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 .
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.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-9 are currently under examination. No claims are amended, added, or canceled.
Previous Grounds of Rejection
The rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagamine et al. to JP 2018-248595, JP 2018-243602, JP 2018-243603, JP 2018-243604, and JP 2018-243605 (herein referred to under US 2021/0273259 A1 as the English-language equivalent cited to for page and paragraph) with respect to claims 1-9 is withdrawn because the common ownership or obligation of assignment exception under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) stated by applicant sufficient overcome the prior are of Nagamine et al. (Remarks page 4).
New grounds of rejections are set forth below.
New Grounds of Rejections
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seetharaman et al. (US 2015/0203979 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Seetharaman et al. teach a process heating a raw material comprising selected alternative LiCl, CaCl2 ([0018]) and YCl3 and GdCl3 obtained from reactions from Gd2O3 and Y2O3 and AlCl3 ([[0032]-[0034]) at a temperature preferably 580-650 0C preferably 3-8 hours, wherein the instant claimed A, B, C and D are Cl ([0006]-[0036]).The heat-treating temperature is encompassed claimed ranges.
Regarding claims 2-9, as discussed above, the temperature taught by Seetharaman et al. comprises lower than or equal to 550-650 0C and 3-8 hours as the instant claims ([0053]).
Response to Arguments
With regards to the previous Grounds of Rejection
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1-9 filed on 09/23/2025 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejections.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YUN QIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5834. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10:00am-4:00pm.
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, Sally A Merkling can be reached at 571-272-6297. 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.
YUN . QIAN
Examiner
Art Unit 1732
/YUN QIAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1738