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 .
Examiner’s Comments
The examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers, paragraphs, or figures in the references as applied to the claims for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Paragraph [0077], Table 3A needs to be resubmitted as the table is blurry in the newly filed amendments to the Specification, dated 5/13/25.
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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niwa et al. (US 2018/0261245) in view of Ishikawa et al. (US 5,815,343).
Regarding claims 1, 3, and 5-6, Niwa discloses a magnetic recording medium comprising a nanogranular magnetic film [0044] comprising a structure including first phases comprises of nano-domains dispersed in a second phase, wherein the first phases include pure Co, and the second phase includes GeO2 [0044], wherein volume of the second phase is 10-50 vol.% [0045], which thereby overlaps the vol.% of the first phase as claimed. Niwa fails to explicitly disclose the content of the noble gas is 0.20-0.80 at.% as presently claimed.
Ishikawa discloses a magnetic recording medium, which is an analogous art to that of Niwa, comprising a Co alloy magnetic film comprising of Ar in a concentration of 0.1-5% (col. 12, line 66 – col. 13, line 8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Niwa’s nanogranular magnetic film to incorporate Ar with the concentration as claimed, since Ishikawa discloses that this will enhance the anisotropic magnetic field and the coercivity of the magnetic film (col. 13, lines 5-8).
Regarding claim 2, Niwa discloses first phases, however, fails to explicitly disclose the average size as claimed. However, Niwa discloses that the nanogranular magnetic film has a thickness of 3 nm [0046]. Given that the first phases or magnetic crystal grains must be within the thickness of a magnetic layer, one of ordinary skill in the art would immediately envisage that the first phases or magnetic crystal grains must be within the thickness range. Therefore, Niwa discloses an overlapping average size as claimed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the ranges disclosed by the reference because overlapping ranges have been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness, In re Malagari, 182 USPQ 549.
Regarding claim 4, Niwa discloses an electronic component Fig. 2.
Regarding claim 7, Niwa discloses 10% of B, C, Si, and Ge (Table 1, Ex. 14-17).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant stated that a newly filed specification was submitted to overcome the objection of paragraph [0077], Table 3A, however, no correction was submitted.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINDA N CHAU whose telephone number is (571)270-5835. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST M-F.
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, Mark Ruthkosky can be reached at (571)272-1291. 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.
Linda Chau
/L.N.C/Examiner, Art Unit 1785
/Holly Rickman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1785