Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/033,408

COATED CUTTING TOOL

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 24, 2023
Examiner
HORGER, KIM S.
Art Unit
1784
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Moldino Tool Engineering Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
192 granted / 274 resolved
+5.1% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
318
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
49.9%
+9.9% vs TC avg
§102
7.6%
-32.4% vs TC avg
§112
27.6%
-12.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 274 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 1, 2, 3, 4. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. 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. 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. 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. 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. Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tabuchi (JP 2011-235393, machine translation attached, paragraph numbers added for citation purposes) in view of Sasaki et al. (US 2020/0298316, previously cited). Claim 1: Tabuchi teaches a coated cutting tool (paragraph 0001) having a tool base of tungsten carbide (i.e. a substrate) and a hard coating layer deposited on (i.e. formed on the substrate) by vapor-depositing (paragraph 0003), specifically by arc ion plating (paragraph 0020). Tabuchi refers to a layer A composition as (Al,Cr)N layers and layer B composition as (Ti,Si)N layers (paragraphs 0009-0010). The coating includes a single-layer region composed of a single layer A (i.e. a nitride; i.e. corresponding to the instantly claimed b layer) (paragraph 0011), which is considered to be disposed on the substrate since the layer is part of the coating. The coating includes a multilayer region in which layers A (i.e. corresponding to the instantly claimed c1 layer) and layers B (i.e. corresponding to the instantly claimed c2 layer) are alternately stacked and these thin layers have a thickness of 1-50 nm (each) for a multilayer thickness (i.e. total thickness of the alternating layer stack) of 100 to 500 nm (paragraph 0011). The thickness of individual layers of the alternating layers in the multilayer region (i.e. 1-50 nm) overlaps the instantly claimed range of 50 nm or less, and the courts have held that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where claimed ranges overlap, lie inside of, or are close to ranges in the prior art. See MPEP § 2144.05. It is noted that as of the writing of this Office Action, no demonstration of a criticality to the claimed ranges has been presented. A single layer B is formed near the surface of the hard coating layer (paragraph 0017) (i.e. being near the surface, this single layer of a TiSiN is considered to be disposed on the multilayer that corresponds to the c layer, and therefore this single layer of a TiSiN corresponds to the instantly PNG media_image1.png 376 595 media_image1.png Greyscale [AltContent: textbox (Multilayer of alternating A and B layers, “c layer”)][AltContent: textbox (“b layer”)][AltContent: textbox (“d layer”)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]claimed d layer). See Fig. 2 of Tabuchi (annotated below). However, Tabuchi does not teach a content of argon (Ar) and nitrogen in the multilayer (i.e. in the c layer) or the lattice structure. In a related field of endeavor, Sasaki teaches a coated cutting tool in which a surface of the tool is covered with a hard coating film (paragraphs 0001-0003). Sasaki teaches that a hard coating film coated by sputtering a target using argon ions is easy to cause the hard coating film to contain argon which concentrates at the crystal grain boundaries, but the toughness of the hard coating film decreases when the content ratio of argon of the hard coating film is high (paragraph 0032). Therefore, the content ratio of argon (Ar) is set to be 0.1 at% or less and may be 0.05 at% or more with respect to the total amount of metal including semimetal (i.e. metalloid) elements and non-metal elements (paragraph 0032), also disclosed to be a content ratio of argon obtained when the content ratios of the metal elements including semimetal elements, nitrogen, oxygen, carbon, and argon is 100 at% (paragraph 0034). This range for content of Ar overlaps the instantly claimed range. See MPEP § 2144.05. Sasaki teaches that the content ratio of nitrogen is 50.0 at% or higher in a case where the total content ratio of metal elements including semimetal elements, nitrogen, oxygen, and carbon is 100 at% so that sufficient nitrides can be formed in the entire hard coating film and heat resistance can be improved (paragraph 0041). This results in a ratio of 1 or greater for nitrogen divided by the sum of metal and metalloid elements (i.e. 50% nitrogen or higher, and therefore the content of metal and metalloid is 50% or lower), which overlaps the instantly claimed ratio for nitrogen over metal and metalloids being greater than 1.02. See MPEP § 2144.05. Sasaki teaches that the hard coating film should have a NaCl type crystal structure (i.e. a face-centered cubic lattice structure) because a hexagonal close-packed structure is brittle and durability of the coated cutting tool would be degraded (paragraph 0035). As Tabuchi and Sasaki both teach a coated cutting tool, they are analogous. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the multilayered coated cutting tool of Tabuchi to include the conventionally known features of the amount of argon (i.e. not more than 0.1 at%), the amount of nitrogen (i.e. 50% or higher), and having a NaCl crystal structure (i.e. face-centered cubic lattice structure) as taught by Sasaki because these features are known to improve toughness (i.e. due to low Ar), heat resistance (i.e. due to forming sufficient nitrides), and durability (i.e. due to the crystal structure), and one would have had a reasonable expectation of success. Claim 2: Tabuchi teaches that the (Al,Cr)N layers are made of [Al1-xCrx]N where x is 0.30-0.80 (i.e. Al is 20-70% of the total of Al and Cr) (paragraph 0013). The (Ti,Si)N layers are made of [Ti1-ySiy]N, where y is 0.10-0.30 (i.e. Ti is 70-90% and Si is 10-30%) (paragraph 0014). These ranges overlap the instantly claimed ranges. See MPEP § 2144.05. Claims 3-4: Sasaki teaches that the hard coating film has a NaCl type crystal structure (i.e. face-centered cubic lattice structure) (paragraph 0035). The hexagonal close-packed (i.e. hcp) structure is brittle so the durability of the coated cutting tool tends to be degraded (paragraph 0035), and preferably a diffraction intensity due to hcp structure is not checked (i.e. not present) in the crystal analysis using X-ray diffraction or a TEM (i.e. a transmission electron microscope) (paragraph 0037). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIM S HORGER whose telephone number is (571)270-5904. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 AM - 4:00 PM EST. 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, Humera Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-0604. 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. /KIM S. HORGER/Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 24, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601939
FILM-TO-GLASS SWITCHABLE GLAZING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594632
TECHNIQUES AND ASSEMBLIES FOR JOINING COMPONENTS USING SOLID RETAINER MATERIALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582255
ADJUSTABLE SUSPENDABLE DECORATIVE ARTIFICIAL TREE SYSTEM AND ASSEMBLY FOR WINDOWS, CORNERS, AND WALLS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576618
DISPERSION, RESIN COMPOSITION, INTERMEDIATE FILM FOR LAMINATED GLASS, AND LAMINATED GLASS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12553137
COATED CUTTING TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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
70%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+20.4%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 274 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