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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 March 4, 2026 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-2, 4-18 and 21-23 are pending wherein claim 1 is amended, claims 3 and 19-20 are canceled, claims 21-23 are new and claims 8-9 are withdrawn from consideration.
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 1-2, 4-7, 10-18 and 21-23 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.
With respect to the recitation “wherein the alloy is substantially free of Mo-related intermetallic compounds” in claim 1, The phrases ”substantially free” and “Mo-related” in claim 1 is a relative phrase which renders the claim indefinite. The phrase “substantially free” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear what the scope of the combination of these phrases would include or exclude in terms of the amount and type of intermetallics. Does the combination of these phrases include or exclude intermetallics that had a portion attached to molybdenum at some point (for instance, a tantalum aluminum where the aluminide was previously attached to a molybdenum?) and how much of it is included or excluded by the combination of these phrases? Is Mo-related limited to molybdenum?
With respect to the recitation “Mo-related intermetallic compounds” in claim 22, is this recitation limited to compounds containing molybdenum or does it include compounds that are formed from metals that were previously attached to the molybdenum?
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, 4-6, 10-18 and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cai et al. (CN 108220742 A).
In regard to claims 1-2 and 4, Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses high-entropy microalloyed Ti-Zr-Hf-V-Nb-Ta refractory metal alloys with the formula TiaZrbHfcVdNbeTafMx wherein M is one or more of aluminum, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, manganese, iron, cobalt, nickel and silicon wherein the alloys would have very high liquid or disordered solid solutions states and the solid solution phase would be stabilized and the main phase would be the BCC phase (pages 4-5). Cai et al. (CN ‘742) further discloses a high entropy alloy of the formula Ti33Zr20Hf15Nb20Ta5Al5Mo2 (Example 5) and the molybdenum equivalent of Example 5 according to the formula in [0022] of the instant specification would be 26.34, which would be greater than or equal to 13.5 as claimed. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the invention to have selected molybdenum from the group of aluminum, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, manganese, iron, cobalt, nickel and silicon because Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
With respect to the recitation “and wherein the alloy satisfies a valence electron concentration (VEC) value ≤ 4.7” in claim 1, Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses a substantially similar composition. Therefore, the claimed VEC value would be expected. MPEP 2112.01 I.
With respect to the recitation “wherein the alloy is substantially free of Mo-related intermetallic compounds” in claim 1, the instant invention teaches wherein the alloy is made by vacuum arc melting [0017]. Cai et al. (CN ‘742) teaches a substantially similar composition also made by vacuum arc melting (Examples). Therefore, alloys substantially free of Mo-related intermetallics would be expected. MPEP 2112.01 I.
In regard to claim 5, Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses high-entropy microalloyed Ti-Zr-Hf-V-Nb-Ta refractory metal alloys with the formula TiaZrbHfcVdNbeTafMx wherein M is one or more of aluminum, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, manganese, iron, cobalt, nickel and silicon wherein the alloys would have very high liquid or disordered solid solutions states and the solid solution phase would be stabilized and the main phase would be the BCC phase (pages 4-5). Cai et al. (CN ‘742) further discloses a high entropy alloy of the formula Ti33Zr20Hf15Nb20Ta5Al5Mo2 (Example 5) and the molybdenum equivalent of Example 5 according to the formula in [0022] of the instant specification would be 26.34, which would be greater than or equal to 13.5 as claimed. The sum of titanium, zirconium and hafnium is 68, which would be in the range of 57.2 to 85. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the invention to have selected molybdenum from the group of aluminum, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, manganese, iron, cobalt, nickel and silicon because Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges. Additionally, since molybdenum may completely replace the aluminum content in Example 5, Cai et al. (CN ‘742) would read on the claim.
In regard to claim 6, Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses high-entropy microalloyed Ti-Zr-Hf-V-Nb-Ta refractory metal alloys with the formula TiaZrbHfcVdNbeTafMx wherein M is one or more of aluminum, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, manganese, iron, cobalt, nickel and silicon wherein the alloys would have very high liquid or disordered solid solutions states and the solid solution phase would be stabilized and the main phase would be the BCC phase (pages 4-5). Cai et al. (CN ‘742) further discloses a high entropy alloy of the formula Ti33Zr20Hf15Nb20Ta5Al5Mo2 (Example 5) and the molybdenum equivalent of Example 5 according to the formula in [0022] of the instant specification would be 26.34, which would be greater than or equal to 13.5 as claimed. The sum of titanium, zirconium and hafnium is 68, which would be in the range of 57.2 to 85 and the sum of tantalum and niobium would be 25, which would be within the range of 12.8 to 33.3. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the invention to have selected molybdenum from the group of aluminum, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, manganese, iron, cobalt, nickel and silicon because Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges. Additionally, since molybdenum may completely replace the aluminum content in Example 5, Cai et al. (CN ‘742) would read on the claim.
In regard to claims 10-11, Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses high-entropy microalloyed Ti-Zr-Hf-V-Nb-Ta refractory metal alloys with the formula TiaZrbHfcVdNbeTafMx wherein M is one or more of aluminum, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, manganese, iron, cobalt, nickel and silicon wherein the alloys would have very high liquid or disordered solid solutions states and the solid solution phase would be stabilized and the main phase would be the BCC phase (pages 4-5). Cai et al. (CN ‘742) further discloses a high entropy alloy of the formula Ti35Zr25Hf25Nb5Ta5Mo5 (Example 4) and the molybdenum equivalent of Example 4 according to the formula in [0022] of the instant specification would be 14.6, which would be greater than or equal to 13.5 as claimed. The sum of titanium, zirconium and hafnium is 85, which would be in the range of 57.2 to 85. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the invention to have selected molybdenum from the group of aluminum, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, manganese, iron, cobalt, nickel and silicon because Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
Still regarding claims 10-11, Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses a substantially similar composition. Therefore, the claimed VEC value would be expected. MPEP 2112.01 I.
Still regarding claim 1 and in regard to claim 12, Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses high-entropy microalloyed Ti-Zr-Hf-V-Nb-a refractory metal alloys with the formula TiaZrbHfcVdNbeTafMx wherein M is one or more of aluminum, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, manganese, iron, cobalt, nickel and silicon wherein the alloys would have very high liquid or disordered solid solutions states and the solid solution phase would be stabilized and the main phase would be the BCC phase (pages 4-5). Cai et al. (CN ‘742) further discloses wherein M, is one or more of Al, Cr, Mo, W, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni and Si and a = 15 to 45, b = 5 to 35, c = 5 to 35, d = 0 to about 35, e = 0 to 35, f = 5 to 40 and x =0.1 to 15 wherein b+c is between 15 and 70. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the invention to have selected molybdenum from the group of aluminum, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, manganese, iron, cobalt, nickel and silicon because Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges. Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses an alloy such as Ti25Zr25Hf25Nb7Ta6Mo12. The Mo equivalent of such an alloy would be 23.11 and with respect to the recitation “and wherein the alloy satisfies a valence electron concentration (VEC) value ≤ 4.7” in claim 1, Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses a substantially similar composition. Therefore, the claimed VEC value would be expected. MPEP 2112.01 I. The sum of Ti, Zr and Hf would be 75, which would be within the claimed range of 57.2 and 85 and the sum of niobium and tantalum would be 13, which would be within the claimed range of 12.8 to 20.
Still regarding claim 1 and in regard to claims 13-14 and 16-18, Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses high-entropy microalloyed Ti-Zr-Hf-V-Nb-a refractory metal alloys with the formula TiaZrbHfcVdNbeTafMx wherein M is one or more of aluminum, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, manganese, iron, cobalt, nickel and silicon wherein the alloys would have very high liquid or disordered solid solutions states and the solid solution phase would be stabilized and the main phase would be the BCC phase (pages 4-5). Cai et al. (CN ‘742) further discloses wherein M, is one or more of Al, Cr, Mo, W, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni and Si and a = 15 to 45, b = 5 to 35, c = 5 to 35, d = 0 to about 35, e = 0 to 35, f = 5 to 40 and x =0.1 to 15 wherein b+c is between 15 and 70. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the invention to have selected molybdenum from the group of aluminum, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, manganese, iron, cobalt, nickel and silicon because Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges. Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses an alloy such as Ti25Zr25Hf25Nb6.5Ta6.5Mo12. The Mo equivalent of such an alloy would be 22.91 and with respect to the recitation “and wherein the alloy satisfies a valence electron concentration (VEC) value ≤ 4.7” in claim 1, Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses a substantially similar composition. Therefore, the claimed VEC value would be expected. MPEP 2112.01 I. The sum of Ti, Zr and Hf would be 75 and would have an equiatomic ratio, and would be within the claimed range of 57.2 and 85 and the sum of niobium and tantalum would be 13, which would be within the claimed range of 12.8 to 13.5 and would have an equiatomic ratio. Since molybdenum is 12 and niobium is 6.5, this would constitute an non-equiatomic ratio as in claim 18.
With respect to the recitation “wherein the Mo-related intermetallic compounds comprise Ti3Mo, ZrMo2, and HfMo2” in claim 21, Cai et al. (CN ‘742) teaches a substantially similar composition also made by vacuum arc melting (Examples). Therefore, alloys comprising Ti3Mo, ZrMo2 and HfMo2 would be expected.
With respect to the recitation “wherein the alloy exhibits no detectable X-ray diffraction peaks corresponding to Mo-related intermetallic compounds” in claim 22, Cai et al. (CN ‘742) teaches a substantially similar composition also made by vacuum arc melting (Examples). Therefore, alloys exhibiting no detectable X-ray diffraction peaks corresponding to Mo-related intermetallic compounds would be expected.
In regard to claim 23, Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses high-entropy microalloyed Ti-Zr-Hf-V-Nb-Ta refractory metal alloys with the formula TiaZrbHfcVdNbeTafMx wherein M is one or more of aluminum, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, manganese, iron, cobalt, nickel and silicon wherein the alloys would have very high liquid or disordered solid solutions states and the solid solution phase would be stabilized and the main phase would be the BCC phase (pages 4-5). Since Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses substantially similar compositions made by the same method (vacuum arc melting), a single-phase solid solution at equilibrium between a decomposition temperature and a solidus temperature would be expected. MPEP 2112.01 I.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cai et al. (CN 108220742 A) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Yuan et al. (Formation, structure and properties of biocompatible TiZrHfNbTa high-entropy alloys).
In regard to claim 7, Cai et al. (CN ‘742) discloses high-entropy microalloyed Ti-Zr-Hf-V-Nb-Ta refractory metal alloys as set forth above, but Cai et al. (CN ‘742) does not specify wherein the alloys would be biocompatible.
Yuan et al. teaches that high entropy TiZrHfNbTa alloys have Young’s moduli that can be more easily adjusted than conventional alloys due to the large compositional variation and high entropy alloys have a unique combination of low modulus, good mechanical biocompatibility and low magnetic susceptibility (Introduction).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the invention to use the high entropy alloys, as disclosed by Cai et al. (CN ‘742), to make alloys suitable for implant in the human body, as disclosed by Yuan et al., in order to observe low modulus, good mechanical biocompatibility and low magnetic susceptibility, as disclosed by Yuan et al. (Introduction).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed March 4, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
First, the Applicant primarily argues that Cai et al. (CN ‘742) does not disclose or teach that the alloys are substantially free of Mo-related intermetallic compounds (such as Ti2Mo, ZrMo2, or HfMo2) and characterizing BCC as the main phase does not imply that the alloy systems of Cai et al. (CN ‘742) ar substantially free of Mo-related intermetallic compounds.
In response, the Examiner notes that the instant invention teaches wherein the alloy is made by vacuum arc melting [0017]. Cai et al. (CN ‘742) teaches a substantially similar composition also made by vacuum arc melting (Examples). Therefore, alloys substantially free of Mo-related intermetallics would be expected. MPEP 2112.01 I.
Second, the Applicant primarily argues that the diagrams in Figures 1b and 1b1 of the Present Application, a Ti-Zr-Hf-Mo alloy system or a Ti-Zr-Hf-Nb-Ta-Mo alloy system, such as the alloy systems in Examples 4 and 5 of Cai et al. (CN ‘742) may include intermetallic compounds.
In response, the Examiner notes that “substantially free of Mo-related intermetallic compounds” would not necessarily exclude 100% of intermetallic compounds. The scope of “substantially free” may include free of, the upper limit is not specified or quantitatively defined in any way as indicated in the 112 rejection above.
Third, the Applicant primarily argues that Cai et al. (CN ‘742) only discloses a BCC main phase and the office has not shown that a main phase is the same as a single phase.
In response, the Examiner notes that Cai et al. (CN ‘742) teaches a substantially similar composition also made by vacuum arc melting (Examples). Therefore, the same or a substantially similar microstructure would be expected.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jessee Roe whose telephone number is (571)272-5938. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 7:30 am to 4 pm.
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, Curt Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
/JESSEE R ROE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759