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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on October 20, 2025 was filed after the mailing date of the Non-Final Office Action on August 25, 2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The reply filed on October 20, 2025 has been entered into the prosecution for the application. Currently, claims 1, 3, 5-7, 9, 11, 13, and 15 are pending. Claims 1, 7, 13, and 15 have been amended. Claims 7, 13, and 15 are withdrawn. Claims 2, 4, 8, 10, 12, and 14 have been cancelled.
All prior art grounds of rejection are withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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(s) 1, 3, 5-6, 9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 111116186 A to Ying et al. (with reference to the previously provided machine translation, hereinafter “Ying”) in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. 2002/0016246 to Kim et al. (hereinafter “Kim”) and Song et al., “Microwave dielectric characteristics of ceramics in Mg2SiO4–Zn2SiO4 system,” Ceramics International 34(4) [2008], pp. 917-920 (hereinafter “Song”).
Regarding claim 1, Ying discloses a frequency-stable low-dielectric microwave dielectric material (Abstract) consisting of (in mass %) 60 to 80% of a main-phase ceramic material Mg2SiO4 (¶ 0014); 20 to 40% of an auxiliary-phase ceramic material composed of aRO-bRe2O3-cTiO2 where RO is CaO and Re2O3 is a combination of Nd2O3 and La2O3 (¶¶ 0015, 0032; CaCO3 being functionally equivalent to CaO when included in a ceramic material), and wherein in some embodiments Re2O3 also includes Al2O3 (see p. 9, Table 1); and 0.5 to 5% of an oxide with a combustion assisting effect (i.e., an oxide sintering aid) (¶¶ 0017-0018), a sum of mass percentage of the main-phase ceramic material, the auxiliary-phase ceramic material, and the oxide sintering aid by necessity summing to 100%. Ying thus teaches component proportion ranges that substantially overlap the recited component proportion ranges of claim 1. In a case where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05).
Ying teaches including an oxide sintering aid, such as MoO3, Nb2O5, or B2O3 (see ¶ 0019), but Ying does not explicitly teach that the oxide sintering aid is at least one of MnO2, MnCO3, WO3, and CeO2.
Kim, in the same field of endeavor (low-dielectric ceramic compositions that include titanates), explicitly teaches the use of MnO2 as a sintering aid (¶ 0019).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the frequency-stable low-dielectric microwave dielectric material of Ying by including MnO2 as an oxide sintering aid, as taught by Kim, using MnO2 as a substitute to replace one of the sintering aids taught by Ying. One of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in performing a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Ying as modified by Kim teaches wherein 2.00≤x+y≤2.10 and 1.80≤x≤2.05 (see Ying, ¶ 0044 and Table 1). However, Ying as modified by Kim does not explicitly teach wherein 0.05≤y≤0.25.
Song, in the same field of endeavor, teaches (Mg1−xZnx)2SiO4 ceramics with x = 0.1–0.9 (Abstract). Song teaches that (Mg1−xZnx)2SiO4 ceramics can be sintered at a temperature much lower than that for Mg2SiO4 (p. 919, “Conclusions” section). Expressed in terms of the molecular formula of main-phase ceramic material A of claim 1 of the present application, Song teaches MgxZnySiO2+x+y where 0.2≤x≤1.8, 0.2≤y≤1.8, and x+y=2.0; these values overlap the claimed values for these molar ratios in claim 1. In a case where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05). For example, in the case in Song where x=0.1, the material has the molecular formula
(Mg1−xZnx)2SiO4
= (Mg1-0.1Zn0.1)2SiO4
= (Mg0.9Zn0.1)2SiO4
= Mg1.8Zn0.2SiO4
which, in terms of the formula MgxMeySiO2+x+y of claim 1, is equivalent to an embodiment in which x=1.8, y=0.2, and x+y=2.0.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teachings of Song, as outlined above, to modify Ying as modified by Kim to the extent of doping the Mg2SiO4 main-phase ceramic material with zinc as taught by Song, thereby producing a magnesium-zinc-silicate main-phase ceramic material MgxZnySiO2+x+y with values of x and y such that 2.00≤x+y≤2.10, 1.80≤x≤2.05, and 0.05≤y≤0.25. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to dope the magnesium-silicate main-phase ceramic material with zinc, as taught by Song, by a desire for a main-phase ceramic material capable of being sintered at a lower temperature than undoped Mg2SiO4 (see Song at p. 919).
Thus, in view of Ying as modified by Kim and Song, a frequency-stable low-dielectric microwave dielectric material reading on every limitation of claim 1 would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 3, Ying in view of Kim and Song teaches the frequency-stable low-dielectric microwave dielectric material according to claim 1 wherein the auxiliary-phase ceramic material B is composed of Ca(1-3x/2-3y/2)NdxLayTiO3, where 0.1<x<0.5, 0<y<0.2 (Ying, ¶ 0015, claim 1); within those taught ranges are compositions which, when expressed in terms of the chemical formula the auxiliary-phase ceramic material B in the pending claims, have molar ratios of CaO, Re2O3, and TiO2 such that 1.0≤a≤2.0, 0.05≤b≤0.50, and 1.0≤c≤1.5. For instance, if, for Ca(1-3x/2-3y/2)NdxLayTiO3, x=0.15 and y=0.05, then
Ca(1-3(0.15)/2-3(0.05)/2)Nd0.15La0.05TiO3,
Ca(1-0.225-0.075)Nd0.15La0.05TiO3,
Ca(0.7)Nd0.15La0.05TiO3,
Expressed in the chemical formula of the pending claims, this is equivalent to:
0.7 CaO ∙ (0.15/2) Nd2O3 ∙ (0.05/2) La2O3 ∙ 1.0 TiO2
0.7 CaO ∙ 0.075 Nd2O3 ∙ 0.025 La2O3 ∙ 1.0 TiO2
If all stoichiometric ratios are multiplied by 1.43 so that the molar ratio of CaO = 1.0, then
1.0 CaO ∙ 0.11 Nd2O3 ∙ 0.04 La2O3 ∙ 1.43 TiO2
1.0 CaO ∙ 0.15 Re2O3 ∙ 1.43 TiO2
Thus, for a CaO ∙ b Re2O3 ∙ c TiO2, Ying in view of Kim and Song teaches wherein 1.0≤a≤2.0, 0.05≤b≤0.50, and 1.0≤c≤1.5.
Regarding claim 5, Ying in view of Kim and Song teaches the frequency-stable low-dielectric microwave dielectric material according to claim 1, as set forth above. Further, as shown above with regard to claim 3, Ying in view of Kim teaches wherein the auxiliary-phase ceramic material B is composed of Ca(1-3x/2-3y/2)NdxLayTiO3, where 0.1<x<0.5, 0<y<0.2 (Ying, ¶ 0015, claim 1). Within those taught ranges, there are compositions which, when expressed in terms of the chemical formula the auxiliary-phase ceramic material B in the pending claims, have molar ratios of CaO, Re2O3, and TiO2 such that 1.0≤a≤1.5, 0.05≤b≤0.30, and 1.0≤c≤1.2. For instance, if, for Ca(1-3x/2-3y/2)NdxLayTiO3, x=0.11 and y=0.01, then
Ca(1-3(0.11)/2-3(0.01)/2)Nd0.11La0.01TiO3,
Ca(1-0.165-0.015)Nd0.11La0.01TiO3,
Ca(0.82)Nd0.11La0.01TiO3,
Expressed in the chemical formula of the pending claims, this is equivalent to:
0.82 CaO ∙ (0.11/2) Nd2O3 ∙ (0.01/2) La2O3 ∙ 1.0 TiO2
0.82 CaO ∙ 0.055 Nd2O3 ∙ 0.005 La2O3 ∙ 1.0 TiO2
If all stoichiometric ratios are multiplied by 1.2, then
0.98 CaO ∙ 0.066 Nd2O3 ∙ 0.006 La2O3 ∙ 1.2 TiO2
0.98 CaO ∙ 0.072 Re2O3 ∙ 1.2 TiO2
which, for a CaO ∙ b Re2O3 ∙ c TiO2, presents values of a, b, and c that lie within or are very close to the recited values of claim 5. A prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap but are merely close (see MPEP 2144.05(I), second paragraph). Thus, it would have been obvious in view of Ying as modified by Kim and Song to produce a frequency-stable low-dielectric microwave dielectric material such that, for a CaO ∙ b Re2O3 ∙ c TiO2, 1.0≤a≤1.5, 0.05≤b≤0.30, and 1.0≤c≤1.2.
Regarding claims 6, 9, and 11, Ying in view of Kim and Song teaches the frequency-stable low-dielectric microwave dielectric material according to claims 1, 3, and 5, as set forth above. Further, Ying in view of Kim and Song teaches that the frequency-stable low-dielectric microwave dielectric material in some embodiments includes a small amount (0.5-5 wt.%) of Al2O3 as an additive (see Ying at ¶¶ 0019, 0046, Table 1). Since Ying in view of Kim and Song also teaches that the frequency-stable low-dielectric microwave dielectric material includes Nd2O3 and La2O3 (see above, p. 3), Ying in view of Kim and Song thus teaches wherein Re2O3 in the chemical formula of the auxiliary-phase ceramic material B is Al2O3 and Nd2O3 or Al2O3 and La2O3.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed October 20, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 13 of the Remarks submitted with the reply filed October 20, 2025 (hereinafter “Remarks”), Applicant argues, with regard in particular to claims 6, 9, and 11, that “Ying does not teach or suggest the specific combination of Al2O3 with at least one of Sm2O3, La2O3, or Y2O3 as the sole rare earth oxides in the auxiliary phase.” Applicant goes on to argue that the cited prior art “does not disclose or motivate the selection of aluminum ions which must be present in the auxiliary phase material together with another rare earth oxide as the only Re2O3 components in the auxiliary phase” (Remarks at p. 13; see also Declaration of Shunguo Liu Under 37 CFR 1.132 at p. 2, ¶ 10).
Firstly, Applicant’s argument rests upon an implicit claim construction not supported by the current claim language. Claims 6, 9, and 11 recite that R2O3 “is Al2O3 and Sm2O3, or Al2O3 and Nd2O3, or Al2O3 and La2O3, or Al2O3 and Y2O3” (emphasis added). Applicant is arguing as if the verb “is” has a closed construction, substantially equivalent to “consisting of.” However, this is not a foregone conclusion. A nonstandard transitional phrase like “is” must be interpreted in interpreted in light of the specification to determine whether open or closed claim language is intended, and the claim language must be given its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification. See MPEP 2111.03(IV). Here, the specification is lacking clear indication that closed claim language is intended, and so broadest reasonable interpretation is to treat “is” as functionally equivalent to “comprising.” Applicant argues that the claims call for “the specific combination of Al2O3 with at least one of Sm2O3, La2O3, or Y2O3 as the sole rare earth oxides in the auxiliary phase,” but none of the pending claims include “sole” or “solely”; none of the pending claims currently recite that R2O3 is only Al2O3 and Sm2O3, or only Al2O3 and Nd2O3, or only Al2O3 and La2O3, or only Al2O3 and Y2O3. Thus, Applicant’s argument is premised on language that is not recited in the rejected claims.
Secondly, Applicant’s argument implicitly draws a distinction between Al2O3 included as an additive (as in Ying) and Al2O3 present in the auxiliary phase material “as a co-primary rare earth oxide,” as in the claimed invention (see Remarks at p. 13). However, it is not clear that this is a meaningful distinction under the circumstances. One of ordinary skill in the art reasonably would expect that the Al2O3 included as an additive in Ying would, in the course of preparation of the ceramic material, make its way into the auxiliary phase. The fact that some of the cited prior art references may include Al2O3 for a different stated purpose than that of the inventors of the claimed invention does not alter the fact that Al2O3 is present in the composition.
Applicant’s remaining arguments with respect to the pending claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. In particular, Applicant’s arguments directed towards the teachings of the Li reference (CN 111995383 A to Li et al.) are moot, since the new ground of rejection does not rely on Li. Likewise, Applicant’s arguments (citing In re Omeprazole) that Applicant had identified a previously unrecognized problem and solved that problem through an approach that “required the addition of Me at levels higher than those taught or suggested by the prior art” (see Remarks at p. 12) is unavailing in view of the new ground of rejection, since Song, unlike Li, expressly teaches levels if Me (i.e., Zn) that clearly overlap the claimed range.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL A. FORSYTH whose telephone number is (703) 756-5425. The examiner can normally be reached M - Th 8:00 - 5:30 EDT and F 8:00 - 12:00 EDT.
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, AMBER R. ORLANDO can be reached at (571) 270-3149. 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.
/P.A.F./Examiner, Art Unit 1731
/JENNIFER A SMITH/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1731