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 Acknowledged Applicant’s election of Group I, claims 1-8, in the reply filed on 11/14/2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse. MPEP § 818.01(a). Status of Claims Claims 1-11 are pending. Of the pending claims, claims 1-8 are presented for examination on the merits, and c laim s 9-11 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention , there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement Four (4) information disclosure statement (s) (IDS) were submitted on 06/20/2023, 09/27/2024, 10/08/2024, and 08/18/2025 . The submission s are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS are being considered by the examiner. Claim Objections Claim s 1 and 2 are objected to because of the following informalities: The claim sentences do not end with periods. In addition, the claims contain periods that are not being used for abbreviations . Per MPEP § 608.01(m), e ach claim begins with a capital letter and ends with a period . P eriods may not be used elsewhere in the claims except for abbreviations In claim 1, there are periods at line 12 after “less” and at line 16 after “respectively” but before the closed parenthesis, and neither period is used in an abbreviation or at the end of the claim sentence. In claim 2 , there is a period at line 20 after “ 2000.” The re is no period at the end of the claim sentence . Appropriate correction is required. 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. 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. Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2021/0062284 (A1) ( also WO 2019/132128 (A1)) to Kim et al. (“ Kim ”) . US 2021/0062284 (A1) is a pre-grant publication of U.S. appl. ser. no. 16/957,834, which is a 371 national stage application of PCT/KR2018/005622, published by WIPO as WO 2019/132128 (A1) . The pre-grant publication will serve as an equivalent to and a translation of the WIPO publication. Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a non-oriented electrical steel. Abstract; para. [0001]. The steel includes the following elements in percent by weight (para. [0005], [0012], [0039] -[ 0044], [0063]-[0076]): Element Claim 1 US 2021/0062284 A1 Si 3.3 - 4.0 2.0 - 3.5 Al 0.4 - 1.5 0.3 - 3.5 Mn 0.2 - 1.0 0.2 - 4.5 C 0.0015 - 0.0040 equal to or less than 0.0040 N 0.0005 - 0.0020 equal to or less than 0.0040 S 0.0005 - 0.0025 equal to or less than 0.0040 Mo 0.005 - 0.01 equal to or less than 0.005 Ti 0.0005 - 0.0020 equal to or less than 0.0040 Nb 0.0005 - 0.0020 equal to or less than 0.0040 V 0.0005 - 0.0020 equal to or less than 0.0040 Fe & unavoidable remainder remainder impurities With respect to claimed Equation 1 and taking the midpoints and upper limits of C, N, Mo, Ti, Nb, and V, the calculated values of Equation 1 are about 2.125, which falls within the claimed range. In addition, the amounts of C, N, Mo, Ti, Nb, and V overlap the claimed quantities; therefore, the range defined by Equation 1 would also be overlapped . The average crystal grain size may be 50 µm to 95 µm (para. [0079]), which overlaps the claimed range. The magnetism of the steel is improved by minimizing fine impurities, such as inclusions or precipitates. Para. [0003]. Elements that form inclusions and precipitates include C, S, N, Ti, Nb, or V, which form carbides and nitrides. Para. [0002], [0070] -[ 0074]. It is important to control the size of the inclusions by limiting the inclusions with a diameter of 0.5 µm to 1.0 µm occupying 40% by vol. or more of the entire inclusions (inclusions having a diameter of 500-1000 nm are 40% by volume or more of all inclusions). Para. [0013], [0077], [0091]. Because the objective is to coarsen inclusions and precipitates and minimize fine inclusions and precipitates (para. [0025], [0053], [0054]) and because inclusions that are 0.5-1.0 µm are 40% by volume or more of all inclusions, it follows that inclusions having a diameter less than 0.5 µm (less than 500 nm) should be minimized (distribution density of at least one of carbides, nitrides, and carbonitrides having particle sizes of 50 nm or less is 0.5 number/mm 2 or less) . The overlap between the ranges taught in the prior art and recited in the claims creates a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP § 2144.05(I). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to select from among the prior art ranges because there is utility over an entire range disclosed in the prior art. Regarding claim 2, w ith respect to claimed Equation 2, the average grain size overlap s the claimed range and the distribution density of fine precipitates and inclusions should be minimized, as discussed above ; therefore, the range defined by Equation 2 would also be overlapped. Regarding claim 3, Kim discloses the presence of Sn 0.0030-0.2 wt.%, Sb 0.0030-0.15 wt.%, and P 0.0040-0.18 wt.% (para. [0045] -[ 0050]), which overlap the claimed ranges. Regarding claim 4, Kim discloses Mg in an amount of equal to or less than 0.005 wt.% and Cu in an amount of equal to or less than 0.025 wt.% (para. [0076]), which overlaps the claimed ranges. Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses example specific resistivity values as high as 78 µ Ω·cm (Table 2 – Classification 13), which falls within the claimed range. Other values in Table 2 exceed the claimed minimum of 50 µ Ω·cm . Regarding claim 6, Kim is silent regarding the density of the steel sheet. However, given that the proportions of alloying elements in Kim meet the claimed proportions, the density of Kim’s steels would be expected to meet the claimed density. Regarding claim s 7 and 8 , Kim is silent regarding the offset yield strength and percentage of offset yield strength compared to the upper yield strength. However, it is well established that when a material is produced by a process that is identical or substantially identical to that of the claims and/or possesses a structure or composition that is identical or substantially identical to that of the claims, any claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. Such a finding establishes a prima facie case of anticipation or obviousness. See MPEP § 2112.01. In the present case, the non-oriented electrical steel sheets of Kim have a composition , grain size , and inclusion/precipitate distribution that meet the claimed steels. Thus, any claimed properties, such as offset yield strength and upper yield strength, would also be expected to exist in Kim’s steels due to the matching structure and composition. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT VANESSA T. LUK whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-3587 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday-Friday 9:30 AM - 4:30 PM ET . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Keith D. Hendricks , can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-1401 . 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. /VANESSA T. LUK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733 December 13, 2025