Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/321,927

GEAR SLICING TOOL AND MANUFACTURE METHOD THEREOF

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
May 23, 2023
Examiner
SNYDER, ALAN W
Art Unit
3722
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Jiangsu Xcmg Construction Machinery Research Institute Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
561 granted / 679 resolved
+12.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
715
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
50.5%
+10.5% vs TC avg
§102
27.4%
-12.6% vs TC avg
§112
19.2%
-20.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 679 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 1-16 in the reply filed on 12/17/2025 is acknowledged. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 5-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 sets forth ‘a tool surface’ (singular) in Line 3, and subsequently as ‘the tool surface’ (again, singular). Claims 5, 7 and 9 then claim that ‘the tool surface comprises a front tool surface and a rear tool surface’ in Lines 1-2 of each claim. It is unclear how a singular tool surface can be both the front and rear surface, two distinct surfaces of the tool. For purposes of examination, the limitation in claim 1 is being interpreted as ‘at least one tool surface’. Appropriate correction/clarification is required. 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 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xing et al. (CN 110181078, hereinafter ‘Xing’) in view of Ni et al. (US 20130065081, hereinafter ‘Ni’). Regarding claims 1-2, Xing discloses a tool comprising a tool body 1 wherein a plurality of at least one of concave parts 5 and convex parts 6 are formed on a tool surface of the tool body, and the plurality of the parts are arranged at intervals along at least one direction on the tool surface. A composite film layer 2/3/4 is disposed on the tool surface. Xing does not explicitly disclose the coating(s) as claimed. Ni discloses a similar cutting tool, wherein the tool body is provided with a composite film layer deposited on the tool surface (Fig. 3). The composite film layer comprises a metal film layer 138 formed on the tool surface, wherein the material of the metal film layer comprises metal (titanium nitride). A transition layer 140 is disposed on one side of the metal film layer away from the tool surface, wherein the transition film layer comprises a first film layer 146A formed on the metal film layer and a second film layer 148A formed on the first layer. A material of the first film layer comprises a nitride of the metal and a material of the second film layer comprises a nitride of an alloy of the metal and aluminum (Paragraphs [0029 & 0025]). A functional film layer 142 is disposed on one side of the transition film layer away from the tool surface, and a material of the functional film layer comprises a nitride of an alloy of the metal, aluminum and silicon (Paragraph [0030]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the tool of Xing by using the coating layers taught by Ni, in order to fully coat (including over the plurality of the parts) the tool in a wear-resistant material that would withstand harsh machining operations. Additionally, while not explicitly disclosed, Examiner takes Official Notice that a gear slicing tool lies fully within the scope of the types of tools outlined as suitable for use with the coating described in Paragraph [0003] of Ni. As such, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to construct the tool of Xing in view of Ni as a gear slicing tool in order to provide a durable long-lasting tool capable of machining gear workpieces if desired. Regarding claim 3, as modified above, the tool of claim 1, utilizing the coating of Ni, discloses a thickness of the metal film layer being 0.2-0.3 µm (Paragraph [0022]), a thickness of the transition film layer ranging between 0.5 and 0.8 µm (Paragraphs [0024-0025 & 0027]) and a thickness of the functional film layer is 1-3 µm (Paragraph [0030]). Regarding claim 4, Xing discloses the tool surface comprising a front tool surface, the plurality of the parts comprising a plurality of circular concave portions, a plurality of transverse grooves, a plurality of fan-shaped grooves or a plurality of crescent-shaped concave portions (Third complete Paragraph in the English translation of this document, provided by Applicant on 02/10/2025), these features being formed on the front tool surface. Regarding claim 5, Xing discloses the plurality of parts comprising a plurality of circular concave portions and a plurality of transverse grooves (i.e. a combination of the circular hole-shaped and the mesh-shaped grooves outlined in the Third complete Paragraph in the English translation of this document, provided by Applicant on 02/10/2025). While not explicitly disclosed, Examiner takes Official Notice that gear slicing/machining tools are known in the art to have a tool front and rear surface that both experience cutting operations. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the tool of claim 1 to provide the plurality of parts on both the front and rear tool surfaces to provide the benefits of the reduced friction surface and wear resistance taught by Xing to both cutting surfaces. Regarding claim 6, the configuration of the plurality of parts claimed (transverse grooves extending along a first direction, spaced apart along a second direction, with a plurality of rows of circular concave portions arranged at intervals, said concave portions being at least partially located in the corresponding transverse grooves) is a configuration that is obvious to try, based upon the disclosure of Xing, which discloses a combination of circular hole and groove shapes, see also MPEP 2143, E. Regarding claim 7, Xing discloses the plurality of parts comprising a plurality of circular concave portions and a plurality of crescent-shaped concave portions (i.e. a combination of the circular hole-shaped and the grooves outlined in the Third complete Paragraph in the English translation of this document, provided by Applicant on 02/10/2025). While not explicitly disclosed, Examiner takes Official Notice that gear slicing/machining tools are known in the art to have a tool front and rear surface that both experience cutting operations. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the tool of claim 1 to provide the plurality of parts on both the front and rear tool surfaces to provide the benefits of the reduced friction surface and wear resistance taught by Xing to both cutting surfaces. Regarding claim 8, the configuration of the plurality of parts claimed (an alternating arrangement of circular and concave grooves disposed in an array) is a configuration that is obvious to try, based upon the disclosure of Xing, which discloses a combination of circular hole and groove shapes, see also MPEP 2143, E. Regarding claim 9, Xing discloses the plurality of parts comprising a plurality of circular convex portions (i.e. the cylindrically-shaped bumps outlined in the Third complete Paragraph in the English translation of this document, provided by Applicant on 02/10/2025). While not explicitly disclosed, Examiner takes Official Notice that gear slicing/machining tools are known in the art to have a tool front and rear surface that both experience cutting operations. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the tool of claim 1 to provide the plurality of parts on both the front and rear tool surfaces to provide the benefits of the reduced friction surface and wear resistance taught by Xing to both cutting surfaces. Regarding claim 10, Xing also discloses that the plurality of parts contains a combination of circular concave portions with the circular convex portions (Fig. 1 and the paragraph cited above). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the tool of claim 9 to provide the plurality of parts on both the front and rear tool surfaces to provide the benefits of the reduced friction surface and wear resistance taught by Xing to both cutting surfaces. Regarding claim 11, the configuration of the plurality of parts claimed (an alternating arrangement of circular convex and concave portions disposed in an array) is a configuration that is obvious to try, based upon the disclosure of Xing, which discloses a combination of circular hole and bump shapes, see also MPEP 2143, E. Regarding claim 12, Xing discloses the circular concave portion(s) having a diameter of 30-50 µm, a depth of 10-150 µm and a distance between adjacent portions of 40-100 µm (e.g. the First complete Paragraph on Page 3 of the English translation provided by Applicant). Regarding claim 13, Xing discloses the circular convex portion(s) having a diameter of 30-50 µm, a height of 10-150 µm and a distance between adjacent portions of 40-100 µm (e.g. the First complete Paragraph on Page 3 of the English translation provided by Applicant). Regarding claims 14-16, Xing discloses exemplary dimensions of the circular hole and bump structures only (e.g. the First and Sixth complete Paragraphs on Page 3 of the English translation provided by Applicant). However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the transverse, fan-shaped and crescent-shaped grooves/concave portion(s) with a width/diameter of 40-100 µm, depth of 10-150 µm and distance therebetween of 40-100 µm, as taught by Xing in the exemplary dimensions cited above. Additionally, providing a fan-shaped included angle of 40˚-60˚ and an angle of a bottom sharp corner of the crescent-shaped concave portion(s) of 20˚-30˚ would have been obvious to try, as a fan-shape and crescent-shape inherently have a respective included angle/angle of a bottom sharp corner. See MPEP 2143, E as well as 2144.04, IV, A and B. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alan Snyder whose telephone number is (571)272-4603. The examiner can normally be reached M-R 7:00a - 5:00p. 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, Sunil K Singh can be reached at 571-272-3460. 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. /Alan Snyder/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3722
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 23, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12583036
Conduit Reamer
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576453
MACHINING SYSTEM AND CUTTING INSERT AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569953
CONTROL DEVICE AND CONTROL METHOD FOR MACHINE TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12544838
CUTTING ELEMENT AND THE USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12539544
BORING TOOL AND CUTTING INSERT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+10.9%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 679 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