DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 04/08/2026 has been entered. Claims 10-29 remain pending in the application. New claims 19-29 have been added. New claims 19-22 are dependent on claim 15 of Group II drawn to a method for forming a machining segment, as described in the restriction requirement mailed 08/06/2025. New claims 19-22 are therefore drawn to a non-elected invention and are hereby withdrawn. New claims 23-24 are drawn to a plurality of machining segments and are considered drawn to a non-elected invention (see Election/Restrictions section below). Claims 15-24 have been withdrawn due to a restriction requirement. No claims have been canceled. Claims 10-14 and 25-29 are presented for examination on the merits.
Applicant's amendments to the drawings have overcome the objections previously set forth in the Non-Final Rejection mailed 01/09/2026. Applicant's amendments to the specification have overcome the objections previously set forth in the Non-Final Rejection mailed 01/09/2026. Applicant's amendments to the claims have overcome the objections previously set forth in the Non-Final Rejection mailed 01/09/2026. Applicant's amendments to the claims have overcome the 112(b) rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Rejection mailed 01/09/2026.
Election/Restrictions
Newly submitted claims 23-24 (Group III) are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons: claims 23 and 24 are drawn to a plurality of machining segments and lacks unity of invention with claims 10 and 15 of Groups I and II since they share the technical feature of claim 10, described in the restriction requirement mailed 08/06/2025. The technical feature is not a special technical feature as it does not make a contribution over the prior art in view of US 5620489 A of Tselesin (see 103 rejection in this Office action).
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claims 23-24 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Claim Interpretation
Regarding the term “powdered or granular” of the instant claims, the instant claims and specification use the terms “powdered” and “granular” together, implying they are used as synonyms. The instant specification does not provide a definition for “powdered” nor “granular”. Under broadest reasonable interpretation, the term “powdered or granular” is interpreted as including an aggregate of discrete particles that are usually in the size range of 1 to 1000 μm, in view of the plain meaning of “powder” as defined by the “Glossary of Terms and Engineering Data” of Davis (see “powder” in page 45). See MPEP 2111.01(I-III).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 5620489 A of Tselesin (as cited in prior Office action).
Regarding claim 10, Tselesin teaches a method for making powder preform and abrasive articles made thereform (Title, abrasive articles read on the claimed machining segment, as further described in col. 1, lines 43-46).
Tselesin teaches a method for manufacturing abrasive articles and wear resistant parts, such articles or parts comprising a plurality of abrasive particles also known as superabrasive particles such as diamond, cubic boron nitride or the like randomly or systematically distributed in a sintered retaining matrix (col. 2, lines 55-65; abrasive particles read on the claimed first and second hard material particles; sintered retaining matrix reads on the claimed first matrix material).
Tselesin teaches an SEDF preform (38 reads on the claimed green body and first matrix material; preform also 86, 98, 101 in other embodiments) having abrasive particles (39, 71, reads on the claimed first hard particles) distributed therein, and a plurality of abrasive particles (40, 104, reads on the claimed second hard particles) on the top side of the preform (38, reads on claimed matrix layer, preform also 46, 46’, 51, and 58 in other embodiments, col. 7, lines 45-55 ; col. 10, lines 24-28; col. 10, line 63 – col. 11, line 11; col. 11, lines 58-65; Figs. 10, 10A, 20, 20A, 21, and 26-27).
Tselesin teaches fixing the preform to a core (99, reads on the claimed basic body of a machining tool) (col.13, lines 15-25; Fig. 28 shows the preform 98 is connected by an underside to the core 99 to form a cut-off disk which reads on the claimed machining tool).
Tselesin teaches adding a separator (100, 109, 110 reads on the claimed lower layer of a powdered or granular supporting material different from the first matrix material) on one side of the assembly (103) (col. 11, line 58-col. 12, line 15).
Tselesin teaches making a preform with a first plurality of diamonds, cutting the preform, putting a second plurality of diamonds into opening of a mesh type material, applying the preform against the carrier including the second plurality of diamonds, hot compacting the assembly, removing, and cutting and mounting to make the final product (col. 14, lines 14-47, reads on the claimed performing a sequence of a first and a second sequential step performed N times, N≥1, wherein in the first sequential step, a matrix layer having a first region is applied, wherein the first matrix material is applied in the first region, and in the second sequential step, the first hard material particles are arranged in the matrix layer; arranging the second hard material particles in the Nth matrix layer and applying an upper layer of the supporting material, wherein the second hard material particles are completely covered by the supporting material as seen in Fig. 20A where abrasive particles 104 are completely covered by 109 above and 105 below).
Tselesin teaches the preferred embodiments of the invention here presented comprise assemblies of abrasive particles such as diamonds, cubic boron nitride or the like, distributed in an orderly fashion on a substrate, or a carrier, and a pre-made SEDF preform formed from metals, ceramics, epoxy materials with binders or other plastics (col. 16, lines 15-21, materials read on the claimed a powdered or granular supporting material different from the first matrix material; orderly fashion reads on the claimed defined second particle pattern and defined first particle pattern).
Tselesin teaches the abrasive particles are included in the preform in a non-random pattern (claim 8, further reads on the claimed the first hard material particles are arranged in the matrix layer according to a defined first particle pattern and the claimed arranging the second hard material particles in the lower layer according to a defined second particle pattern).
Tselesin teaches the abrasive particles may be pressed into the substrate or held by an adhesive (col. 5, lines 60-67) and that particles are placed at least partially into the substrate (col. 6, lines 32-36, reads on the claimed wherein the second hard material particles are partially embedded in the first matrix material and partially embedded in the supporting material). Tselesin further teaches abrasive particles may be completely, or partially, covered by a binder-powder mixture (col. 6, lines 41-59).
Tselesin therefore reads on the limitation a method for producing a green body for a machining segment from a powdered or granular first matrix material, first hard material particles and second hard material particles, the machining segment being connected by an underside to a basic body of a machining tool, the method comprising the following steps: applying a lower layer of a powdered or granular supporting material different from the first matrix material; arranging the second hard material particles in the lower layer according to a defined second particle pattern, the second hard material particles being partially embedded in the supporting material; performing a sequence of a first and a second sequential step performed N times, N ≥ 1 wherein in the first sequential step, a matrix layer having a first region is applied, wherein the first matrix material is applied in the first region, and in the second sequential step, the first hard material particles are arranged in the matrix layer according to a defined first particle pattern; arranging the second hard material particles in the Nth matrix layer according to the defined second particle pattern, wherein the second hard material particles are partially embedded in the first matrix material, and applying an upper layer of the supporting material, wherein the second hard material particles are completely covered by the supporting material of claim 10.
Regarding claim 11, Tselesin teaches the method of claim 10 as described above.
Tselesin teaches assemblies of abrasive particles in an orderly fashion on a substrate, or a carrier (col. 16, lines 15-21, reads on the claimed first hard material particle are arranged in the first matrix material according to the defined first particle pattern). Tselesin further teaches the abrasive particles are included in the preform in a non-random pattern (claim 8, further reads on the claimed defined first particle pattern).
Tselesin therefore reads on the limitation wherein the first hard material particle are arranged in the first matrix material according to the defined first particle pattern of claim 11.
Regarding claim 12, Tselesin teaches the method of claim 10 as described above.
As seen in Fig. 20A, Tselesin teaches an assembly with a preform (101, reads on claimed matrix layer) applied to a separator layer (100, reads on claimed supporting material), and including particles within the preform (particles reads on claimed first hard material particles). Under broadest reasonable interpretation, the matrix layer of Tselesin has a first and second region and the supporting material is applied to at least the second region and particles are arranged throughout the matrix layer, with at least one particle being present between the first and second region of the matrix layer.
Tselesin therefore reads on the limitation wherein the matrix layer includes the first region and a second region, the supporting material being applied in the second region, and the first hard material particles being arranged in a transitional region between the first region and the second region of claim 12.
Regarding claim 13, Tselesin teaches the method of claim 12 as described above.
Tselesin teaches a method wherein a separator (reads on claimed supporting material) is added before sintering, the assembly is sintered, and thereafter removing the layer of separator material from the assembly (claim 29, assembly includes the preform made of a matrix material). Since the separator of Tselesin does not melt during sintering of the assembly and can be removed after the sintering step, the separator necessarily has a melting temperature higher than the sintering temperature of the preform or matrix material. A patent need not teach, and preferably omits, what is well known in the art. See MPEP § 2164.01.
Tselsein therefore reads on the limitation wherein the supporting material applied in the second region of the matrix layer has a melting temperature higher than the sintering temperature of the first matrix material applied of claim 13.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 5620489 A of Tselesin (as cited in prior Office action), as applied to claim 12 above, in view of US 5203880 A of Tselesin ‘880 (as cited in prior Office action).
Regarding claim 14, Tselesin teaches the method of claim 12 as described above.
Tselesin does not explicitly disclose wherein the supporting material applied in the second region of the matrix layer has a melting temperature lower than the sintering temperature of the first matrix material applied.
However, Tselesin explicitly discloses assemblies can include punches and/or separators disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,203,880.
Tselesin ‘880 teaches a method and apparatus for making abrasive tools (Title). Tselesin and Tselesin ‘880 are considered analogous art since they are both similarly concerned with methods of making abrasive tools and both teach assemblies made of layers comprising a preform made of a matrix material, separator, and abrasive particles.
Tselesin ‘880 teaches the separator is an electrically conductive material, which may be a graphite powder, graphite fibers, graphite paper, silicon carbide, other powders or fibers, or may be made of ceramics or minerals (col. 3, lines 19-26; col. 6, lines 5-10). Tselesin teaches the separator may be made of many different materials and that the primary feature of the separator is that it is soft enough that during compaction of the body of matrix material some of the hard particles can penetrate the separator (col. 3, lines 27-39). Tselesin teaches when paper is used, the paper burns at sintering temperature rendering removal quite easy (col. 6, lines 35-41). Tselesin further teaches metallic screens may be used as a separator (col. 6, lines 11-23) and that they may be made of a low melting metal which will fuse at sintering temperature, or of a high melting metal that will remain intact during sintering (col. 4, lines 10-28, low melting metal which will fuse at sintering temperature reads on claimed supporting material applied in the second region of the matrix layer has a melting temperature lower than the sintering temperature of the first matrix material applied).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the separator of Tselesin with the paper or metallic screen with low melting point of Tselesin ‘880 to select an appropriate separator material which will fuse at sintering temperature and render removal of the separator easy, as taught by Tselesin ‘880.
Additionally, the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960), Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945), and MPEP § 2144.07. In this case, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to reference the work of Tselesin ‘880 as explicitly referenced by Tselesin to identify appropriate materials suitable for separator use in the assemblies of Tselesin.
Modified Tselesin therefore reads on the limitation wherein the supporting material applied in the second region of the matrix layer has a melting temperature lower than the sintering temperature of the first matrix material applied of claim 14.
Claims 25-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 5620489 A of Tselesin (as cited in prior Office action) in view of US 5203880 A of Tselesin ‘880 (as cited in prior Office action).
Regarding claims 25-29, Tselesin teaches a method for making powder preform and abrasive articles made thereform (Title, abrasive articles read on the claimed machining segment, as further described in col. 1, lines 43-46).
Tselesin teaches a method for manufacturing abrasive articles and wear resistant parts, such articles or parts comprising a plurality of abrasive particles also known as superabrasive particles such as diamond, cubic boron nitride or the like randomly or systematically distributed in a sintered retaining matrix (col. 2, lines 55-65; abrasive particles read on the claimed first and second hard material particles; sintered retaining matrix reads on the claimed first matrix material).
Tselesin teaches an SEDF preform (38 reads on the claimed green body and first matrix material; preform also 86, 98, 101 in other embodiments) having abrasive particles (39, 71, reads on the claimed first hard particles) distributed therein, and a plurality of abrasive particles (40, 104, reads on the claimed second hard particles) on the top side of the preform (38, reads on claimed matrix layer, preform also 46, 46’, 51, and 58 in other embodiments, col. 7, lines 45-55 ; col. 10, lines 24-28; col. 10, line 63 – col. 11, line 11; col. 11, lines 58-65; Figs. 10, 10A, 20, 20A, 21, and 26-27). Tselesin teaches to form the SEDF preform a slurry is formed of the powdered composition and binder composition (col. 3, lines 7-10, reads on claimed powdered or granular first matrix material).
Tselesin teaches fixing the preform to a core (99, reads on the claimed basic body of a machining tool) (col.13, lines 15-25; Fig. 28 shows the preform 98 is connected by an underside to the core 99 to form a cut-off disk which reads on the claimed machining tool).
Tselesin teaches adding a separator (100, 109, 110 reads on the claimed lower layer of a powdered or granular supporting material different from the first matrix material) on one side of the assembly (103) (col. 11, line 58-col. 12, line 15).
Tselesin teaches making a preform with a first plurality of diamonds, cutting the preform, putting a second plurality of diamonds into opening of a mesh type material, applying the preform against the carrier including the second plurality of diamonds, hot compacting the assembly, removing, and cutting and mounting to make the final product (col. 14, lines 14-47, reads on the claimed performing a sequence of a first and a second sequential step performed N times, N≥1, wherein in the first sequential step, a matrix layer having a first region is applied, wherein the first matrix material is applied in the first region, and in the second sequential step, the first hard material particles are arranged in the matrix layer; arranging the second hard material particles in the Nth matrix layer and applying an upper layer of the supporting material, wherein the second hard material particles are completely covered by the supporting material as seen in Fig. 20A where abrasive particles 104 are completely covered by 109 above and 105 below).
Tselesin teaches the preferred embodiments of the invention here presented comprise assemblies of abrasive particles such as diamonds, cubic boron nitride or the like, distributed in an orderly fashion on a substrate, or a carrier, and a pre-made SEDF preform formed from metals, ceramics, epoxy materials with binders or other plastics (col. 16, lines 15-21, materials read on the claimed a powdered or granular supporting material different from the first matrix material; orderly fashion reads on the claimed defined second particle pattern and defined first particle pattern).
Tselesin teaches the abrasive particles are included in the preform in a non-random pattern (claim 8, further reads on the claimed the first hard material particles are arranged in the matrix layer according to a defined first particle pattern and the claimed arranging the second hard material particles in the lower layer according to a defined second particle pattern).
Tselesin teaches the abrasive particles may be pressed into the substrate or held by an adhesive (col. 5, lines 60-67) and that particles are placed at least partially into the substrate (col. 6, lines 32-36, reads on the claimed wherein the second hard material particles are partially embedded in the first matrix material and partially embedded in the supporting material). Tselesin further teaches abrasive particles may be completely, or partially, covered by a binder-powder mixture (col. 6, lines 41-59).
Tselesin teaches using separators as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,203,880, "Method and Apparatus for Making Abrasive Tools", by the present inventor (col. 8, lines 12-18). Tselesin ‘880 teaches the separator is an electrically conductive material, which may be a graphite powder, graphite fibers, graphite paper, silicon carbide, other powders or fibers, or may be made of ceramics or minerals (col. 3, lines 19-26; col. 6, lines 5-10; emphasis added; reads on claimed powdered or granular supporting material). Tselesin further teaches a separator can be a part of the assembly itself to prevent contacting and/or diffusion between the SEDF preforms and the molding parts (col. 16, lines 23-27). Tselesin ‘880, which is referenced in Tselesin ‘489, explicitly teaches the separator can be a powder, such as a graphite powder or other powders.
Since Tselesin teaches a powdered metal as a matrix material and a graphite powder as a separator or supporting material, Tselesin reads on the claimed powdered or granular supporting material different from the first matrix material of claim 10, all limitations of claim 10, wherein the first matrix material is a powdered first matrix material and the powdered or granular supporting material different from the first matrix material is a powdered supporting material different from the first matrix material of claim 27, and wherein the first matrix material is a granular first matrix material and the powdered or granular supporting material different from the first matrix material is a granular supporting material different from the first matrix material of claim 28.
Regarding claims 25-26, Tselesin teaches it should be understood that the first and second pluralities of diamonds, and generally, any abrasive particles, can be of the same or different origin, size, shape and physical-mechanical parameters (col. 14, lines 44-47, first and second pluralities of diamonds of same size reads on claimed wherein the first hard material particles have a first average particle diameter and the second hard material particles have a second average particle diameter, the first average particle diameter being equal to the second average particle diameter). The first and second pluralities of diamonds of Tselesin having a different size necessarily implies that one set of plurality of diamonds is of a larger size than the other plurality of diamonds. A patent need not teach, and preferably omits, what is well known in the art. See MPEP § 2164.01.
Tselesin therefore reads on the limitation wherein the first hard material particles have a first average particle diameter and the second hard material particles have a second average particle diameter, the first average particle diameter being greater than the second average particle diameter of claim 25 and wherein the first hard material particles have a first average particle diameter and the second hard material particles have a second average particle diameter, the first average particle diameter being equal to the second average particle diameter of claim 26.
Regarding claim 29, as seen in Fig. 20A, Tselesin teaches an assembly with a preform (101, reads on claimed matrix layer) applied to a separator layer (100, reads on claimed supporting material), and including particles within the preform (particles reads on claimed first hard material particles). Under broadest reasonable interpretation, the matrix layer of Tselesin is applied in a first regio and therefore the matrix layer consists of the first region.
Tselesin therefore reads on the limitation wherein the matrix layer consists of the first region of claim 29.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/08/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the separator 109 of Tselesin is a solid film that prevents diffusion as explained at column 12 lines 10 to 15 of Tselesin (remarks, page 4). Applicant further argues that it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a powdered or granular material as claimed in place of the separator 109 of Tselesin because such a modification would not allow for a separator preventing diffusion between the assembly 103 and the mesh type material 106 (remarks, page 5; emphasis in original text).
In response, Tselesin teaches using separators as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,203,880, "Method and Apparatus for Making Abrasive Tools", by the present inventor (col. 8, lines 12-18). Tselesin ‘880 teaches the separator is an electrically conductive material, which may be a graphite powder, graphite fibers, graphite paper, silicon carbide, other powders or fibers, or may be made of ceramics or minerals (col. 3, lines 19-26; col. 6, lines 5-10; emphasis added). Tselesin further teaches a separator can be a part of the assembly itself to prevent contacting and/or diffusion between the SEDF preforms and the molding parts (col. 16, lines 23-27). Tselesin ‘880, which is referenced in Tselesin ‘489, explicitly teaches the separator can be a powder, such as a graphite powder or other powders. Tselesin is therefore not limited to a solid film nor to a single objective of preventing diffusion, as argued by Applicant.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2003/0089364 A1 of Kim is considered relevant to claim 25. Kim teaches a segment type diamond tool (Abstract). Kim teaches a filler of abrasive material such as diamond and diamonds from the segment have different particle sizes to prevent an undesirable early pop-out of diamonds from the machining segment ([0070]-[0076], see Figs. 12-13).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAYELA ALDAZ whose telephone number is (571)270-0309. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Thursday: 10 am - 7 pm and alternate Friday: 10 am - 6 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, Keith Hendricks can be reached at (571) 272-1401. 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.
/M.A./Examiner, Art Unit 1733
/REBECCA JANSSEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733
Prosecution Insights