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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-9 and 11-15, in the reply filed on October 6, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claim 16 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected mold, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on October 6, 2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-9 and 11-15 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 requires “a number of the second phases is 1000 or more.” It is unclear whether this refers to the types of composition, the number of grains, or a different parameter. While Applicant’s specification refers to the number of second phases are measured in a specific area, there is no mention of what is actually being counted to determine the number of phases per unit area, see Applicant’s specification [0009]. As such, it is unclear what is being counted for the claimed measurement regarding number of second phases. Note that the similar language in claim 6 is also unclear for the above reasons.
Claims 2-9 and 11-15 are rejected as indefinite for depending from an indefinite claim.
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 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 1-9 and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujino et al. (US 2009/0044415).
Regarding claim 1, Fujino discloses a cemented carbide comprising 5 to 10 mass % of cobalt and a hard phase of tungsten carbide particles, see abstract. Additionally, the cemented carbide contains chromium and/or vanadium with each content of Cr and V preferably 0.01 to 3 mass % and the total content of Cr and V preferably 0.1 to 6 mass % [0050]. Note that based on the mass percentages for Co, Cr and V, the reference is considered to render obvious the claimed Cr to Co and V to Co ratios; see MPEP 2144.05 I regarding overlapping ranges. For example, when Co is 8 mass % and Cr is 0.6 mass %, then Co to Cr is 7.5%. Similarly, when Co is 8 mass % and V is 0.3 mass %, then Co to Cr is 3.75%.
While the reference does not specifically disclose the claimed area ratio of the second phase (i.e. cobalt) and the number of second phases (i.e. cobalt), the reference does disclose the mass % and starting particle size of the cobalt powder overlapping the values disclosed by Applicant, see Fujino [0059-0062] and Applicant’s specification [0072-0082]. Additionally, both the disclosed and claimed cemented carbides are made using a similar method, see Fujino [0059] and Applicant’s specification [0072-0082]. As such, it is expected that the disclosed cemented carbide has values overlapping the claimed area ratio and number of phases given the similar Co mass percentage and starting particle size as well as the similar method of making; see MPEP 2112.01 I “Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established.”
Regarding claim 2, the reference renders obvious the claimed area ratio of the second phase, see above discussion and MPEP 2112.01 I.
Regarding claim 3, the reference discloses the amount of cobalt as 5 to 10 mass %, which overlaps the claimed range, see abstract and MPEP 2144.05 I.
Regarding claims 4 and 5, the reference renders obvious the claimed mass-based percentages of chromium to cobalt and of vanadium to cobalt, see above discussion and MPEP 2144.05 I.
Regarding claim 6, the reference renders obvious the claimed number of second phases, see above discussion and MPEP 2112.01 I.
Regarding claim 7, the reference discloses the mean particle size of the tungsten carbide particles as 1 micron or less, which overlaps the claimed range, see abstract and MPEP 2144.05 I.
Regarding claim 8, while the reference does not specifically disclose the claimed area ratio of the first phase (i.e. tungsten carbide), the reference does disclose a particle size and amount of WC overlapping the values disclosed by Applicant, see Fujino abstract and Applicant’s specification [0072-0082]. Additionally, both the disclosed and claimed cemented carbides are made using a similar method, see Fujino [0059] and Applicant’s specification [0072-0082]. As such, it is expected that the disclosed cemented carbide has a first phase area ratio overlapping the claimed area ratio given the similar WC mass percentage and particle size as well as the similar method of making; see above discussion and MPEP 2112.01 I.
Regarding claim 9, the reference discloses the cemented carbide consists of tungsten carbide and cobalt, which corresponds to the claimed first and second phases, respectively, see abstract.
Regarding claim 11, the reference discloses the cemented carbide as free of η phase, see entire document.
Regarding claim 12, the reference renders obvious the claimed area ratios, see above discussion and MPEP 2112.01 I.
Regarding claims 13 and 14, while the reference does not specifically disclose the claimed Vickers hardness ad bending strength, given the similar composition, particle size and method of making, it is expected the disclosed and claimed cemented carbide will have similar properties regarding hardness and bending strength, see above discussion and MPEP 2112.01 I and II.
Regarding claim 15, the reference renders obvious the claimed cobalt content of the binder phase, see abstract and MPEP 2144.05 I.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA A AUER whose telephone number is (571)270-5669. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 am - 4 pm EST.
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, M. Veronica Ewald can be reached at (571)272-8519. 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.
/LAURA A AUER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783