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 I, claims 1-18 in the reply filed on 12/24/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 19-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 12/24/2025.
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, 10, 12, 14-15, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamauchi et al. (US20180222799, hereinafter referred to as Yamauchi).
Regarding claim 1, Yamauchi discloses a sintered body comprising zirconia (see Yamauchi at the Abstract, disclosing a zirconia sintered body.), the zirconia including: a stabilizer element dissolved therein (See Yamauchi at [0034], disclosing yttrium functions as a stabilizer without coloring zirconia. The content of yttria is 2% by mole or more and less than 6% by mole.); and a lanthanoid element dissolved therein, the lanthanoid element having an ionic radius larger than an atomic radius of zirconium (see Yamauchi at [0022], disclosing a zirconia sintered body containing at least ... Tb. Examiner notes Tb is terbium, and terbium has an ionic radius larger than the atomic radius of zirconium as evidenced by the instant specification at [0069]-[0070].),
wherein a content of monoclinic zirconia after a hydrothermal treatment at 140°C for 24 hours is less than 25% (see Yamauchi at [0229], disclosing a zirconia sintered body that … did not include a monoclinic phase. Examiner notes this corresponds with 0% monoclinic zirconia, which is within the claimed range.) While Yamauchi does not explicitly disclose the content of monoclinic zirconia after a hydrothermal treatment at 140°C for 24 hours is less than 25%, Examiner notes the content of monoclinic zirconia after a hydrothermal treatment is a function of the initial monoclinic content, as well as the stabilizer element content per [0068] of the instant specification which states "the content of the stabilizer element is preferably 2 mol% or more... and is preferably 15 mol% or less ... when the content of the stabilizer element falls within the above range, the fracture of the sintered body during production or under hydrothermal conditions may be reduced." Because the zirconia sintered body of Yamauchi has 0% initial monoclinic phase and a stabilizer of 2% by mole or more and less than 6% by mole per [0034] of Yamauchi, the zirconia sintered body of Yamauchi would inherently possess the claimed monoclinic content after hydrothermal treatment. 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 (see MPEP 2112.01(I) first paragraph),
and the sintered body includes a spinel compound, the spinel compound including aluminum (see Yamauchi at [0015], disclosing the zirconia sintered body … includes at least ... Spinel (MgAl2O4), which Examiner notes includes aluminum.) and a coloring agent (see Yamauchi at the Abstract, disclosing a zirconia sintered body that uses coloring of cerium oxide.).
Regarding claim 2, Yamauchi discloses the stabilizer element is one or more selected from the group consisting of yttrium, cerium, magnesium and calcium (See Yamauchi at [0034], disclosing yttrium functions as a stabilizer without coloring zirconia. The content of yttria is 2% by mole or more and less than 6% by mole.).
Regarding claim 3, Yamauchi discloses the stabilizer element is yttrium (See Yamauchi at [0034], disclosing yttrium functions as a stabilizer without coloring zirconia. The content of yttria is 2% by mole or more and less than 6% by mole.).
Regarding claim 4, Yamauchi discloses a content of the stabilizer element in the zirconia is 2 mol% or more (See Yamauchi at [0034], disclosing yttrium functions as a stabilizer without coloring zirconia. The content of yttria is 2% by mole or more and less than 6% by mole.).
Regarding claim 5, Yamauchi discloses the lanthanoid element is one or more selected from the group consisting of praseodymium, neodymium, europium, terbium, holmium and erbium (see Yamauchi at [0076], disclosing zirconia sintered bodies containing ... europium.).
Regarding claim 6, Yamauchi discloses the lanthanoid element is terbium (see Yamauchi at [0022], disclosing a zirconia sintered body containing at least ... Tb. Examiner notes Tb is terbium.).
Regarding claim 7, Yamauchi discloses a content of the lanthanoid element is 0.1 mol% or more (see Yamauchi at the Abstract, disclosing the zirconia sintered body includes an oxide of cerium is an amount of 0.5% by mole or more and less than 4% by mole in terms of CeO2.).
Regarding claim 10, Yamauchi discloses the sintered body including aluminum oxide (see Yamauchi at [0044], disclosing 0.2% by weight or more and 1.2% by weight or less, in terms of weight ratio of aluminum oxide (Al2O3), relative to the weight of the sintered body.).
Regarding claim 12, Yamauchi discloses the sintered body having a structure including crystal grains of the zirconia as a matrix (see Yamauchi at [0016], disclosing crystal grains of zirconia.) and crystal grains of the spinel compound (see Yamauchi at [0045], disclosing the oxide of aluminum is ... spinel. See also Yamauchi at [0043] disclosing oxide of aluminum contained in the sintered body of the present invention preferably has a crystal grain.).
Regarding claim 14, Yamauchi discloses an average size of crystal grains of the zirconia is 2 µm or less (see Yamauchi at [0104], disclosing crystal grains of zirconia have an average crystal grain size of 2 μm or less).
Regarding claim 15, Yamauchi discloses a measured density of the sintered body is 5.45 g/cm3 or more (see Yamauchi at Table 1, showing Examples 1-13 have a density of from 6.05-6.08 g/cm3, which is within the claimed range.).
Regarding claim 17, while Yamauchi does not explicitly disclose a difference ΔE between color tones of the sintered body before and after a hydrothermal treatment at 140°C for 24 hours is 0 or more and 2.0 or less, this is a property which depends upon the composition, specifically the lanthanoid content, as evidenced by the comparative example in [0218]-[0222] and Table 2 of the instant specification, which shows the primary difference between examples 1-8 and the comparative example is the content of the lanthanoid element. Because the composition of Yamauchi is substantially identical to the instantly disclosed composition, specifically the lanthanoid content, the zirconia sintered body of Yamauchi would inherently possess the claimed property.
Regarding claim 18, Yamauchi discloses a member comprising the sintered body according (see Yamauchi at [0001], disclosing a zirconia sintered body that has suitable strength as an exterior member, such as a decorative member.).
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) 11 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamauchi.
Regarding claim 11, Yamauchi discloses a content of the aluminum oxide is 0.5% by mass or more and 25% by mass or less (see Yamauchi at [0044], disclosing 0.2% by weight or more and 1.2% by weight or less, in terms of weight ratio of aluminum oxide (Al2O3), relative to the weight of the sintered body, 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 13, while Yamauchi does not explicitly disclose a proportion of tetragonal phase in a crystal structure of the sintered body is 75% or more because Yamauchi does not disclose the specific proportion of tetragonal phase in the crystal structure, Yamauchi at [0047] discloses a main phase of the crystal structure preferably includes a tetragonal phase. Yamauchi at [0047] teaches when the main phase of the crystal structure includes a tetragonal phase, the sintered body of the present invention has high strength. While Yamauchi does not mathematically define a "main phase", in view of the teachings of Yamauchi regarding high strength with a tetragonal main phase, a person having ordinary skill in the art would seek to form a main crystal phase of tetragonal zirconia as close to 100% as possible in order to maximize the strength as much as possible. Such a motivation would make obvious tetragonal content over 75%.
Claim(s) 8-9 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamauchi in view of Nagayama et al. (US20160347666, hereinafter referred to as Nagayama).
Regarding claim 8, Yamauchi does not disclose the coloring element is one or more selected from the group consisting of manganese, nickel, cobalt and iron, however, per MPEP 2144.04(I), changes in aesthetic design are obvious. Nagayama discloses a sintered body including an oxide of ceramic exhibits a bright red color (see Nagayama at the Abstract).
Nagayama is directed towards a zirconia sintered body which has at least two different color tones (See Nagayama at the Abstract). Nagayama discloses a nickel oxide powder ... was added to a zirconia powder containing 3 mol% of yttria and 0.25 wt.% of alumina (see Nagayama at [0390]). Nagayama teaches the powder, after mixing was dried to obtain a green zirconia powder. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art when practicing the invention of Yamauchi to substitute the CeO2 for a nickel oxide powder with a reasonable expectation of successfully providing a green zirconia sintered body instead of a red zirconia sintered body as taught by Nagayama.
Regarding claim 9, Yamauchi does not disclose the coloring element is nickel, however, per MPEP 2144.04(I), changes in aesthetic design are obvious.
Nagayama is directed towards a zirconia sintered body which has at least two different color tones (See Nagayama at the Abstract). Nagayama discloses a nickel oxide powder ... was added to a zirconia powder containing 3 mol% of yttria and 0.25 wt.% of alumina (see Nagayama at [0390]). Nagayama teaches the powder, after mixing was dried to obtain a green zirconia powder. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art when practicing the invention of Yamauchi to substitute the CeO2 for a nickel oxide powder with a reasonable expectation of successfully providing a green zirconia sintered body instead of a red zirconia sintered body as taught by Nagayama.
Regarding claim 16, Yamauchi discloses 20≤L*≤60 (see Yamauchi at [0053]), 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).
Yamauchi does not disclose a chromaticity index a*: -20 ≤ a* ≤ 2 and a chromaticity index b*: -20 ≤ b* ≤ 30, however, per MPEP 2144.04(I), changes in aesthetic design are obvious. Yamauchi discloses a sintered body including an oxide of ceramic exhibits a bright red color (see Yamauchi at the Abstract).
Nagayama is directed towards a zirconia sintered body which has at least two different color tones (See Nagayama at the Abstract). Nagayama discloses a nickel oxide powder ... was added to a zirconia powder containing 3 mol% of yttria and 0.25 wt.% of alumina (see Nagayama at [0390]). Nagayama teaches the powder, after mixing was dried to obtain a green zirconia powder. Nagayama discloses an a*=from −2 to 2 and b*=from −2 to 3.0, which is within the claimed range. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art when practicing the invention of Yamauchi to substitute the CeO2 for a nickel oxide powder with a reasonable expectation of successfully providing a green zirconia sintered body instead of a red zirconia sintered body as taught by Nagayama to provide a sintered zirconia body with L*, a*, and b* color coordinates 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