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 .
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.
Response to Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I claims 1-3, in the reply filed on 04/08/2026, is acknowledged.
Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.03(a)).
The claims 4-15 are withdrawn from consideration.
Priority
Certified English translation for the foreign priority documents have not been submitted yet.
Once applicants submit certified English translations for the foreign priority documents, the effective filing date will be 02/09/2021.
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.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scapens et al. to WO 2020/161459 A1 (herein referred to under US 2022/0080393 A1 as the English-language equivalent cited to for page and paragraph).
Regarding claim 1, Scapens et al. teach a metal oxides (the claimed complex oxide) comprising on oxide basis 10-98% wt. of in total of ZrO2+HfO2, 2-90% wt. of CeO2, having a particle size distribution D50 particularly 0.3-0.7 µm which overlaps the instant claimed ranges (<0.5 µm), and D90 0.3-0.9 µm which is encompassed by the instant claimed ranges (<1 µm) in particular, the d50 and d90 are measured by laser diffraction (Abstract, [0031]-[0034], [0064]-[0104], and claims 1-16).
The references differ from Applicant's recitations of claims by not disclosing identical ranges. However, the reference discloses "overlapping" ranges and overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding claim 2, the surface area of the particles taught by Scapens et al. is at least 80 m2/g measured by BET after heat treatment at 1000 0C for 4 hours ([0036]-[0041]).
Although Scapens et al. do not specifically the time for 3 hours in an air atmosphere as per applicant claim 2, a particular parameter must first be recognized as a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, before the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable might be characterized as routine experimentation.
The length of time under which a chemical reaction is performed is considered to be a result effective variable because, it is well known in the art that depending upon the exact reaction conditions, the time to completion of reaction will vary, and one of ordinary skill in the art would be expected to be able to determine the time it takes for a reaction to go to completion, given the teachings by Scapens et al.
Although Scapens et al. are silent as to the heat treatment in an air atmosphere, it would be obvious to perform this in air atmosphere, which reads on the instant claimed limitations.
Regarding claim 3, it is not examined due to the fact that it is dependent on unexamined optional another rare earth metal element of claim 1.
The recited the metal oxide containing other rare earth metal element is not necessary presented in the instant complex oxide because claim 3 does not further limit the complex oxide embodiment of claim 1 and thus does not further limit for that embodiment because the dependent claim is not positively limited to the complex oxide.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YUN QIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5834. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10:00am-4:00pm.
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, Sally A Merkling can be reached at 571-272-6297. 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.
YUN . QIAN
Examiner
Art Unit 1732
/YUN QIAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1738
Prosecution Insights