DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 April 13, 2026 has been entered.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of a certified copy of JP 2020-150803 filed September 8, 2020 as required by 37 CFR 1.55. Receipt is also acknowledged of a copy of WO 2022/054803, the WIPO publication of PCT/JP2021/032883 filed September 7, 2021.
Claim Status
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s Remarks and Claim Amendments filed April 13, 2026.
Claims Filing Date
April 13, 2026
Amended
1, 8, 9, 12
New
13-17
Pending
1-17
Withdrawn
2, 3, 6, 7
Under Examination
1, 4, 5, 8-17
The applicant argues the amended claims are supported by [0020]-[0026] of the original specification (Remarks p. 10 para. 2).
Withdrawn Claim Objections
The following objections are withdrawn due to claim amendment:
Claim 8 line 3 “0.005-0.050 of Mg”.
Claim 12 line 8 “0.005-0.050 of Mg”.
Withdrawn Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following 112(d) rejection is withdrawn due to claim amendment:
Claim 8 lines 1-3 “further comprising: in mass%, 0.005-0.050 of Mg”.
Response to Remarks filed April 13, 2026
Zhu in view of Chen; Shen in view of Chen; Nakanishi in view of Chen
Applicant's arguments filed April 13, 2026 with respect to Zhu in view of Chen, Shen in view of Chen, and Nalanishi in view of Chen have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues that none of the references teach 0.05-1.80% of Si as recited in new claim 15 (Remarks p. 12 para. 3).
Chen discloses <0.25% ([0009], [0013], [0019], [0023]) contributes to forming a high-temperature alloy with high powder quality ([0035]). This overlaps with new claims 16 and 17, such that a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Dorfman in view of Chen
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks p. 11 para. 3, filed April 13, 2026, with respect to Dorfman have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of Dorfman in view of Chen has been withdrawn.
The applicant argues in Dorfman 4 to 6 Cr does not overlap with the amended range of 0.8-3.0% of Cr (Remarks p. 11 para. 3).
New Grounds
In light of claim amendment and new claims and upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made Eliseev in view of Kitamura and Chen.
Claim Objection
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 2 ends with a semicolon ;.
Each claims ends with a period. MPEP 608.01(m).
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 4, 5, 13, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu (CN 106086525 machine translation) in view of Chen (CN 109943752 machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Zhu discloses a Ni-based (high-temperature) alloy powder with an overlapping Al, Cr, Ni, and C content ([0002], [0009]).
Element
Claim 1
Claim 12
Zhu [0009]
Al
3.7 to 4.2
3.5 to 4.5
1 to 10
Cr
0.8 to 3.0
0.8 to 3.0
1 to 10
C
0.0100 or less
0.0100 or less
0
O
0.001 to 0.050
0.001 to 0.050
-
N
0.0001 to 0.0150
0.0001 to 0.0150
-
Ni
Balance
Balance
60 to 95
Mg
-
0.005 to 0.050
-
Mo
-
1 to 5
W
-
1 to 5
Cu
-
1 to 10
Zhu is silent to an overlapping amount of O and N.
Chen discloses a Ni-based (high-temperature) alloy powder ([0002]) with 0.001-0.0050% of O (< 0.006%) and 0.0001-0.0150% of N (< 0.015%) ([0010], [0019], [0034]-[0035], [0038], [0054]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the alloy of Zhu to strictly control O to less than 0.006% and N to less than 0.0150% to advantageously ensure powder quality of a high-temperature alloy powder using a low cost process (Chen [0008], [0035]) by preventing inclusions and achieving an accurate chemical composition (Chen [0054]).
In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 4, Zhu in view of Chen discloses a Ni-based alloy powder further comprising 0.050% or less of Mg (0% Mg) (Zhu [0009]) (<0.01% Mg) (Chen [0010], [0038]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 5, Zhu is silent to a powder particle size of the Ni-based alloy powder.
Chen discloses a powder particle size of the Ni-based alloy powder is in a range of 1-100 um (20-100 um) ([0008], [0033], [0035], [0054]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the powder of Zhu to have a size of 20 to 100 um to use the powder in additive manufacturing (Chen [0008], [0035]) to form a part with good performance (Chen [0054]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 13, Zhu discloses 0.8-2.3% of Cr (1 to 10%) ([0009]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 16, Zhu is silent to 0.05 – 1.80% of Si.
Chen discloses 0.05-1.80% of Si (<0.25%) ([0009], [0013], [0019], [0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the powder of Zhu to add < 0.25% Si to form a high-temperature alloy with high powder quality (Chen [0035]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Claims 12, 15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu (CN 106086525 machine translation) in view of Chen (CN 109943752 machine translation) and Mihashi ‘031 (JP 2001-355031 machine translation).
Regarding claim 12, Zhu discloses a Ni-based (high-temperature) alloy powder with an overlapping Al, Cr, Ni, and C content ([0002], [0009]).
Zhu is silent to an overlapping amount of O and N.
Chen discloses a Ni-based (high-temperature) alloy powder ([0002]) with 0.001-0.0050% of O (< 0.006%) and 0.0001-0.0150% of N (< 0.015%) ([0010], [0019], [0034]-[0035], [0038], [0054]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the alloy of Zhu to strictly control O to less than 0.006% and N to less than 0.0150% to advantageously ensure powder quality of a high-temperature alloy powder using a low cost process (Chen [0008], [0035]) by preventing inclusions and achieving an accurate chemical composition (Chen [0054]).
Zhu is silent to an overlapping amount of Mg.
Chen discloses a Ni-based (high-temperature) alloy powder ([0002]) with Mg < 0.01% ([0010], [0038]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the alloy powder of Zhu to include < 0.01% Mg because Mg is known to be used as a desulfurization agent in Ni-Al alloys with an upper limit of 0.001% (100 ppm) known to improve high-temperature properties (Mihashi ‘031 [0011]).
The composition of Zhu in view of Chen and Mihashi ‘031 overlaps with that claimed. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 15, Zhu discloses 0.8-2.3% of Cr (1 to 10%) ([0009]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 17, Zhu is silent to 0.05 – 1.80% of Si.
Chen discloses 0.05-1.80% of Si (<0.25%) ([0009], [0013], [0019], [0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the powder of Zhu to add < 0.25% Si to form a high-temperature alloy with high powder quality (Chen [0035]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Claims 1, 4, 5, 13, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shen (CN 106975748 machine translation) in view of Chen (CN 109943752 machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Shen discloses a Ni-based (high-temperature) alloy powder with an overlapping Al, Cr, C, and Ni content ([0009], [0012], [0019]).
Element
Claim 1
Claim 12
Shen [0019]
Al
3.7 to 4.2
3.5 to 4.5
4 to 5.5
Cr
0.8 to 4.0
0.8 to 4.0
0.5 to 3.5
C
0.0100 or less
0.0100 or less
0
O
0.001 to 0.050
0.001 to 0.050
-
N
0.0001 to 0.0150
0.0001 to 0.0150
-
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
Mg
-
0.005 to 0.050
Nb
-
5 to 8
Ti
-
1 to 3.2
Shen is silent to an overlapping amount of O and N.
Chen discloses a Ni-based (high-temperature) alloy powder ([0002]) with 0.001-0.0050% of O (< 0.006%) and 0.0001-0.0150% of N (< 0.015%) ([0010], [0019], [0034]-[0035], [0038], [0054]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the alloy of Shen to strictly control O to less than 0.006% and N to less than 0.0150% to advantageously ensure powder quality of a high-temperature alloy powder using a low cost process (Chen [0008], [0035]) by preventing inclusions and achieving an accurate chemical composition (Chen [0054]).
In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 4, Shen in view of Chen discloses a Ni-based alloy powder further comprising 0.050% or less of Mg (0% Mg) (Shen [0019]) (<0.01% Mg) (Chen [0010], [0038]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 5, Shen is silent to a powder particle size of the Ni-based alloy powder.
Chen discloses a powder particle size of the Ni-based alloy powder is in a range of 1-100 um (20-100 um) ([0008], [0033], [0035], [0054]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the powder of Shen to have a size of 20 to 100 um to use the powder in additive manufacturing (Chen [0008], [0035]) to form a part with good performance (Chen [0054]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 13, Shen discloses 0.8-2.3% of Cr (0.5 to 3.5%) ([0019]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 16, Shen is silent to 0.05 – 1.80% of Si.
Chen discloses 0.05-1.80% of Si (<0.25%) ([0009], [0013], [0019], [0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the powder of Shen to add < 0.25% Si to form a high-temperature alloy with high powder quality (Chen [0035]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Claims 12, 15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shen (CN 106975748 machine translation) in view of Chen (CN 109943752 machine translation) and Mihashi ‘031 (JP 2001-355031 machine translation).
Regarding claim 12, Shen discloses a Ni-based (high-temperature) alloy powder with an overlapping Al, Cr, C, and Ni content ([0009], [0012], [0019]).
Shen is silent to an overlapping amount of O and N.
Chen discloses a Ni-based (high-temperature) alloy powder ([0002]) with 0.001-0.0050% of O (< 0.006%) and 0.0001-0.0150% of N (< 0.015%) ([0010], [0019], [0034]-[0035], [0038], [0054]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the alloy of Shen to strictly control O to less than 0.006% and N to less than 0.0150% to advantageously ensure powder quality of a high-temperature alloy powder using a low cost process (Chen [0008], [0035]) by preventing inclusions and achieving an accurate chemical composition (Chen [0054]).
Shen is silent to an overlapping amount of Mg.
Chen discloses a Ni-based (high-temperature) alloy powder ([0002]) with Mg < 0.01% ([0010], [0038]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the alloy powder of Shen to include < 0.01% Mg because Mg is known to be used as a desulfurization agent in Ni-Al alloys with an upper limit of 0.001% (100 ppm) known to improve high-temperature properties (Mihashi ‘031 [0011]).
The composition of Shen in view of Chen and Mihashi ‘031 overlaps with that claimed. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 15, Shen discloses 0.8-2.3% of Cr (0.5 to 3.5%) ([0019]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 17, Shen is silent to 0.05 – 1.80% of Si.
Chen discloses 0.05-1.80% of Si (<0.25%) ([0009], [0013], [0019], [0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the powder of Shen to add < 0.25% Si to form a high-temperature alloy with high powder quality (Chen [0035]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Claims 1, 4, 5, 13, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakanishi (JP H01-204365 machine translation) in view of Chen (CN 109943752 machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Nakanishi discloses a Ni-based alloy powder with an overlapping Al, Cr, C, and Ni content (p. 1 para. 2, p. 2 para. 2).
Element
Claim 1
Claim 12
Nakanishi p. 1 para. 2, p. 2 para. 2
Al
3.7 to 4.2
3.5 to 4.5
0.5 to 8.0
Cr
0.8 to 4.0
0.8 to 4.0
2
C
0.0100 or less
0.0100 or less
0
O
0.001 to 0.050
0.001 to 0.050
-
N
0.0001 to 0.0150
0.0001 to 0.0150
-
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
Mg
-
0.005 to 0.050
-
Ti
-
-
0.5 to 8.0
Nakanishi is silent to an overlapping amount of O and N.
Chen discloses a Ni-based alloy powder ([0002]) with 0.001-0.0050% of O (< 0.006%) and 0.0001-0.0150% of N (< 0.015%) ([0010], [0019], [0034]-[0035], [0038], [0054]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the alloy of Nakanishi to strictly control O to less than 0.006% and N to less than 0.0150% to advantageously ensure powder quality of a high-temperature alloy powder using a low cost process (Chen [0008], [0035]) by preventing inclusions and achieving an accurate chemical composition (Chen [0054]).
In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 4, Nakanishi in view of Chen discloses a Ni-based alloy powder further comprising 0.050% or less of Mg (0% Mg) (Nakanishi p. 1 para. 2, p. 2 para. 2) (<0.01% Mg) (Chen [0010], [0038]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 5, Nakanishi discloses a powder particle size of the Ni-based alloy powder is in a range of 1-100 um (6 to 12 um) (p. 2 para. 1). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 13, Nakanishi discloses 0.8-2.3% of Cr (2%) (p. 1 para. 2, p. 2 para. 2).
Regarding claim 16, Nakanishi is silent to 0.05 – 1.80% of Si.
Chen discloses 0.05-1.80% of Si (<0.25%) ([0009], [0013], [0019], [0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the powder of Nakanishi to add < 0.25% Si to form a high-temperature alloy with high powder quality (Chen [0035]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Claims 12, 15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakanishi (JP H01-204365 machine translation) in view of Chen (CN 109943752 machine translation) and Mihashi ‘031 (JP 2001-355031 machine translation).
Regarding claim 12, Nakanishi discloses a Ni-based alloy powder with an overlapping Al, Cr, C, and Ni content (p. 1 para. 2, p. 2 para. 2).
Nakanishi is silent to an overlapping amount of O and N.
Chen discloses a Ni-based alloy powder ([0002]) with 0.001-0.0050% of O (< 0.006%) and 0.0001-0.0150% of N (< 0.015%) ([0010], [0019], [0034]-[0035], [0038], [0054]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the alloy of Nakanishi to strictly control O to less than 0.006% and N to less than 0.0150% to advantageously ensure powder quality of a high-temperature alloy powder using a low cost process (Chen [0008], [0035]) by preventing inclusions and achieving an accurate chemical composition (Chen [0054]).
Nakanishi is silent to an overlapping amount of Mg.
Chen discloses a Ni-based (high-temperature) alloy powder ([0002]) with Mg < 0.01% ([0010], [0038]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the alloy powder of Nakanishi to include < 0.01% Mg because Mg is known to be used as a desulfurization agent in Ni-Al alloys with an upper limit of 0.001% (100 ppm) known to improve high-temperature properties (Mihashi ‘031 [0011]).
The composition of Nakanishi in view of Chen and Mihashi ‘031 overlaps with that claimed. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 15, Nakanishi discloses 0.8-2.3% of Cr (2%) (p. 1 para. 2, p. 2 para. 2).
Regarding claim 17, Nakanishi is silent to 0.05 – 1.80% of Si.
Chen discloses 0.05-1.80% of Si (<0.25%) ([0009], [0013], [0019], [0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the powder of Nakanishi to add < 0.25% Si to form a high-temperature alloy with high powder quality (Chen [0035]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Claims 1, 4, 5, 8, 12, 13, and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eliseev (RU 2213801 machine translation) in view of Kitamura (US 5,472,663) and Chen (CN 109943752 machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Eliseev discloses a Ni-based alloy powder (plasma spraying from alloy powder) ([0011]) with an overlapping composition ([0009], [0019]-[0027]).
Element
Claim 1 mass%
Eliseev %
Eliseev Citation
Al
3.7 – 4.2
2 – 15
[0021]
Cr
0.8 – 3.0
2 – 30
[0020]
C
0.0100 or less
-
-
O
0.001 – 0.050
-
-
N
0.0001 – 0.0150
-
-
Ni
balance
base
[0027]
Eliseev discloses the alloy powder is for use as a heat resistant coating ([0003], [0008]).
Kitamura discloses a Ni-based material with high-temperature strength (1:7-11) including about 3.1 to 4.3% aluminum (2:53-59), about 1 to about 2% chromium (3:24-30), and from 0.002 to 0.01% carbon (3:8-15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the alloy powder of Eliseev to include: 3.1 to 4.3% Al to improve strength at high temperature without impairing workability (Kitamura 2:53-59), about 2% Cr to enhance strength without impairing workability (3:24-30), and from 0.002 to 0.01% C to improve strength without impairing weldability (3:8-15).
Eliseev in view of Kitamura is silent to O and N.
Chen discloses a Ni-based alloy powder ([0002]) with 0.001-0.0050% of O (< 0.006%) and 0.0001-0.0150% of N (< 0.015%) ([0010], [0019], [0034]-[0035], [0038], [0054]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the alloy of Eliseev in view of Kitamura to strictly control O to less than 0.006% and N to less than 0.0150% to advantageously ensure powder quality of a high-temperature alloy powder using a low cost process (Chen [0008], [0035]) by preventing inclusions and achieving an accurate chemical composition (Chen [0054]).
In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 4, Eliseev discloses 0.050% or less of Mg (0%) (Eliseev [0009], [0019]-[0027]).
Regarding claim 5, Eliseev is silent to a powder particle size of the Ni-based alloy powder being in a range of 1-100 um.
Chen discloses a powder particle size of the Ni-based alloy powder is in a range of 1-100 um (20-100 um) ([0008], [0033], [0035], [0054]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the powder of Eliseev to have a size of 20 to 100 um to use the powder in additive manufacturing (Chen [0008], [0035]) to form a part with good performance (Chen [0054]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 8, Eliseev is silent to 0.005-0.050% Mg.
Kitamura discloses 0.005-0.050% Mg (about 0.005 to about 0.05% Mg) (3:16-23).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the Ni-based alloy powder of Eliseev to include about 0.005 to 0.05% Mg to improve resistance to wear, particularly in the presence of Si (Kitamura 3:16-23). The alloy of Eliseev includes 0.1 to 5% Si ([0024]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 12, Eliseev discloses a Ni-based alloy powder (plasma spraying from alloy powder) ([0011]) with an overlapping composition ([0009], [0019]-[0027]).
Element
Claim 12 mass%
Eliseev %
Eliseev Citation
Al
3.5 – 4.5
2 – 15
[0021]
Cr
0.8 – 3.0
2 – 30
[0020]
C
0.0100 or less
-
-
O
0.001 – 0.050
-
-
N
0.0001 – 0.0150
-
-
Mg
0.005 – 0.050
-
-
Ni
balance
base
[0027]
Eliseev discloses the alloy powder is for use as a heat resistant coating ([0003], [0008]).
Kitamura discloses a Ni-based material with high-temperature strength (1:7-11) including about 3.1 to 4.3% aluminum (2:53-59), about 1 to about 2% chromium (3:24-30), from 0.002 to 0.01% carbon (3:8-15), and from about 0.005 to about 0.05% magnesium (3:16-24).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the alloy powder of Eliseev to include: 3.1 to 4.3% Al to improve strength at high temperature without impairing workability (Kitamura 2:53-59), about 2% Cr to enhance strength without impairing workability (3:24-30), from 0.002 to 0.01% C to improve strength without impairing weldability (3:8-15), and about 0.005 to 0.05% Mg to improve resistance to wear, particularly in the presence of Si (Kitamura 3:16-23). The alloy of Eliseev includes 0.1 to 5% Si ([0024]).
Eliseev in view of Kitamura is silent to O and N.
Chen discloses a Ni-based alloy powder ([0002]) with 0.001-0.0050% of O (< 0.006%) and 0.0001-0.0150% of N (< 0.015%) ([0010], [0019], [0034]-[0035], [0038], [0054]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the alloy of Eliseev in view of Kitamura to strictly control O to less than 0.006% and N to less than 0.0150% to advantageously ensure powder quality of a high-temperature alloy powder using a low cost process (Chen [0008], [0035]) by preventing inclusions and achieving an accurate chemical composition (Chen [0054]).
In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 13, Eliseev in view of Kitamura discloses in mass%, 0.8-2.3% of Cr (about 2%) (Eliseev [0020]; Kitamura 3:24-30). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 15, Eliseev in view of Kitamura discloses in mass%, 0.8-2.3% of Cr (about 2%) (Eliseev [0020]; Kitamura 3:24-30). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 16, Eliseev in view of Kitamura discloses in mass%, 0.05-1.80% of Si (0.5 to about 1.5%) (Eliseev [0025]; Kitamura 2:60-67; Chen). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 17, Eliseev in view of Kitamura discloses in mass%, 0.05-1.80% of Si (0.5 to about 1.5%) (Eliseev [0025]; Kitamura 2:60-67; Chen). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-11 and 14 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The prior art does not teach or suggest a Ni-based powder, consisting of, in mass%: 3.5-4.5% Al; 0.8-3.0% Cr; 0.0100% or less C; 0.001-0.050% O; 0.0001-0.0150% N, and balance Ni with inevitable impurities.
Chen (CN 109943752 machine translation) discloses a Ni-based alloy powder ([0002]) that reads on the claimed O and N ([0010], [0019], [0034]-[0035], [0038], [0054]), but does not read on the “consisting of” language regarding the claimed Al, Cr, and C contents.
Kobayashi (JP 2005-097650 machine translation) discloses a Ni-based superalloy with overlapping Cr, Al, and Ni contents ([0005], [0024], [0027]) manufactured by powder metallurgy ([0012]). However, Kobayashi does not read on the “consisting of” language regarding the claimed Al, Cr, C, O, and Ni contents.
Finally, prior art, such as Giggins (Giggins and Pettit. Oxidation of Ni-Cr-Al Alloys Between 1000° and 1200°C. J. Electrochem. Soc. 118, 1782-1790. (November 1971).), Takahashi (JP 2003-049259 machine translation), and Yoshida (JP 2005-028425 machine translation), disclose a composition that read on the claimed Al, Cr, and Ni (Giggins Experimental, Table I; Takahashi [0008]; Yoshida [0006], [0011]-[0013]), but do not read on the Ni-based alloy being a powder nor the claimed amounts of C, O, and N.
Element
Claim 9 mass%
Giggins Table I wt%
Takahashi [0008] wt%
Yoshida Component 1 [0006] mass%
Al
3.5 – 4.5
4
3 – 20
2.0 – 5.0
Cr
0.8 – 3.0
2
0 – 30
0.8 – 4.0
C
0.0100 or less
-
-
-
O
0.001 – 0.050
-
-
-
N
0.0001 – 0.0150
-
-
-
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
Remainder
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHANI HILL whose telephone number is (571)272-2523. The examiner can normally be reached Monday, Wednesday-Friday 7am-12pm.
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 WALKER can be reached at 571-272-3458. 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.
/STEPHANI HILL/Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights