Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/122,190

SINTERED BODY AND PRODUCTION METHOD THEREFOR

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Mar 16, 2023
Examiner
MILLER, CAMERON KENNETH
Art Unit
1731
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Tosoh Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
80%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
258 granted / 321 resolved
+15.4% vs TC avg
Minimal -0% lift
Without
With
+-0.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
65 currently pending
Career history
386
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
47.7%
+7.7% vs TC avg
§102
19.8%
-20.2% vs TC avg
§112
22.2%
-17.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 321 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1, claims 1-10 and 15 in the reply filed on 12/08/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 11-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/08/2025. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-7 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ito et al. (WO2020196505 with reference to machine translation, hereinafter referred to as Ito). Regarding claim 1, Ito discloses a sintered body comprising: zirconia (See Ito at the Abstract from the machine translation, disclosing a zirconia sintered body); iron (see Ito at Table 6, [0160] from the original WIPO publication, disclosing Example 24 of a zirconia sintered body comprising 0.266 wt.% Fe2O3); cobalt (see Ito at Table 6, [0160] from the original WIPO publication, disclosing Example 24 of a zirconia sintered body comprising 0.133 wt.% Co3O4); and titanium (see Ito at Table 6, [0160] from the original WIPO publication, disclosing Example 24 of a zirconia sintered body comprising 6.31 mol% TiO2, which corresponds to approximately 4 wt.% TiO2), wherein a total iron and cobalt content is more than 0.1 mass% and less than 3 mass% (see Ito at Table 6, [0160] from the original WIPO publication, disclosing Example 24 of a zirconia sintered body comprising 0.133 wt.% Co3O4 and 0.266 wt.% Fe2O3 for a combined content of approximately 0.399 wt.%) and a titanium content is more than 3 mass% (see Ito at Table 6, [0160] from the original WIPO publication, disclosing Example 24 of a zirconia sintered body comprising 6.31 mol% TiO2, which corresponds to approximately 4 wt.% TiO2). Regarding claim 2, Ito discloses a mass ratio of an iron content to a cobalt content is less than 4 (see Ito at Table 6, [0160] from the original WIPO publication, disclosing Example 24 of a zirconia sintered body comprising 0.133 wt.% Co3O4 and 0.266 wt.% Fe2O3 for a mass ratio of iron to cobalt of 0.266/0.133= 2). Regarding claim 3, Ito discloses the iron and the cobalt are contained as a solid solution containing iron and cobalt (see Ito at the third to last paragraph of page 8 from the machine translation, disclosing a solid solution containing cobalt and iron is contained). Regarding claim 4, Ito discloses the zirconia contains at least one element selected from the group consisting of yttrium (Y), calcium (Ca) and magnesium (Mg) (see Ito at Table 6, [0160] from the original WIPO publication, disclosing Example 24 of a zirconia sintered body comprising Y2O3). Regarding claim 5, Ito discloses the zirconia contains more than 3 mol% and 10 mol% or less of the at least one element selected from the group consisting of yttrium (Y), calcium (Ca) and magnesium (Mg) (see Ito at Table 6, [0160] from the original WIPO publication, disclosing Example 24 of a zirconia sintered body comprising 4.0 mol% Y2O3). Regarding claim 6, Ito discloses further comprising alumina (see Ito at Table 6, [0160] from the original WIPO publication, disclosing Example 24 of a zirconia sintered body comprising Al2O3). Regarding claim 7, Ito discloses a ratio of cobalt regions exceeding 5.0 µm2 in an element map obtained with an electron probe microanalyzer under conditions below is 55% or less: Measurement method: wavelength-dispersive Accelerating voltage: 15 kV Irradiation current: 300 nA Analysis area: 51.2 µm x 51.2 µm Number of fields of view: 3 to 5 Measurement sample: sintered body with surface roughness (Ra) < 0.02 µm (see Ito at the second to last paragraph of page 8 from the machine translation, disclosing the proportion of the cobalt region exceeding 5.0 µm2 in the element mapping by the electron probe microanalyzer is preferably 15% or less.). Regarding claim 15, Ito discloses a member comprising the sintered body (see Ito at the second paragraph of page 2, disclosing members). 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. 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. Claim(s) 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito. Regarding claim 8, Ito discloses the zirconia has an average crystal grain size of 1.2 µm or more and 2.5 µm or less (see Ito at the fourth to last paragraph of page 8 from the machine translation, disclosing the average crystal grain size of zirconia contained in the opaque zirconia portion is preferably … 2.5 µm or less, which overlaps with the claimed range.) In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05). Regarding claim 9, Ito discloses the sintered body has a biaxial flexure strength of 1000 MPa or more and 1350 MPa or less as measured from a 1 mm-thick sample in accordance with ISO/DIS 6872 (See Ito at the fifth to last paragraph of page 5 from the machine translation, disclosing a biaxial flexural strength of 600 MPa or more … and 2000 MPa or less, which overlaps with the claimed range.). Regarding claim 10, Ito discloses a color tone of the sintered body in a L*a*b* color space has a lightness L* of 10 or less, a chromaticity a* of -2.00 or more and 2.00 or less and a chromaticity b* of -2.00 or more and 5.00 or less (see Ito at the third paragraph of page 8 from the machine translation, disclosing an L* of 10 or less… b* is -2.00 or more and 5.00 or less ... a* is -3.00 or more and 0.80 or less, which overlaps with the claimed range). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAMERON K MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4616. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00am - 5:00pm 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, 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. CAMERON K MILLER Examiner Art Unit 1731 /CAMERON K MILLER/Examiner, Art Unit 1731
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 16, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600674
ALUMINA PARTICLES, RESIN COMPOSITION, MOLDED BODY, AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING ALUMINA PARTICLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600664
GLASS-CERAMICS WITH HIGH ELASTIC MODULUS AND HARDNESS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594223
GRADIENT COMPOSITION ZIRCONIA DENTAL MATERIALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590039
Glazing Material
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583784
Li2O-Al2O3-SiO2-BASED CRYSTALLIZED GLASS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
80%
Grant Probability
80%
With Interview (-0.3%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 321 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