DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 February 26, 2026 has been entered.
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 a certified copy of JP 2021-124120 filed July 29, 2021 as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Status
This Office Action is in response to applicant’s Remarks and Claim Amendments filed February 26, 2026.
Claims Filing Date
February 26, 2026
Amended
1
New
8
Cancelled
3, 4
Under Examination
1, 2, 5-8
Claim 7 lines 1-2 recite “the α-Fe phase is spatially isolated such that it does not directly contact the Sm-Fe-N particles”. Applicant’s specification at [0020] recites that “the α-Fe phase in the particle form is not directly in contact with the Sm-Fe-N particle”. Further, applicant’s Fig. 1 depicts α-Fe phase 140 in particle form present in the Fe3Zn10 phase 130 and not directly in contact with the Sm-Fe-N particles 100 (applicant’s specification [0024]-[0030]).
Response to Remarks filed February 26, 2026
Matsuura in view of Reinsch and optionally Kawano as evidence by Kinoshita
Applicant’s claim amendments, see amended Claim 1 lines 10-14, filed February 26, 2026, have been fully considered and are not rendered obvious by Matsuura in view or Reinsch and optionally Kawano as evidenced by Kinoshita. This rejection has been withdrawn.
Amended claim 1 incorporates the subject matter of previous claim 3 and a narrower average thickness of previous claim 4. In the October 29, 2025 Final Rejection on pages 6-9 claims 3 and 4 were not rejected over Matsuura in view of Reinsch and optionally Kawano as evidenced by Kinoshita.
Saito in view of Matsuura and Kawano as evidenced by Kinoshita and further in view of Prabhu
Applicant’s claim amendments, see amended Claim 1 lines 10-14, filed February 26, 2026, have been fully considered and are not rendered obvious by Saito in view of Matsuura and Kawano as evidenced by Kinoshita and further in view of Prabhu. This rejection has been withdrawn.
Amended claim 1 incorporates the subject matter of previous claim 3 and a narrower average thickness of previous claim 4 of 20 nm or more and 50 nm or more. In the October 29, 2025 Final Rejection on page 13 claims 3 and 4 were rejected over Saito in view of Matsuura and Kawano as evidenced by Kinoshita and further in view of Prabhu. Prabhu discloses an average Sm-Fe-Zn coating layer thickness of 5-8 nm to enhance coercivity (Prabhu p. 155 cols. 1-2, Fig. 3), which is outside the 20 nm to 50 nm scope of amended claim 1.
Masashi in view of Matsuura and Kawano as evidenced by Kinoshita
Applicant's arguments filed February 26, 2026 with respect to Masashi in view of Matsuura and Kawano as evidenced by Kinoshita have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues Examples 1-4 represent a consistent trend across varying Zn concentrations (5 wt% to 20 wt%) while maintaining the 80% phase ratio and high coercivity, where Table 2 demonstrates a coercivity “step-change” from 55% (Magnet 12) to 80%+ (Magnets 1-4) of unexpected improvement in magnetic stability that goes beyond routine optimization (para. spanning pp. 5-6).
The applicant also argues unexpected results with respect to Applicant’s Examples 1-4 including 80% or more Fe3Zn10 area ratio and a 20-50 nm coating thickness (p. 10 para. 1), which achieve coercivity values between 20.5 and 26.3 kOe (p. 10 para. 2), whereas Comparative Example 12 with only 55% Fe3Zn10 has a significantly lower coercivity of 19.1 kOe, such that optimization fails to reach the claimed performance levels (p. 10 para. 3).
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). The “objective evidence of nonobviousness must be commensurate in scope with the claims which the evidence is offered to support.” MPEP 716.02(d). To establish unexpected results over a claimed range, applicants should compare a sufficient number of tests both inside and outside the claimed ranged to show the criticality of the claimed range. MPEP 716.02(d)(II).
A sufficient number of tests has not been presented. For example evidence showing the coercivity change between more than 55% to less than 82% area of Fe3Zn10 has not been presented. There is also not data presented for an Fe3Zn10 phase area of 80% to establish that this point is critical with respect to the argued coercivity. With respect to Examples 1-4 and Comparative Example 12, the data is not of statistical significance because it only provides one comparative example. Further, 55% area Fe3Zn10 has a coercivity of 19.1 kOe and 88% area Fe3Zn10 has a coercivity of 20.5, which does not appear to be a sharp increase.
Further, Masashi discloses Zn-bonded Sm-Fe-N magnets with improved coercivity, such as 2.66 mA/m (33.4 kOe), 2.41 MA/m (30.3 kOe) (Abstract), 2.07 MA/m (26.0 kOe), and 2.35 MA/m (29.5 kOe) (p. 245 col. 1 para. 2, Fig. 2). The coercivity range disclosed by Masashi, 26.0 to 33.4 kOe, overlaps with applicant’s inventive 20.5 to 26.3 kOe coercivity range. In contrast, the coercivity of applicant’s Comparative Example 12, 19.1 kOe, is outside of the range of Masashi. The overlapping coercivity supports the obviousness of applicant’s claimed invention over the disclosure of Masashi. Expected beneficial results are evidence of obviousness of a claimed invention. MPEP 716.02(c)(II).
The applicant argues Masashi and Matsuura do not disclose a specific coating thickness between 20 nm and 50 nm to maintain the magnet stability (p. 5 para. 1, p. 9 para. 4), where the claimed thickness of 20-50 nm is optimized to protect the Sm-Fe-N particles during high-pressure sintering (1 GPa to 2 GPa) by ensuring sufficient coverage to isolate soft-magnetic alpha-Fe particles while preventing excessive non-magnetic volume that would otherwise reduce residual magnetic flux density (p. 9 para. 5).
With respect to a Sm-Fe-Zn coating layer, Masashi discloses Sm2Fe17N3 particles with a Zn diffusion surface layer consisting of Fe, Sm, and Zn formed by Zn diffusing from the surface (p. 247 col. 2 para. 3, Fig. 9). The process of the prior art (Masashi 2. Experimental procedure) is also substantially similar to that disclosed by the applicant (applicant’s specification [0097]-[0120]), including pressure molding (applicant’s specification [0101]-[0103]) the mixed Sm-Fe-N magnet powder and Zn powder (applicant’s specification [0100]) at 10 MPa or more and 3000 MPa or less (applicant’s specification [0104]) (200 MPa, Masashi 2. Experimental procedure). Therefore, the product of the prior art is substantially similar to the product claimed, including the Sm-Fe-Zn coating layer having an average thickness of 20 nm or more and 50 nm or less.
The applicant argues Masashi and Matsuura reduce the α-phase, whereas in the present invention the α-Fe phase is maintained in a particle that is spatially isolated within the Fe3Zn10 matrix so as not to contact the Sm-Fe-N particles (p. 10 para. 4), where Reinsch teaches complete elimination of alpha-Fe is “constitutionally impossible” (p. 10 para. 5) and Applicant’s solution renders the α-Fe particles harmless (p. 10 para. 6).
Masashi in view of Matsuura discloses the α-FeZn phase is surrounded by Γ-FeZn phase and not in contact with the Sm-Fe-N (SFN) particles formed by Zn melting during annealing and diffusing into the Sm2Fe17N3 powder and interdiffusing with Fe to form α-FeZn and Γ-FeZn (Matsuura p. 6 col. 2 para. 3, Fig. 11). Furthermore, the process of the prior art (Masashi 2. Experimental procedure) is substantially similar to that disclosed by the applicant (applicant’s specification [0097]-[0120]), such that the product of the prior art is substantially similar to the claimed product.
For the above cited reasons, the rejection of Masashi in view of Matsuura and Kawano as evidenced by Kinoshita is maintained.
New Grounds
In light of claim amendment and upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made over Kataoka in view of Matsuura and Masashi.
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, 2, and 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Masashi (Masashi Matsuura et al. High coercive Zn-bonded Sm-Fe-N magnets prepared using fine Zn particles with low oxygen content. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 452 (2018) 243-248.) in view of Matsuura (Matsuura et al. Microstructural changes in high-coercivity Zn-bonded Sm-Fe-N magnets. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 510 (2020) 166943) and Kawano (US 2002/0029824) as evidenced by Kinoshita (US 2020/0098496).
Regarding claim 1, Masashi discloses a Sm-Fe-N magnet (Zn-bonded Sm-Fe-N magnet) (Abstract, 2. Experimental procedure) comprising:
Sm-Fe-N particles (p. 247, Figs. 8-9),
wherein an inter-particle metal phase is present between at least two of the Sm-Fe-N particles (pp. 247-248, Figs. 8-9),
the inter-particle metal phase includes: a Fe3Zn10 phase (Γ-FeZn, Kinoshita [0058]); and an α-Fe phase (pp. 247-248, Fig. 8),
wherein each of the Sm-Fe-N particles has a surface (2. Experimental procedure, p. 246, p. 247 col. 2 para. 3, Figs. 6, 9),
a Sm-Fe-Zn coating layer is formed in at least a portion of the surface (p. 247 col. 2 para. 3, Fig. 9).
Masashi discloses the presence of α-Fe and Γ-FeZn (Fe3Zn10, Kinoshita [0058]) in the Zn-bonded Sm-Fe-N magnet (Fig. 8). With respect to the inter-particle metal phase, an area ratio of the Fe3Zn10 phase being 80% or more, Masashi discloses Sm2Fe17N3 phase decomposes into α-Fe and Zn reacts with α-Fe to form Γ-FeZn phase (Fe3Zn10, Kinoshita [0058]) (pp. 243, 247-248) and the area ratio of Γ-FeZn (Fe3Zn10, Kinoshita [0058]) is a result-effective variable because the formation of Γ-FeZn decreases the formation of α-Fe phases, increasing the coercivity of the magnets (Masashi p. 247). Therefore, it would have been routine optimization at arrive at the claimed invention including an area ratio of the Fe3Zn10 phase being 80% or more. The determination of the optimum or workable ranges of a result-effective variable is characterized as routine optimization. MPEP 2144.05(II)(B).
The Sm-Fe-Zn coating layer including Zn at 1 at% or more and 20 at% or less and having an average thickness of 20 nm or more and 50 nm or less have been considered and determined to recite features of the Sm-Fe-N magnet that result from applicant’s disclosed processing (applicant’s specification [0097]-[0120]). The prior art discloses a substantially similar process (Masashi 2. Experimental procedure), such that the product of the prior art is substantially similar to that claimed, including the Sm-Fe-Zn coating layer (Zn diffusion region) including Zn at 1 at% or more and 20 at% and having an average thickness of 20 nm or more and 50 nm or less.
Masashi is silent to the α-Fe phase being in a particle form.
Matsuura discloses a Sm-Fe-N magnet (Zn-bonded Sm-Fe-N magnet) (Abstract, 2. Experimental procedures) with an inter-particle metal phase that includes: a Fe3Zn10 phase (Γ-FeZn, Kinoshita [0058]); and an α-Fe phase in a particle form (p. 6 col. 2, 4. Summary, Fig. 11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the magnet of Masashi for the alpha-Fe to be in particle form because during annealing of a Zn-bonded magnet alpha-FeZn grains (particles) form that are surrounded by gamma-FeZn (Fe3Zn10, Kinoshita [0058]), which isolates the soft magnetic alpha-FeZn phase, resulting in a magnet with high coercivity (Matsuura p. 6 col. 2, 4. Summary, Fig. 11).
Masashi is silent to an average particle diameter of the Sm-Fe-N particles being less than 2.0 μm, and a percentage of the Sm-Fe-N particles having an aspect ratio of 2.0 or more being 10% or less.
Kawano discloses an average particle diameter of Sm-Fe-N particles is less than 2.0 μm (most preferably 0.7 um to 3 um) ([0012], [0029]), and a percentage of the Sm-Fe-N particles having an aspect ratio of 2.0 or more is 10% or less (spherical shape, not less than 95% in average degree of needle shape) ([0011], [0030], Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the Sm-Fe-N particles of Masashi to be most preferably 0.7 um to 3um to increase the coercive force (Kawano [0029]) because fine particles increase the degree of orientation in an direction of easy magnetization (Kawano [0011]). 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).
It also would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the Sm-Fe-N particles of Masashi to be substantially spherical with not less than 95% in average degree of needle shape because a spherical shape increases a degree of orientation when magnetizing (Kawano [0011]), overcomes the problem of a low filling rate and degradation in the magnetic field orientation (Kawano [0049]), and improve coercive force (Kawano [0030], Fig. 3). 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 2, Masashi discloses the presence of α-Fe and Γ-FeZn (Fe3Zn10, Kinoshita [0058]) in the Zn-bonded Sm-Fe-N magnet (Fig. 8). With respect to in the inter-particle metal phase, an area ratio of the α-Fe phase in a particle form being 10% or less, Masashi discloses Sm2Fe17N3 phase decomposes into α-Fe and Zn reacts with α-Fe to form Γ-FeZn phase (Fe3Zn10, Kinoshita [0058]) (pp. 243, 247-248) and the area ratio of Γ-FeZn (Fe3Zn10, Kinoshita [0058]) is a result-effective variable because the formation of Γ-FeZn decreases the formation of α-Fe phases, increasing the coercivity of the magnets (p. 247). Therefore, it would have been routine optimization at arrive at the claimed invention, including an area ratio of the α-Fe phase in a particle form being 10% or less. The determination of the optimum or workable ranges of a result-effective variable is characterized as routine optimization. MPEP 2144.05(II)(B).
Regarding claim 5, Masashi discloses the Sm-Fe-N magnet includes Zn at 1 wt% or more and 20 wt% or less (10 or 15 wt%) (2. Experimental procedure).
Regarding claim 6, Masashi discloses the Sm-Fe-N magnet includes oxygen at less than 1.0 wt% (the coercivity of the Zn-bonded Sm-Fe-N magnets increased strongly as the oxygen content decreased) (pp. 246-247, Fig. 7). 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 7, Masashi in view of Matsuura discloses the α-Fe phase (Masashi pp. 247-248, Fig. 8) is spatially isolated such that it does not directly contact the Sm-Fe-N particles (α-FeZn phase surrounded by Γ-FeZn phase and not in contact with the Sm-Fe-N (SFN) particles formed by Zn melting during annealing and diffusing into the Sm2Fe17N3 powder and interdiffusing with Fe to form α-FeZn and Γ-FeZn) (Matsuura p. 6 col. 2 para. 3, Fig. 11).
Regarding claim 8, the Sm-Fe-Zn coating layer having an average thickness of 35 nm or more and 50 nm or less has been considered and determined to be a feature of the Sm-Fe-N magnet that results from applicant’s disclosed processing (applicant’s specification [0097]-[0120]). The prior art discloses a substantially similar process (Masashi 2. Experimental procedure), such that the product of the prior art is substantially similar to that claimed, including the Sm-Fe-Zn coating layer (Zn diffusion region) having an average thickness of 35 nm or more and 50 nm or less.
Claims 1, 2, and 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kataoka (Kataoka et al. Influence of Swaging on the Magnetic Properties of Zn-Bonded Sm-Fe-N Magnets. Materials Transactions, Vol. 56, No. 10 (2015) pp, 1698 to 1702.) in view of Matsuura (Matsuura et al. Microstructural changes in high-coercivity Zn-bonded Sm-Fe-N magnets. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 510 (2020) 166943) and Masashi (Masashi Matsuura et al. High coercive Zn-bonded Sm-Fe-N magnets prepared using fine Zn particles with low oxygen content. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 452 (2018) 243-248.).
Regarding claim 1, Kataoka discloses a Sm-Fe-N magnet (Abstract) comprising:
Sm-Fe-N particles (3. Results and Discussion, Figs. 7-8),
wherein an inter-particle metal phase is present between at least two of the Sm-Fe-N particles (interparticle Zn rich region) (3. Results and Discussion para. 5, Fig. 8),
an average particle diameter of the Sm-Fe-N particles is less than 2.0 um, and a percentage of the Sm-Fe-N particles having an aspect ratio of 2.0 or more is 10% or less (3. Results and Discussion para. 3, Fig. 6),
the inter-particle metal phase includes: a Fe3Zn10 phase (interparticle Zn rich region corresponds to Γ-Fe3Zn10 phase) (3. Results and Discussion para. 5); and
wherein each of the Sm-Fe-N particles has a surface (3. Results and Discussion, Figs. 7-8).
With respect to in the inter-particle metal phase, an area ratio of the Fe3Zn10 phase being 80% or more, Kataoka discloses the interparticle Zn rich region corresponds to the Γ-Fe3Zn10 phase formed by Zn reacting with the α-Fe phase (Kataoka 3. Results and Discussion para. 5, Fig. 8).
Similarly, Masashi discloses Sm2Fe17N3 phase decomposes into α-Fe and Zn reacts with α-Fe to form Γ-FeZn phase (Fe3Zn10, Kinoshita [0058]) (pp. 243, 247-248). Further, the area ratio of Γ-FeZn is a result-effective variable because the formation of Γ-FeZn decreases the formation of α-Fe phases, increasing the coercivity of the magnets (Masashi p. 247).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the magnet of Kataoka in light of the disclosure of Masashi to perform routine optimization to increase coercivity (Masashi p. 247) to arrive at the claimed invention including an area ratio of the Fe3Zn10 phase being 80% or more. The determination of the optimum or workable ranges of a result-effective variable is characterized as routine optimization. MPEP 2144.05(II)(B).
Kataoka discloses the interparticle Zn rich region is formed by Zn reacting with the α -Fe phase (3. Results and Discussion para. 5).
Kataoka is silent to an α-Fe phase in a particle form.
Matsuura discloses a Sm-Fe-N magnet (Zn-bonded Sm-Fe-N magnet) (Abstract, 2. Experimental procedures) with an inter-particle metal phase that includes: a Fe3Zn10 phase (Γ-FeZn) and an α-Fe phase in a particle form (p. 6 col. 2, 4. Summary, Fig. 11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the magnet of Kataoka for the interparticle Zn rich region to include α-Fe in particle form because during annealing of a Zn-bonded magnet (Kataoka Abstract, 2. Experimental Procedure) α-FeZn grains (particles) form that are surrounded by Γ-FeZn, which isolates the soft magnetic α-FeZn phase resulting in a magnet with high coercivity (Matsuura p. 6 col. 2, 4. Summary, Fig. 11).
Kataoka is silent to a Sm-Fe-Zn coating layer is formed in at least a portion of the surface.
Masashi discloses a Sm-Fe-N magnet (Zn-bonded Sm-Fe-N magnet) (Abstract, 2. Experimental procedure) comprising Sm-Fe-N particles (p. 24 Figs. 8-9), wherein each of the Sm-Fe-N particles has a surface (p. 247-248, Fig. 9) with a Sm-Fe-Zn coating layer formed in at least a portion of the surface (Zn diffusion region) (p. 247-248, Fig. 9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the Sm-Fe-N particles to have a Sm-Fe-Zn coating layer in at least a portion of the surface because annealing (Masashi 2. Experimental procedure; Kataoka 2. Experimental Procedure) forms a surface layer consisting of Fe, Sm, and Zn by Zn diffusing from the surface (Masashi p. 247 vol. 2 para. 3, p. 248 col. 1 paras. 1-2, Fig. 9).
The Sm-Fe-Zn coating layer including Zn at 1 at% or more and 20 at% or less and the Sm-Fe-Zn coating layer having an average thickness of 20 nm or more and 50 nm or less have been considered and determined to recite features of the Sm-Fe-Zn coating layer that result from processing. Kataoka in view of Masashi discloses Zn diffusion (Masashi p. 247 col. 2 para. 3) as a result of annealing (Kataoka 2. Experimental Procedure; Masashi 2. Experimental procedure). Kataoka discloses annealing at 425 or 450°C for 1 h (2. Experimental Procedure), which is within the scope of applicant’s disclosed heating to 420 to 600°C for 5 hours or less (applicant’s specification [0110]-[0113]). Therefore, the claimed features of the Sm-Fe-Zn coating layer naturally flow from the disclosure of the prior art, including Zn at 1 at% or more and 20 at% or less and an average thickness of 20 nm or more and 50 nm or less.
Applicant’s inventive Sm-Fe-N magnet has “both high density and coercivity” (applicant’s specification [0008]), with inventive examples having coercivity of 20.5-26.3 kOe (applicant’s Table 2). Similarly, the magnet of Kataoka has increased density and coercivity (Abstract, 1. Introduction para. 2, 4. Conclusions) with an average coercivity value of 23.7 kOe (1.89 MA/m) (Abstract, 3. Results and Discussion para. 2, Fig. 3-4, 4. Conclusions). The similarity in the coercivity property between applicant’s invention and the magnet of Kataoka supports the obviousness rejection.
Regarding claim 2, Kataoka in view of Matsuura and Masashi discloses the Sm-Fe-N magnet according to claim 1 as cited above, wherein in the inter-particle metal phase, an area ratio of the α-Fe phase in a particle form is 10% or less (interparticle Zn rich region corresponds to Γ-Fe3Zn10 phase) (Kataoka 3. Results and Discussion para. 5) (includes α-Fe phase in a particle form) (Matsuura p. 6 col. 2, 4. Summary, Fig. 11) (where α-Fe phase can decrease magnet coercivity) (Masashi p. 247 col. 2 para. 2). The prior art (Masashi) discloses the α-Fe content is a result-effective variable. Therefore, it would have been routine optimization to arrive at the claimed invention, including an area ratio of the α-Fe phase in a particle form is 10% or less. The determination of the optimum or workable range of a result-effective variable is characterized as routine optimization. MPEP 2144.05(II)(B).
Regarding claim 5, Kataoka in view of Matsuura and Masashi disclose the Sm-Fe-N magnet according to claim 1 as cited above, wherein the Sm-Fe-N magnet includes Zn at 1 wt% or more and 20 wt% or less (15 mass%) (Kataoka 2. Experimental Procedure).
Regarding claim 6, Kataoka in view of Matsuura and Masashi disclose the Sm-Fe-N magnet according to claim 1 as cited above.
Kataoka is silent to the Sm-Fe-N magnet including oxygen at less than 1.0 wt%.
Masashi discloses the Sm-Fe-N magnet includes oxygen at less than 1.0 wt% (the coercivity of the Zn-bonded Sm-Fe-N magnets increased strongly as the oxygen content decreased) (pp. 246-247, Fig. 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the magnet of Kataoka to include oxygen at less than 1.0 wt% to increase the coercivity (Masashi pp. 246-247, Fig. 7). 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 7, Kataoka in view of Matsuura and Masashi disclose the Sm-Fe-N magnet according to claim 1 as cited above, where the α-Fe phase is spatially isolated such that it does not directly contact the Sm-Fe-N particles (α-FeZn phase surrounded by Γ-FeZn phase and not in contact with the Sm-Fe-N (SFN) particles formed by Zn melting during annealing and diffusing into the Sm2Fe17N3 powder and interdiffusing with Fe to form α-FeZn and Γ-FeZn) (Matsuura p. col. 2 para. 3, Fig. 11).
Regarding claim 8, Kataoka in view of Matsuura and Masashi discloses the Sm-Fe-N magnet according to claim 1 as cited above.
The Sm-Fe-Zn coating layer having an average thickness of 35 nm or more and 50 nm or less has been considered and determined to recite a feature of the Sm-Fe-Zn coating layer that results from processing. Kataoka in view of Masashi discloses Zn diffusion (Masashi p. 247 col. 2 para. 3) as a result of annealing (Kataoka 2. Experimental Procedure; Masashi 2. Experimental procedure). Kataoka discloses annealing at 425 or 450°C for 1 h (2. Experimental Procedure), which is within the scope of applicant’s disclosed heating to 420 to 600°C for 5 hours or less (applicant’s specification [0110]-[0113]). Therefore, the claimed features of the Sm-Fe-Zn coating layer naturally flow from the disclosure of the prior art, including an average thickness of 35 nm or more and 50 nm or less.
Related Art
Haga (JP 2020-053440 machine translation)
Haga discloses producing a Sm-Fe-N magnet ([0001]) by mixing Sm-Fe-N magnet powder with Zn alloy powder, compression molding, then heat treating using 1 to 20 mass% Zn ([0012], [0017]-[0024], [0051]-[0070]).
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, Wednesday-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 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.
/STEPHANI HILL/Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights