Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/249,216

IRON-BASED AMORPHOUS ALLOY POWDER, PREPARATION METHOD THEREFOR AND APPLICATION THEREOF

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Apr 14, 2023
Examiner
KESSLER, CHRISTOPHER S
Art Unit
1759
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Hengdian Group Dmegc Magnetics Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
59%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 10m
To Grant
74%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 59% of resolved cases
59%
Career Allow Rate
465 granted / 783 resolved
-5.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+15.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
61 currently pending
Career history
844
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
45.2%
+5.2% vs TC avg
§102
16.2%
-23.8% vs TC avg
§112
27.4%
-12.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 783 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . DETAILED ACTION Status of Claims Responsive to the amendment filed 31 December 2025, claim 1 is amended and claims 2-3 are cancelled. Claims 1 and 4-6 are currently under examination. Claims 7-12 are withdrawn. Status of Previous Rejections Responsive to the amendment filed 31 December 2025, new grounds of rejection are presented. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 20230017833 A1 (hereinafter “Jian”). Regarding claim 1, Jian teaches a coated soft magnetic alloy particle (See title). Jian teaches that the particle has a composition of an amorphous phase with a first film coating thereon (See SUMMARY or Fig 1 or claim 1). Jian teaches that a non-spherical particle shape causes problems in the prior art (see SUMMARY). Jian teaches that the particle has a composition of FeaSibBcCdPeCufSngM1hM2i (see [0044]-[0056] or claims 1-4). Jian teaches a spherical shape (see [0071]). Jian teaches Example 1 in which an iron alloy with composition of Fe84.2Si1B9C1P3Cu0.8Sn1 is melted and quenched (See Example 1). Jian teaches that the powder is amorphous (see [0109]). Jian teaches that the powder is subjected to a spheroidization treatment (see [0104]-[0105]). Thus the particles meet the limitation of being spherical. Regarding claim 4, Jian teaches Sn (Example 1). Jian teaches also that M2 may include V, Mn, or Sn (see claim 4). Regarding claim 5, Jian teaches that the particle has a composition of FeaSibBcCdPeCufSngM1hM2i (see [0044]-[0056] or claims 1-4). Jian teaches that M1 includes NI or Co, while M2 includes Ti, Zr, Hf, Nb, Ta, Mo, W, Cr, Al, Mn, Ag, V, Zn, As, Sb, Bi, Y, and a rare earth element. All of the numerical limitations are considered to be optional. Thus the composition meets the claim limitations. 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. Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jian. Regarding claim 6, Jian teaches that the particles are sieved to generate the size as needed (see Example 1). Jian teaches that an average size of the powder would desirably be 10-50 microns (See [0064]-[0067]). Jian taches that the small particle size causes problems in the prior art (see SUMMARY). The optimization of the particle size of the powder of Jian would have been an obvious matter to the skilled artisan based on these teachings to optimize particle size. The selection of a suitable desired particle would have required no more thana routine investigation of the broad teachings of Jian. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) filed 31 December 2025 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. 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 CHRISTOPHER S KESSLER whose telephone number is (571)272-6510. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30. 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, Curt Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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. CHRISTOPHER S. KESSLER Primary Examiner Art Unit 1734 /CHRISTOPHER S KESSLER/ Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 14, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Dec 31, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 07, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601034
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING A PART
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12578038
PIPING ARTICLES INCORPORATING AN ALLOY OF COPPER, ZINC, AND SILICON
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571072
METHOD FOR THE PRODUCTION OF A SMALL-FRACTION TITANIUM-CONTAINING FILLING FOR A CORED WIRE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564885
OSCILLATING NOZZLE FOR SINUSOIDAL DIRECT METAL DEPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12553112
HIGH-STRENGTH BLACKPLATE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
59%
Grant Probability
74%
With Interview (+15.0%)
3y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 783 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