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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 14-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 2/10/26.
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-13 in the reply filed on 2/10/26 is acknowledged.
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 instant claims contain the transitional phrase “comprising”. Per MPEP 2111.03 ‘The transitional term “comprising”, which is synonymous with “including,” “containing,” or “characterized by,” is inclusive or open-ended and does not exclude additional, unrecited elements or method steps'. This open-ended definition has been taken into consideration in the following rejections.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2007/0138459 A1 to Wong et al. (hereinafter Wong).
Regarding claims 1, 6, and 13, Wong discloses a method of forming a single phase (single crystalline) compositionally complex material including transition metals (para [0170]), the method comprising:
creating a magnetic phase diagram to predict magnetic behavior of the magnetic material (para [0251]-[0253]), wherein the desired behavior is one of antiferromagnetism (para [0251]), superparamagnetism (para [0253]), ferromagnetism (para [0257]), and magnetic frustration of co-existing states (para [0257]). The magnetic phase diagrams determine magnetic behaviors based on variables including spin structures and interactions (para [0253]) that depend on the particular elements present (para [0253]) and magnetic states (levels of magnetization, para [0251]) leading to macroscopic behavior (order-disorder characteristics that have a strong influence on magnetization values, para [0252]).
Wong also discloses selecting a plurality of transition metals and corresponding transition metal composition ratios for the single phase compositionally complex material based on a desired magnetic behavior and spin characteristics (para [0178]) and [0253]), and
forming the single phase compositionally complex material (para [0023]-[0026]), wherein the single phase compositionally complex material is a compositionally complex transition metal oxide having the formula ABO3 (para [0170]), where A is an element selected from a group that includes La (para [0171]), B is at least one element selected from a group comprising the plurality of transition metals including Ni, Fe, Co, Cr, and Mn (para [0172] and [0178]), wherein the ratio of A:B is about 0.0:1 to 100:1 (para [0129]). When all are present, the Wong formula is La(Ni,Fe,Co,Cr,Mn)O3. The total amount of B = Ni+Fe+Co+Cr+Mn = 1. This overlaps the instantly claimed formula La(CraMnbFecCodNie)O3 in which a+b+c+d+e=1 and each of a, b, c, d, and e is greater than 0 and less than 1. See MPEP 2144.05(I), which states that ‘In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists’.
Wong does not expressly disclose creating the magnetic phase diagrams by calculating expected local magnetic states using the particularly claimed formula: H
PNG
media_image1.png
68
236
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein Si are spin values depending on which transition metal is placed at site i, Sj are spin values depending on which transition metal is placed at site j, <ij>refers to next nearest-neighbor sites, and Jij are magnetic exchange values, or by calculating the spin structure factor S(k) by Fourier transform, using the formula: S(k)
PNG
media_image2.png
68
244
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein ri is the vector position of site i, rj is the vector position of site j, k is the wavevector that is set to (0,0,0) and (1/2,1/2,1/2), and <Si.Sj>are the standard spin-spin correlations in real space at all distances.
However, as discussed above, the reference does teach an overlapping method of making overlapping single phase complex materials comprising overlapping amounts of the same elements in overlapping formulas via use of phase diagrams, spin structures and interactions, and predictions of the same desired behaviors. Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ the instantly claimed formulas in the Wong method and thereby facilitate optimization and automation of the process with in-line corrections.
Regarding claim 2, Wong discloses the method of claim 1, but does not expressly recite the limitation “wherein the spin values S are: (i) S=5/2 when the transition metal is Fe; (ii) S=2 when the transition metal is Co; (iii) S=3/2 when the transition metal is Mn; (iv) S=3/2 when the transition metal is Cr; and (v) S=1 when the transition metal is Ni”.
However, the reference does recite an overlapping method of making an overlapping material comprising Fe, Co, Mn, Cr and Ni in overlapping amounts. See MPEP 2112.01(I), which states 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…"When the PTO shows a sound basis for believing that the products of the applicant and the prior art are the same, the applicant has the burden of showing that they are not."…Therefore, the prima facie case can be rebutted by evidence showing that the prior art products do not necessarily possess the characteristics of the claimed product’. Wong recites an overlapping method of making an overlapping single phase complex oxide comprising Fe, Co, Mn, Cr and Ni. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect similar spin values for Fe, Co, Mn, Cr and Ni, absent evidence to the contrary.
Regarding claim 3, Wong discloses the method of claim 1, but is silent regarding magnetic exchange values J. However, the magnetic exchange values, J, appear to be constants based on the coupling of particular elements. See MPEP 2112.01(I), cited above. Wong teaches the presence of overlapping elements in an overlapping formula. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect the Wong materials to have similar magnetic exchange values, absent evidence to the contrary.
Regarding claim 4, Wong discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the step of creating a magnetic phase diagram includes varying a compositional amount of at least one of the transition metals (adjusting ratios of the precursors/reagents, para [0169]-[0170]) but is silent regarding the limitation “repeating the calculation of the expected local magnetic states and spin structure factor S(k) for each compositional amount”.
However, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to repeat the process as needed to tune nanostructures comprising the complex oxide (para [0169]) in a large-scale process (para [0026]).
Regarding claim 5, Wong discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of transition metals includes more than three transition metals (para [0172]).
Regarding claim 7, Wong discloses the method of claim 6, including the step of varying one or more of a, b, c, d, and e (adjusting ratios of the precursors/reagents, para [0169]-[0170]) but is silent regarding varying one or more in the range of 0.1 to 0.9. However, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the ranges of a, b, c, d, and e to tune the complex oxide (para [0169]) and ultimately facilitate predictive formation of complex metal oxides with the desired size, shape, and magnetic properties (para [0026]).
Regarding claim 8, Wong discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the compositionally complex transition metal oxide is a compositionally complex transition metal oxide having the formula ABO3 (para [0170]), where A is an element selected from a group that includes La (para [0171]), B is at least one element selected from a group comprising Ni, Fe, Co, Cr, and Mn (para [0172] and [0178]), wherein the ratio of A:B is about 0.0:1 to 100:1 (para [0129]). When all are present, the Wong formula is La(Ni,Fe,Co,Cr,Mn)O3, which overlaps the instantly claimed formula
La(Cr(1-n)/4MnnFe(1-n)/4Co(1-n)/4Ni(1-n)/4)O3, 0>n>1 and n is selected based on the desired magnetic behavior and transition temperature (para [0253]). See MPEP 2144.05(I), cited above.
Regarding claim 9, Wong discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the compositionally complex transition metal oxide is a compositionally complex transition metal oxide having the formula ABO3 (para [0170]), where A is an element selected from a group that includes La (para [0171]), B is at least one element selected from a group comprising Ni, Fe, Co, Cr, and Mn (para [0172] and [0178]), wherein the ratio of A:B is about 0.0:1 to 100:1 (para [0129]). When all are present, the Wong formula is La(Ni,Fe,Co,Cr,Mn)O3, which overlaps the instantly claimed formula
La(Cr(1-n)/4Mn(1-n)/4FenCo(1-n)/4Ni(1-n)/4)O3, 0>n>1 and n is selected based on the desired magnetic behavior and transition temperature (para [0253]). See MPEP 2144.05(I), cited above.
Regarding claim 10, Wong discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the compositionally complex transition metal oxide is a compositionally complex transition metal oxide having the formula ABO3 (para [0170]), where A is an element selected from a group that includes La (para [0171]), B is at least one element selected from a group comprising Ni, Fe, Co, Cr, and Mn (para [0172] and [0178]), wherein the ratio of A:B is about 0.0:1 to 100:1 (para [0129]). When all are present, the Wong formula is La(Ni,Fe,Co,Cr,Mn)O3, which overlaps the instantly claimed formula
La(CrnMn(1-n)/4Fe(1-n)/4Co(1-n)/4Ni(1-n)/4)O3, 0>n>1 and n is selected based on the desired magnetic behavior and transition temperature (para [0253]). See MPEP 2144.05(I), cited above.
Regarding claim 11, Wong discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the compositionally complex transition metal oxide is a compositionally complex transition metal oxide having the formula ABO3 (para [0170]), where A is an element selected from a group that includes La (para [0171]), B is at least one element selected from a group comprising Ni, Fe, Co, Cr, and Mn (para [0172] and [0178]), wherein the ratio of A:B is about 0.0:1 to 100:1 (para [0129]). When all are present, the Wong formula is La(Ni,Fe,Co,Cr,Mn)O3, which overlaps the instantly claimed formula
La(Cr(1-n)/4nMn(1-n)/4Fe(1-n)/4ConNi(1-n)/4)O3, 0>n>1 and n is selected based on the desired magnetic behavior and transition temperature (para [0253]). See MPEP 2144.05(I), cited above.
Regarding claim 12, Wong discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the compositionally complex transition metal oxide is a compositionally complex transition metal oxide having the formula ABO3 (para [0170]), where A is an element selected from a group that includes La (para [0171]), B is at least one element selected from a group comprising Ni, Fe, Co, Cr, and Mn (para [0172] and [0178]), wherein the ratio of A:B is about 0.0:1 to 100:1 (para [0129]). When all are present, the Wong formula is La(Ni,Fe,Co,Cr,Mn)O3, which overlaps the instantly claimed formula
La(Cr(1-n)/4nMn(1-n)/4Fe(1-n)/4Co(1-n)/4Nin)O3, 0>n>1 and n is selected based on the desired magnetic behavior and transition temperature (para [0253]). See MPEP 2144.05(I), cited above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LYNNE EDMONDSON whose telephone number is (571)272-2678. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6:30.
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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1177. 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.
/L.E./Examiner, Art Unit 1734
/Matthew E. Hoban/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights