DETAILED ACTION
The following Office action concerns Patent Application Number 17/919,901. Claims 1-3, 5-14, 16, 17, 19-21 are pending in the application. Claims 3, 7, 9-14, 17 have been withdrawn from consideration as being drawn to non-elected inventions or species.
The applicant’s amendment filed June 26, 2026 has been entered.
The previous grounds of rejection are withdrawn in light of the applicant’s amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. § 112 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
(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.
(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.
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 16, 19-21 are rejected under 35 USC § 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the art that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention at the time the application was filed. In particular, the limitation “wherein x is in a range between 1 and 2.0,” which was added by amendment, is not supported by the specification. The specification discloses that x is in a range of 0.7 to 1.5, which does not include x=2.0. MPEP § 2163(II)(A)(3)(b).
Claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 16, 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) because the term
PNG
media_image1.png
55
434
media_image1.png
Greyscale
is indefinite. A spinel is a metal oxide as that term is defined in the instant specification (p. 10). The above overall composition does not contain oxygen, and so it is unclear how it can be spinel and what is meant by the term “spinel” in claim 1.
Claim 2 is rejected 35 U.S.C. § 112(d) because the range 3-30 % is broader than the range 20-30 % in 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 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, 5, 6, 8, 16, 18-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Rentrop et al (US 2020/0020467) in view of Mitsumoto et al (US 2014/0353547) and Miura et al (US 2008/0048821).
Rentrop et al teaches a method of making a printed temperature sensor product comprising negative temperature coefficient (NTC) particles in a dielectric matrix (abstract). The product includes a conductive percolation network of the NTC particles in the dielectric matrix (Fig. 1, par. 4, 34). The dielectric matrix is a cross-linked polymer (par. 12). The NTC particles have a spinel phase comprising Mn, Ni and Co (par. 10). The method includes dispersing the NTC particles in a solvent and the matrix material to form an ink (par. 43). The ink is applied to a substrate and the solvent is evaporated and the matrix polymer is cross-linked (cured) at a temperature of less than 250 °C (par. 43). The NTC particles are made by mixing (binary) metal oxide powders such as MnO, Co3O4, and NiO and firing them at 950 °C (par. 44). The method further includes quenching the NTC material and grinding the material to a smaller size (par. 44). The particles have a final size of 10-50 µm (par. 10).
Rentrop et al in view of Miura et al does not teach the size of the raw material precursor particles.
However, Mitsumoto et al teaches a method of making a metal oxide product which includes mixing and pulverizing the raw material powders to a sub-micron size in order to increase uniformity and reactivity (par. 23, 99). Sub-micron is interpreted to mean less than one micron.
Rentrop et al teaches mixing the raw material metal oxide powders but is silent regarding the size of the raw material powders (par. 44). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated by design need to combine the raw material powder size of Mitsumoto et al with the method of Rentrop et al in view of Miura et al in order to improve the uniformity and reactivity of the powder.
Rentrop et al in view of Mitsumoto et al does not teach a NiO phase.
However, Miura et al teaches a method of making an NTC thermistor comprising Mn, Ni and Co and further comprising a spinel phase and a NiO phase (par. 11, 43, 82-83). The NTC thermistor provides excellent reliability (par. 10). The observed amount of NiO phase (rocksalt phase) is 0-33.2 area % (Table 2). The amount in weight % can be roughly estimated from the known densities of the NiO phase (4.84 g/cm3) and MnO (5.43 g/cm3) representing the overall density such that (33.2%)(4.84/5.43)=29.6 % by weight NiO phase.
The NTC material is formed into a ceramic powder (par. 61). The nickel oxide phase and the spinel phase are both present in the NTC material (par. 80, 81). Since the particles include the nickel oxide phase, the nickel oxide phase must be incorporated into the particles on a scale of the particle size.
The preferred mole ratio of Mn to Ni is 55/45 to 90/10 (par. 45). The mole ratio of Mn to Ni comprises an excess of nickel oxide to form the nickel oxide phase. When cobalt is included, the molar amounts are 0.1-90 % Mn, 0.1-45 % Ni and 0.1-90 % Co (par. 17). A spinel phase containing Mn, Ni and Co is formed (par. 43).
The broad ranges 0.1-90% Mn, 0.1-45% Ni and 0.1-90% Co encompass the claimed spinel composition of Mn3-x-yNix-yMIIIy with cobalt being “M.”
Rentrop et al teaches an NTC material comprising Mn, Ni and Co, but Rentrop et al is silent regarding the relative amounts of each. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated by design need to combine the NiO phase and molar amounts of Mn, Ni and Co of Miura et al with the method of Rentrop et al in view of Mitsumoto et al in order to obtain an NTC material having excellent reliability.
Response to Arguments
The primary reference, Rentrop et al, does not require titanium. The secondary reference, Miura et al, is relied upon for teaching amounts of Mn, Ni and Co, as discussed above. An amount of titanium is not needed because Rentrop et al does not require it.
The molar amount of nickel is specified by the formula for the “overall composition” in claim 1. The applicant’s calculation of a molar amount from the claimed weight percentage of NiO phase cannot be inconsistent with the molar amount of Ni required by the formula.
Examiner’s Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to William Young whose telephone number is (571) 270-5078. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 8:30 AM to 5 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Angela Brown-Pettigrew, can be reached at 571-272-2817. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000./WILLIAM D YOUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761 July 1, 2026
Prosecution Insights