Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/022,163

SILICON NITRIDE SINTERED BODY, ROLLING ELEMENT USING THE SAME, AND BEARING

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 19, 2023
Examiner
ABU ALI, SHUANGYI
Art Unit
1731
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Ntn Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
45%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 3m
To Grant
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 45% of resolved cases
45%
Career Allow Rate
475 granted / 1057 resolved
-20.1% vs TC avg
Strong +38% interview lift
Without
With
+38.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 3m
Avg Prosecution
51 currently pending
Career history
1108
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
53.9%
+13.9% vs TC avg
§102
15.9%
-24.1% vs TC avg
§112
19.1%
-20.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1057 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 of Group I, claims 1-10 in the reply filed on 11/11/2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). 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. Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2007297231(JP’231). Regarding claim 1, JP’231 discloses a silicon nitride sintered body by mixing the silicon nitride powder with 1 to 10% by mass of rare earth elements in terms of oxides and 2 to 10% by mass of aluminum in terms of oxides. See claim 4 and 6th paragraph of page 2. The reference differs from Applicant's recitations of claims by not disclosing identical ranges. However, the reference discloses "overlapping" ranges, and overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness (MPEP 2144.05). Regarding claim 2, JP’231 discloses that the rare earth element oxide such as yttrium (Y), ytterbium (Yb), or erbium (Er) is preferably used. See 5th paragraph of page 4. Regarding claim 3, JP’231 discloses that a rare earth oxide comprising lanthanoid element. See 5th paragraph of page 4. Cerium belongs to lanthanoid elements. it is not picking and choosing to select one element (cerium) from one list (lanthanoid) however long the list may be. When the species is clearly named, the selection from a long list does not avoid a 103 rejection. See Ex parte A, 17 USPQ2d 1716 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1990) (The claimed compound was named in a reference which also disclosed 45 other compounds. The Board held that the comprehensiveness of the listing did not negate the fact that the compound claimed was specifically taught. See also In re Sivaramakrishnan, 673 F.2d 1383, 213 USPQ 441 (CCPA 1982). Regarding claim 4, it appears that the prior art discloses a similar process of making the sintered body as the applicants set forth in the instant application. JP’231 discloses a silicon nitride sintered body by mixing the silicon nitride powder with 1 to 10% by mass of rare earth elements in terms of oxides, 2 to 10% by mass of aluminum in terms of oxides, 0.1 to 5 mass% titanium nitride as a conductivity imparting material and 0.1 to 5% by mass of metal carbon silicide.. Then, a molding step for molding the mixture into a predetermined shape, and a temperature of the molded body obtained by the molding step are increased, and a primary sintered body is prepared by sintering in a temperature range of 1700 to 1850 ° C. And a secondary sintering step of subjecting the obtained primary sintered body to a hot isostatic pressing (HIP) treatment in a temperature range of 1500 to 1750 ° C. In the primary sintering step, the temperature is 1500 to 1650. The heating time in the temperature raising range of ° C. is 30 minutes or more and 120 minutes or less. See claims 1-8 The recitation of “the silicon nitride sintered body contains an inclusion (I) in a surface layer portion that is a region within 2 mm from a surface of the silicon nitride sintered body, and a ratio of a total sectional area of the inclusion (I) to a total sectional area of the surface layer portion is 0.05% or more” is met by the prior art teaching since It has been held that 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. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). Regarding claims 5 - 6, JP’231 discloses that 0.1 to 5% by mass of metal carbon silicide including metal carbon silicide (MxSiyCz) is present in the silicon nitride sintered body. Here, M is an arbitrary transition metal, and x, y, and z are arbitrary coefficients. See 3rd and 4th paragraphs of page 4, Regarding claim 7, JP’231 discloses that 0.1 to 5 mass% titanium nitride is used. See claim 2. Regarding claim 8, JP’231 discloses that 0.1 to 5% by mass of metal carbon silicide (MxSiyCz), various transition metal element carbon silicides can be used. See 3rd and 4th paragraphs of page 4. It is not picking and choosing to select one element (Cr) from one list (transition metals), however long the list may be. When the species is clearly named, the selection from a long list does not avoid a 103 rejection. See Ex parte A, 17 USPQ2d 1716 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1990) (The claimed compound was named in a reference which also disclosed 45 other compounds. The Board held that the comprehensiveness of the listing did not negate the fact that the compound claimed was specifically taught. See also In re Sivaramakrishnan, 673 F.2d 1383, 213 USPQ 441 (CCPA 1982). Regarding claim 9, JP’231 discloses that when a metal carbon silicide powder is used, the average particle diameter of the metal carbon silicide powder is preferably 5 μm or less. See 9th paragraph of page 4. Regarding claim 10, JP’231 discloses that in the primary sintering step, it is important to manage so that the heating time in the temperature rising range of 1500 to 1650 ° C. is 30 minutes or more and 120 minutes or less. When the heating time in the above temperature rising range is as short as less than 30 minutes, the outgassing becomes insufficient and pores remain. See second paragraph of page 6. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that less pores are desired. Thus, the diameter of the pore can be zero. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHUANGYI ABU ALI whose telephone number is (571)272-6453. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am- 5:00 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, Amber Orlando can be reached at (571)270-3149. 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. /SHUANGYI ABU ALI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1731
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 19, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600871
DYE-EXCHANGED ZEOLITE MARKER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595402
SHAPED ABRASIVE PARTICLES WITH LOW ROUNDNESS FACTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595180
ULTRA-WHITE SILICA-BASED FILLER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590210
WATER DISPERSIBLE COMPOSITE PARTICLES, METHODS OF MAKING, AND COATINGS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12540246
METHOD FOR THE PRODUCTION OF METAL OXIDE PIGMENT COMPOSITE OF CONTROLLED AGGLOMERATING PROPERTIES AND RESPECTIVE PRODUCT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
45%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+38.0%)
4y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1057 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month