Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/049,012

METHOD OF MAKING A MAGNETIC MATERIAL AND A FLUIDIZED BED MIXER FOR MAKING THE SAME

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 24, 2022
Examiner
HOWELL, MARC C
Art Unit
1774
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
GM Global Technology Operations LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allowance Rate
377 granted / 552 resolved
+3.3% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+24.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
582
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
84.0%
+44.0% vs TC avg
§102
5.3%
-34.7% vs TC avg
§112
8.7%
-31.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 552 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
CTNF 18/049,012 CTNF 90913 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 08-25 AIA Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-10 and 18-20 in the reply filed on 03/13/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no serious search burden on the Examiner if all claims are considered . This is not found persuasive because, as stated in the restriction requirement, there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply: (a) the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification (b) the inventions have acquired separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter; (c) the inventions require a different field of search (i.e. searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search queries); (d) the prior art applicable to one invention would not likely be applicable to another invention; (e) the inventions are likely to raise different non-prior art issues under 35 USC 101 and/or 35 USC 112(a). Of the above list, at least items (a) and (c) apply to Groups I and II, and thus a serious search and/or examination burden is deemed to be present . The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claims 11-17 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to an unelected invention. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/24/2022 and 02/28/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cui et al. (CN 112447389, hereinafter Cui) in view of Wang (US 8480815, hereinafter Wang) . Regarding claim 1, Cui discloses a method of making a magnetic material comprising: mixing a first powder (paragraph 0018, “NdFeB particles”) material with a second powder material (paragraph 0021) in a fluidized bed mixer (paragraph 0009, “fluidized bed process”; paragraph 0014) to form a combined powder material (paragraph 0008, “dysprosium oxide-coated NdFeB permanent magnet composite powder”). Cui is silent to the milling and sintering steps, but indicates that these are known methods for producing a magnet (paragraph 0007). Wang teaches a method of making a magnetic material comprising milling a powder material (column 3, lines 24-30); and sintering the milled combined powder material into a solid structure (claim 3) . To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have included the milling and sintering steps of Wang in the method of Cui because Cui indicates that these are known methods for mixing the materials and forming them into a magnet. Regarding claim 2, Cui discloses the first powder material comprises neodymium (Nd), iron (Fe), and boron (B) (paragraph 0012, “NdFeB particles”) and the second powder material comprises one or more of dysprosium (Dy) and terbium (Tb) (paragraph 0021). It is noted that Wang also discloses these materials (column 3, lines 5-10). Regarding claim 3, Cui discloses the combined powder material includes alloy particles comprising a particle core having Nd, Fe, and B, and a particle surface coated with one or more of Dy and Tb (paragraph 0011, “dysprosium oxide-coated neodymium iron boron permanent magnet composite powder”). Regarding claim 4, Cui discloses the first powder material is gravity fed into a top portion (figure 1, via material hopper 1) of the fluidized bed mixer (fluidized bed reactor 2) and the second powder material is sprayed into the fluidized bed mixer (paragraphs 0024 and 0025) such that the second powder material collides with the first powder material (paragraph 0031) . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-07 AIA 07-97 12-51-07 Claim s 18-20 are allowed. 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 5-10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claim 18 is deemed to contain allowable subject matter because it recites a cascading baffle system not reasonably disclosed, taught, or suggested in the prior art of record. Claim 5 is deemed to contain allowable subject matter because it recites a positive and negative charge not reasonably disclosed, taught, or suggested in the prior art of record. Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited art relates to producing magnetic material including NdFeB magnets. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARC C HOWELL whose telephone number is (571)272-9834. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5. 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, Claire Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. 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. /MARC C HOWELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774 Application/Control Number: 18/049,012 Page 2 Art Unit: 1774 Application/Control Number: 18/049,012 Page 3 Art Unit: 1774 Application/Control Number: 18/049,012 Page 5 Art Unit: 1774 Application/Control Number: 18/049,012 Page 6 Art Unit: 1774 Application/Control Number: 18/049,012 Page 7 Art Unit: 1774
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 24, 2022
Application Filed
Jun 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Jul 01, 2026
Interview Requested

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12680007
BOWLS AND ATTACHMENTS FOR FOOD PROCESSING APPARATUSES
4y 1m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12678744
Jet Propulsion Dry Powder Dissolution Unit That Uses a Submersible Actuator
3y 4m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12678752
Nut Butter Mixing Apparatus
2y 9m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12667228
QUICK RELEASE ATTACHMENT MECHANISM ON A STAND MIXER
3y 9m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12660961
KITCHEN APPLIANCE INCLUDING LOCATING FEATURES FOR FOOT ASSEMBLIES
3y 9m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+24.9%)
3y 5m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 552 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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