zr (Table 1).
Sakai discloses the soft magnetic alloy composition includes 0 to 5 at% M’ of at least one of Ta, Mo, W, Ti, and V (Abstract, p.1 para. 2, p. 2 paras. 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the example compositions of Sakai to include 0 to 5 at% of Ta to improve soft magnetic properties without causing the saturation magnetic flux density to decrease (p. 2 para. 2). 40% of 7 at% is at least 2.8 at%, where the amount of Ta overlaps with this amount, such that it overlaps with and renders obvious an amount of Ta being 40 at% or more with respect to the entirety of M1 in the soft magnetic alloy. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Sakai discloses M is Zr or Hf, Y is P and Y’ is C, where M (Zr or Hf) combines with Y’ (C) during heat treatment, promoting the precipitation of bccFe and suppressing precipitation of other phases (Para. spanning pp. 1-2, p. 2 para. 2, Table 1). Therefore, Sakai discloses dispersion or segregation of Fe and Y’ (C, at least one of the metalloid elements), such that a coefficient of determination between an atomic concentration of Fe and an atomic concentration of the at least one of metalloid elements is 0.700 or more naturally flows from the disclosure of Sakai. “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” MPEP 2144.05(II)(A).
In the event it is determined that the disclosure of Sakai does not render obvious the claimed coefficient of determination between an atomic concentration of Fe and an atomic concentration of the at least one of metalloid elements being 0.700 or more, then the below rejection in view of Martis and Inoue is applied.
A coefficient of determination between an atomic concentration of Fe and an atomic concentration of the at least one of metalloid elements being 0.700 or more has been considered and determined to recite a property of the claimed soft magnetic alloy.
Sakai renders obvious the claimed composition (Abstract, pp. 1-2, Table 1).
Sakai also discloses heat treating at -50 to +250°C relative to the crystallization temperature of the quenched body (para. spanning pp. 2-3) for a heat treatment time of 2 minutes to 24 hours, where less than 2 minutes is difficult to precipitate crystal grains and more than 24 hours likely precipitates phases other than bccFe , with a rapid cooling after heat treatment (p. 3 para. 2).
Sakai is silent to the heating rate and cooling rate of the heat treatment.
Martis discloses a soft magnetic alloy (4:11-13) manufactured with a rapid heating rate of about 150°C/minute (5:56-62) and a rapid cooling more preferably at a rate greater than about 100°C/minute (6:32-45).
Inoue discloses a soft magnetic alloy ([0001]) with a rate of temperature rise more preferably in the range of 40 to 200°C ([0035]) and cooling of 180°C/min ([0037])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the heat treatment of Sakai for rapidly heat at about 150°C/minute and to rapidly cool more preferably at a rate greater than about 100°C/minute because a fast temperature rise rate is not slow and does not increase manufacturing time (Inoue [0035]) and rapid cooling suppresses in-plane anisotropy (Martis 6:32-45).
The claimed composition is rendered obvious by the prior art (Sakai pp. 1-2, Table 1) and the process of the prior art (Sakai para. spanning pp. 2-3, p. 3 para. 2; Martis 5:56-62, 6:32-45; Inoue [0035], [0037]) is substantially similar to the process disclosed by applicant to manufacture the soft magnetic alloy (applicant’s specification [0136]). Therefore, the claimed properties naturally flow from the disclosure of the prior art, including a coefficient of determination between an atomic concentration of Fe and an atomic concentration of the at least one of metalloid elements being 0.700 or more. In support, Sakai discloses Bs (kOe) of 16.5 (1.65 T) for Fe84Hf7P6C3 and 16.7 (1.67 T) for Fe84Zr7P6C3 (Table 1). Similarly, applicant’s specification at [0165] recites “with regard to Bs, 1.40 T or more was set as satisfactory and 1.50 T or more set as further satisfactory.”
Regarding claim 2, Sakai discloses M is Zr or Hf, Y is P and Y’ is C, where M (Zr or Hf) combines with Y’ (C) during heat treatment, promoting the precipitation of bccFe and suppressing precipitation of other phases (Para. spanning pp. 1-2, p. 2 para. 2, Table 1). Therefore, Sakai discloses dispersion or segregation of Fe and M, such that a coefficient of determination between an atomic concentration of Fe and an atomic concentration of the at least one of M being 0.700 or more naturally flows from the disclosure of Sakai. “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” MPEP 2144.05(II)(A).
In the event it is determined that the disclosure of Sakai does not render obvious the claimed coefficient of determination between an atomic concentration of Fe and an atomic concentration of the at least one of M being 0.700 or more, then the below rejection in view of Martis and Inoue is applied.
A coefficient of determination between an atomic concentration of Fe and an atomic concentration of the at least one of M being 0.700 or more has been considered and determined to recite a property of the claimed soft magnetic alloy.
Sakai discloses the claimed composition (pp. 1-2, Table 1).
Sakai also discloses heat treating at -50 to +250°C relative to the crystallization temperature of the quenched body (para. spanning pp. 2-3) for a heat treatment time of 2 minutes to 24 hours, where less than 2 minutes is difficult to precipitate crystal grains and more than 24 hours likely precipitates phases other than bccFe , with a rapid cooling after heat treatment (p. 3 para. 2).
Sakai is silent to the heating rate and cooling rate of the heat treatment.
Martis discloses a soft magnetic alloy (4:11-13) manufactured with a rapid heating rate of about 150°C/minute (5:56-62) and a rapid cooling more preferably at a rate greater than about 100°C/minute (6:32-45).
Inoue discloses a soft magnetic alloy ([0001]) with a rate of temperature rise more preferably in the range of 40 to 200°C ([0035]) and cooling of 180°C/min ([0037])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the heat treatment of Sakai for rapidly heat at about 150°C/minute and to rapidly cool more preferably at a rate greater than about 100°C/minute because a fast temperature rise rate is not slow and does not increase manufacturing time (Inoue [0035]) and rapid cooling suppresses in-plane anisotropy (Martis 6:32-45).
The claimed composition is rendered obvious by the prior art (Sakai pp. 1-2, Table 1) and the process of the prior art (Sakai para. spanning pp. 2-3, p. 3 para. 2; Martis 5:56-62, 6:32-45; Inoue [0035], [0037]) is substantially similar to the process disclosed by applicant to manufacture the soft magnetic alloy (applicant’s specification [0136]). Therefore, the claimed properties naturally flow from the disclosure of the prior art, including a coefficient of determination between an atomic concentration of Fe and an atomic concentration of the at least one of M being 0.700 or more. In support, Sakai discloses Bs (kOe) of 16.5 (1.65 T) for Fe84Hf7P6C3 and 16.7 (1.67 T) for Fe84Zr7P6C3 (Table 1). Similarly, applicant’s specification at [0165] recites “with regard to Bs, 1.40 T or more was set as satisfactory and 1.50 T or more set as further satisfactory.”
Claims 3-7, 12-14, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakai (JP H04-136139 machine translation) in view of Martis (US 5,252,144) and Inoue (JP 2000-144349 machine translation) as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 3, Sakai discloses an element among Z having the highest content ratio as a ratio of the number of atoms with respect to the entirety of the soft magnetic alloy is set as Z1 (P), and an element among Z having the highest content ratio except Z1 is set as Z2 (C), (Fe84Hf7P6C3, Fe84Zr7P6C3) (Table 1).
A coefficient of determination between an atomic concentration of M and an atomic concentration of Z1 is 0.600 or more, or a coefficient of determination between the atomic concentration of M and an atomic concentration of Z2 is 0.600 or more, and a coefficient of determination between the atomic concentration of Z1 and the atomic concentration of Z2 is less than 0.400 has been considered and determined to recite a property of the claimed soft magnetic alloy.
Sakai discloses the claimed composition (pp. 1-2, Table 1).
Sakai also discloses heat treating at -50 to +250°C relative to the crystallization temperature of the quenched body (para. spanning pp. 2-3) for a heat treatment time of 2 minutes to 24 hours, where less than 2 minutes is difficult to precipitate crystal grains and more than 24 hours likely precipitates phases other than bccFe , with a rapid cooling after heat treatment (p. 3 para. 2).
Sakai is silent to the heating rate and cooling rate of the heat treatment.
Martis discloses a soft magnetic alloy (4:11-13) manufactured with a rapid heating rate of about 150°C/minute (5:56-62) and a rapid cooling more preferably at a rate greater than about 100°C/minute (6:32-45).
Inoue discloses a soft magnetic alloy ([0001]) with a rate of temperature rise more preferably in the range of 40 to 200°C ([0035]) and cooling of 180°C/min ([0037])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the heat treatment of Sakai for rapidly heat at about 150°C/minute and to rapidly cool more preferably at a rate greater than about 100°C/minute because a fast temperature rise rate is not slow and does not increase manufacturing time (Inoue [0035]) and rapid cooling suppresses in-plane anisotropy (Martis 6:32-45).
The claimed composition is rendered obvious by the prior art (Sakai pp. 1-2, Table 1) and the process of the prior art (Sakai para. spanning pp. 2-3, p. 3 para. 2; Martis 5:56-62, 6:32-45; Inoue [0035], [0037]) is substantially similar to the process disclosed by applicant to manufacture the soft magnetic alloy (applicant’s specification [0136]). Therefore, the claimed properties naturally flow from the disclosure of the prior art, including a coefficient of determination between an atomic concentration of M and an atomic concentration of Z1 being 0.600 or more, or a coefficient of determination between the atomic concentration of M and an atomic concentration of Z2 being 0.600 or more, and a coefficient of determination between the atomic concentration of Z1 and the atomic concentration of Z2 being less than 0.400. In support, Sakai discloses Bs (kOe) of 16.5 (1.65 T) for Fe84Hf7P6C3 and 16.7 (1.67 T) for Fe84Zr7P6C3 (Table 1). Similarly, applicant’s specification at [0165] recites “with regard to Bs, 1.40 T or more was set as satisfactory and 1.50 T or more set as further satisfactory.”
Regarding claim 4, Sakai discloses an element among Z having the highest content ratio as a ratio of the number of atoms with respect to the entirety of the soft magnetic alloy is set as Z1 (P), and an element among Z having the highest content ratio except Z1 is set as Z2 (C), (Fe84Hf7P6C3, Fe84Zr7P6C3) (Table 1).
A coefficient of determination between an atomic concentration of M and an atomic concentration of Z1 is less than 0.500, or a coefficient of determination between the atomic concentration of M and an atomic concentration of Z2 is less than 0.500, and a coefficient of determination between the atomic concentration of Z1 and the atomic concentration of Z2 is less than 0.400 has been considered and determined to recite a property of the claimed soft magnetic alloy.
Sakai discloses the claimed composition (pp. 1-2, Table 1).
Sakai also discloses heat treating at -50 to +250°C relative to the crystallization temperature of the quenched body (para. spanning pp. 2-3) for a heat treatment time of 2 minutes to 24 hours, where less than 2 minutes is difficult to precipitate crystal grains and more than 24 hours likely precipitates phases other than bccFe , with a rapid cooling after heat treatment (p. 3 para. 2).
Sakai is silent to the heating rate and cooling rate of the heat treatment.
Martis discloses a soft magnetic alloy (4:11-13) manufactured with a rapid heating rate of about 150°C/minute (5:56-62) and a rapid cooling more preferably at a rate greater than about 100°C/minute (6:32-45).
Inoue discloses a soft magnetic alloy ([0001]) with a rate of temperature rise more preferably in the range of 40 to 200°C ([0035]) and cooling of 180°C/min ([0037])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the heat treatment of Sakai for rapidly heat at about 150°C/minute and to rapidly cool more preferably at a rate greater than about 100°C/minute because a fast temperature rise rate is not slow and does not increase manufacturing time (Inoue [0035]) and rapid cooling suppresses in-plane anisotropy (Martis 6:32-45).
The claimed composition is rendered obvious by the prior art (Sakai pp. 1-2, Table 1) and the process of the prior art (Sakai para. spanning pp. 2-3, p. 3 para. 2; Martis 5:56-62, 6:32-45; Inoue [0035], [0037]) is substantially similar to the process disclosed by applicant to manufacture the soft magnetic alloy (applicant’s specification [0136]). Therefore, the claimed properties naturally flow from the disclosure of the prior art, including a coefficient of determination between an atomic concentration of M and an atomic concentration of Z1 being less than 0.500, or a coefficient of determination between the atomic concentration of M and an atomic concentration of Z2 being less than 0.500, and a coefficient of determination between the atomic concentration of Z1 and the atomic concentration of Z2 being less than 0.400. In support, Sakai discloses Bs (kOe) of 16.5 (1.65 T) for Fe84Hf7P6C3 and 16.7 (1.67 T) for Fe84Zr7P6C3 (Table 1). Similarly, applicant’s specification at [0165] recites “with regard to Bs, 1.40 T or more was set as satisfactory and 1.50 T or more set as further satisfactory.”
Regarding claim 5, Sakai discloses the Fe-M-Z based composition is expressed by a compositional formula is (Fe(1-(α+β))X1αX2β)1-(a+b+c))M1aZbCrc
X1 is one or more of Co and Ni,
X2 is one or more of Al, Mn, Ag, Zn, Sn, Cu, Bi, N, O, S, and a rare-earth element,
0.030 ≤ a ≤ 0.140 (0.070 to 0.120, 0.07+0 to 0.07+0.05, 7 at% Hf or Zr with 0 to 5 at% Ta),
0.030 ≤ b ≤ 0.275 (0.090),
0.000 ≤ c ≤ 0.030 (0.000),
0 ≤ α(1-(a+b+c)) ≤ 0.400 (0),
β ≥ 0 (0), and
0 ≤ α+β ≤ 0.50 (0) are satisfied (Fe84Hf7P6C3, Fe84Zr7P6C3 including 0 to 5 at% M’ of Ta) (Abstract, p. 1 para. 2, p. 2 paras. 1-2, Table 1).
In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Sakai Composition
X1
X2
M1
A
Z
b
Cr
Fe84Hf7P6C3
0
0
Hf
0.070
P and C
0.090
0
Fe84Zr7P6C3
0
0
Zr
0.070
P and C
0.090
0
Regarding claim 6, Sakai discloses 0.050 ≤ b ≤ 0.200 is satisfied (0.090) (Fe84Hf7P6C3, Fe84Zr7P6C3) (Table 1).
Regarding claim 7, Sakai discloses 0.730 ≤ 1-(a+b+c) ≤ 0.930 is satisfied (0.790 to 0.840, 0.84-0.05 to 0.84-0) (Fe84Hf7P6C3 or Fe84Zr7P6C3 with 0 to 5 at% Ta) (pp. 1-2, Table 1). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 12, Sakai discloses 0.050 ≤ a ≤ 0.140 is satisfied (0.070 to 0.120, 0.07+0 to 0.07+0.05, 7 at% Hf or Zr with 0 to 5 at% Ta) (Fe84Hf7P6C3, Fe84Zr7P6C3) (pp. 1-2, Table 1). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 13, Sakai discloses the soft magnetic alloy contains (bcc) Fe-based nanocrystals (p. 2 paras. 1-2).
Regarding claim 14, Sakai discloses the soft magnetic alloy has a ribbon shape (p. 3 para. 3).
Regarding claim 17, Sakai discloses a magnetic component (various transformers, saturable reactors, various choke coils, audio or thin film magnetic heads, various sensors) (p. 1 paras. 1-2) comprising the soft magnetic alloy according to claim 1 (pp. 1-2, Table 1).
Related Art
Amano (US 2022/0351884 publication of applicant’s related US application No. 17/614,397)
Amano claims a composition that reads on that claimed (claims 10-25), but is silent to coefficient(s) of determination and primary regression equation(s) and measuring element aggregating or dispersion with each other.
Honda (JP 2002-074639 machine translation)
Honda discloses a soft magnetic films of Fe-8 at% Ta- 12 at% C- 3 at% B and Fe-8 at% Ta- 12 at% C- 3 at% Si with an average crystal grain size of 1 nm to 10 nm ([0032], Fig. 5).
Lee (Lee et al. High permeability nano-crystalline FeSiBTaAg ribbons obtained by direct casting. Intermetallics 15 (2007) 1564-1567.)
Lee discloses a nano-crystalline Fe77.4-xSi15.5B7TaxAg0.1 )x= 1, 2) ribbon with soft magnetic properties and about 25 nm nano-crystals in the as-spun ribbon (Abstract, 2. Experimental, 4. Conclusions, Fig. 1) where quenching speed influences the micro-crystallization fraction (Table 1, Fig. 4).
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHANI HILL whose telephone number is (571)272-2523. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-12pm.
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 E