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 with traverse of Group I, claims 1-10, in the reply filed on November 24, 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no serious search burden on the Examiner. This is not found persuasive because there would be a serious search burden on the Examiner given the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification and given the different search terms required to search each invention. Note that Applicant also argues that Examiner has not provided evidence that the claimed product can be made as the Office has alleged. This is not found persuasive because Applicant has not provided evidence that the claimed product has to be made using the claimed method. Further, to the extent Applicant argues that Examiner has not provided reasons/examples for distinctness, Examiner notes that the rational for the independent groups is stated on pages 2-5 of the Restriction dated September 24, 2025.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 11-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected product and method, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on November 24, 2025.
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.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schneider et al. (US 2018/0037493) in view of Hamzawy et al. (“Sintered Mono-Cordierite Mg2Al4-xBxSi5O18 Glass-Ceramic with B/Al Replacement at the Nano- and Micro-Scale”).
Regarding claim 1, Schneider discloses a cordierite glass-ceramic comprising at least 5% by volume amorphous material and not more than 30% by volume amorphous regions, see abstract and [0022]. While the reference does not specifically disclose the claimed mass% of the crystal phase, given the crystalline phase can be present up to 95% by volume in the disclosed glass-ceramic and given the density of the green glass compared to the density of the cerammed glass is relatively similar, it is expected that the disclosed glass will have a crystal amount of 40 mass% or more, see Schneider Table 1; see MPEP 2144.05 I. Additionally, the reference discloses that foreign ions can be incorporated into the cordierite [0024].
The reference, however, fail to disclose that the foreign ions are at an Al site.
Hamzawy discloses sintered glass ceramics based on cordierite modified glass with partial substitution of aluminum by boron, which corresponds to a crystallized glass comprising a crystal of cordierite with the crystal comprising a different element at an Al site, see abstract. The reference further discloses that the substitution of B3+ for Al3+ in the cordierite crystal structure can effectively improve the near-infrared spectral emissivity of the glass-ceramic, see page 439 col. 2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to partially substitute aluminum with boron in the cordierite of Schneider in order to improve the near-infrared spectral emissivity of the glass-ceramic.
Regarding claim 2, Schneider discloses that the proportion of foreign ions should only be so great that the properties of the glass-ceramic according to the invention are not too greatly influenced by the crystal phases formed or that the ions can still be incorporated into the crystal phases and the properties of these crystal phases are not altered adversely, but no separate undesirable crystal phases are formed [0034]. While the reference does not specifically disclose the claimed total of Al sites with a different element, wherein the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, absent a showing of criticality. MPEP 2144.05 II. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the percentage of substitutions so as to not adversely alter the properties of the crystal phases.
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Schneider discloses ranges for the claimed oxide components that overlap the claimed ranges [0039]. Note that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”; see also MPEP 2144.05 I.
Regarding claim 5, the reference discloses that the glass ceramic contains not more than 10% by weight of P2O5, which overlaps the claimed range [0061]; see MPEP 2144.05 I.
Regarding claim 6, the reference discloses glass ceramic plates with a size of at least 50 cm x 50 cm and a thickness of 0.5 mm to 40 mm [0108]. Note that the disclosed ranges overlap the claimed ranges and that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”; see MPEP 2144.05 I.
Regarding claim 7, the reference discloses that the thermal conductivity is at least 1.5 W/(K x m), which overlaps the claimed range [0083]; see MPEP 2144.05 I.
Regarding claim 8, the reference discloses that the dielectric constant is in the range from 5 to 8 in the GHz range, which overlaps the claimed range [0086]; see MPEP 2144.05 I.
Regarding claims 9 and 10, while the references do not specifically disclose the claimed properties, given the references render obvious a crystallized glass with the claimed composition and crystalline structure, the references are considered to render obvious a crystallized glass with the claimed dielectric loss tangent and coefficient of thermal expansion, see above discussion; see MPEP 2112.01 I: “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.”
Claims 1, 3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hamzawy et al. (“Sintered Mono-Cordierite Mg2Al4-xBxSi5O18 Glass-Ceramic with B/Al Replacement at the Nano- and Micro-Scale”) in view of Kawai et al. (US 2004/0087427).
Regarding claim 1, Hamzawy discloses sintered glass ceramics based on cordierite modified glass with partial substitution of aluminum by boron, which corresponds to a crystallized glass comprising a crystal of cordierite with the crystal comprising a different element at an Al site, see abstract.
The reference fails to disclose the total amount of crystal of the crystallized glass.
Kawai discloses a glass ceramic sintered body containing cordierite wherein the cordierite crystal phase is present in an amount of not smaller than 30 mass %, see abstract and [0029]. The reference further discloses that when the content of the cordierite crystal phase is smaller than this range, it is probable that the thermal expansion-coefficient, dielectric constant or Young's modulus increases [0029].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the glass ceramic of Hamzawy to contain at least 30 mass % cordierite in order to prevent the thermal expansion-coefficient, dielectric constant or Young's modulus from increasing. Note that the disclosed range overlaps the claimed range and that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”; see also MPEP 2144.05 I.
Regarding claim 3, Hamzawy discloses examples with mass percentages within the claimed ranges, see Table 1; see MPEP 2131.03 I.
Regarding claim 10, Hamzawy discloses the thermal expansion coefficient is from 10.46 x 25.60 x 10-7 °C-1, which overlaps the claimed range, see conclusion; see also MPEP 2144.05 I.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA A AUER whose telephone number is (571)270-5669. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 am - 4 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, M. Veronica Ewald can be reached at (571)272-8519. 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.
/LAURA A AUER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783