DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending, and claims 1-4 and 8-11 are currently under review.
Claims 5-7 and 12-20 are withdrawn.
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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 9/03/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-20 remain(s) pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Claims have overcome each and every 112 rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 6/05/2025.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Urata et al. (US 2019/0362871) and further evidenced by Koshiba et al. (US 2005/0236071).
Regarding claim 1, Urata et al. discloses a soft magnetic alloy powder having a compositional formula of FeaSibBcPdCue, wherein a ranges from 79 to 84.5 atomic percent, b ranges from 0 to 6 atomic percent, c ranges from 4 to 10 atomic percent, d ranges from 4 to 11 atomic percent, and e ranges from 0.2 to 0.4 atomic percent [0012]. Urata et al. further teaches that Fe can be substituted for up to 3 atomic percent of C, Sn, Co, Ni, Zr, Hf, etc. among others [0040]. The examiner notes that the overlap between the composition of Urata et al. and that as claimed is prima facie obvious. See MPEP 2144.05(I). Urata et al. further teaches that the soft magnetic alloy powder includes an amorphous phase as a main phase (ie. at least 50%) [0015].
Urata et al. does not expressly teach an aspect ratio shape of powder as claimed. However, Urata et al. does expressly teach that the powder can be made through gas atomization [0043], and one of ordinary skill would readily recognize gas atomization to achieve spherical (ie. aspect ratio of 1) powders as evidenced by Koshiba et al. [0010].
Regarding claim 2, the aforementioned prior art discloses the powder of claim 1 (see previous). The examiner notes that the claimed S range includes zero, such that S is not actually required. Alternatively, Urata et al. further teaches that S can also be included as in impurity in an amount of up to 0.1 weight percent, which overlaps with the claimed range [0034]. See MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claims 3 and 8, the aforementioned prior art discloses the powder of claims 1-2 (see previous). Urata et al. further teaches a total crystallinity of up to 10%, which corresponds to an amorphous phase of at least 90% [0046].
Regarding claims 4 and 9-11, the aforementioned prior art discloses the powder of claims 1-3 and 8 (see previous). Urata et al. further teaches a crystal grain size of up to 40 nanometers, which overlaps with the claimed range [0049]. See MPEP 2144.05(I).
Response to Arguments
The previous 103 rejections made over Chiba et al. have been withdrawn in view of applicant’s remarks regarding unexpected results and criticality of the claimed Sn range.
Applicant's arguments filed 9/03/2025 regarding the 103 rejections over Urata et al. have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the claimed Sn range achieves unexpected and critical results of desirable coercive force and magnetic flux density values. The examiner cannot concur. The examiner notes that Urata et al. discloses broadly overlapping Sn values and values of coercivity of as low as approximately 40 A/m and magnetic flux density of up to 1.71 [table3]. These values are substantially similar to and comparable to those obtained by the instant application (and purported to be unexpected) as shown in the table provided on p.7 of the remarks such that the purported values of coercive force and magnetic flux density cannot be considered unexpected. Rather, these values are entirely expected and expressly disclosed by Urata et al.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS A WANG whose telephone number is (408)918-7576. The examiner can normally be reached usually M-Th: 7-5.
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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at 5712721177. 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.
/NICHOLAS A WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1734