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 1-4, in the reply filed on 2/12/26 is acknowledged.
Claims 5-19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 2/12/26.
Applicant stated that the “Applicant does not traverse Group I being a separate group, but otherwise disagrees with the further groups listed as restricted.”
Examiner respectfully traverses the argument above.
It is noted that inventions listed as Groups I-VII do not relate to a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1 because, under PCT Rule 13.2, they lack the same or corresponding special technical features as set forth in page 4 of the previous Office Action.
Therefore, given that the Examiner has properly established that Groups I-VII lack unity as set forth in page 4 of the Office Action mailed 12/12/25, it is the Examiner's position that the restriction is proper.
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 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harada et al (US20150064406).
Harada teaches fluoride spray coatings.
Harada, abstract, teaches a fluoride spray coating covered member in which a fluoride spray coating firmly adheres by coating carbide cermet to a surface of a substrate and interposing it.
Harada, paragraph 43 of the PGPUB, teaches the fluoride spray coating is formed in such a manner that fluoride particles having a particle size of 5 μm-80 μm made of a fluoride of one or more materials selected from a group of: Mg in Group IIa of the Periodic Table; Al in Group IIIb of the Periodic Table; Y in Group IIIa of the Periodic Table; and lanthanide metals of Atomic Numbers 57-71 in the Periodic Table such as La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb and Lu are blown to the substrate surface to be a coating thickness of 20 μm-500 μm.
Harada, paragraph 121 of the PGPUB, teaches fluoride for coating-formation: MgF2, YF3 (particle size: 10-60 μm) are used, and a sample having a fluoride coating with a coating thickness of 250 μm is prepared by a reduced-pressure plasma spraying method.
It 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 to choose the amount of MgF and YF3 present in the coating to obtain a fluoride spray coating covered member in which a fluoride spray coating firmly adheres by coating carbide cermet to a surface of a substrate and interposing it.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Although the references teach fluoride spray coatings, the reference does not teach the composite compound is a granulated powder of an yttrium fluoride, magnesium fluoride and a calcium fluoride having an average particle size of primary particles of 10 microns or less and the granulated powder has an average particle size of 5 microns or less and more than 40 microns as claimed in claim 3.
There is no motivation in the reference incorporate a calcium fluoride in the composite as claimed in claim 3.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US20210130243 teaches fiber porosity forming fillers in thermal spray powders.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEFANIE J COHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5836. The examiner can normally be reached 10am- 6pm 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, Coris Fung can be reached at (571) 270-5713. 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.
/STEFANIE J COHEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1732 3/4/26
Prosecution Insights