DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 06/09/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-2, 4-12, 14-16, and 18-19 remain pending in the application. Claims 10 and 11 have been withdrawn. Claims 3, 13, and 17 have been canceled. New claim 19 has been added. Claims 1-2, 4-9, 12, 14-16, and 18-19 are presented for examination on the merits. Applicant's amendments to the claims have overcome the objections previously set forth in the Non-Final Rejection mailed 02/09/2026. Applicant's amendments to the claims have overcome the 112(b) rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Rejection mailed 02/09/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's amendment and arguments (remarks filed 06/09/2026, pages 7-10) have overcome the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection over JP 2018/081970 A of Hayashi previously set forth in the Non-Final Rejection mailed 02/09/2026. Hayashi does not teach wherein the second coating portion comprises an iron oxide of amended claim 1 nor does Hayashi teach an oxidation step that could form an iron oxide. Hayashi further teaches suppressing oxidation of the surface of the rare earth element-iron-based master alloy coarse powder ([0040]). It would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the iron of Hayashi to form iron oxide since Hayashi explicitly teaches suppressing oxidation of the powder surface.
Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US 2010/0068512 A1 of Imaoka (as cited in IDS mailed 05/26/2023).
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claims 1-2, 4-9, 12, 14-16, and 18-19 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-2, 4-9, 12, 14-16, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2010/0068512 A1 of Imaoka (as cited in IDS mailed 05/26/2023).
Regarding claims 1-2, 4-9, 12, 14-16, and 18-19, Imaoka teaches a composite magnetic material for a high frequency wave, which comprises a (rare earth element)-(iron)-(nitrogen)-based magnetic material and a (rare earth element)-(iron)-(nitrogen)-based magnetic material whose surface is coated with a ferrite magnetic material (Abstract, reads on claimed coated rare earth-iron-nitrogen-based magnetic powder since Imaoka teaches the magnetic material is a powder in [0063]).
Regarding the core region of claim 1, Imaoka teaches a rare earth-iron-nitrogen based magnetic material powder is coated with a ferrite-based magnetic material ([0063], ferrite-based coating reads on claimed first coating portion and second coating portion; one of ordinary skill in the art understands the coated powder has a core region). Imaoka teaches a rare earth-iron-nitrogen based magnetic material represented by the following general formula: RxFe(100−x−y)Ny wherein R is at least one of rare earth elements including Y; and x and y are numbers that satisfy 3≦x≦30 and 1≦y≦30% by atom, respectively (claim 1, reads on claimed core region containing R, Fe, and N). Imaoka teaches rare earth element R contains at least one of Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb and Lu ([0065], reads on claimed the core region containing R, Fe, and N, where R represents at least one selected from the group consisting of Y, Ce, Pr, Nd, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Lu, and Sm) Imaoka teaches each composition of the R—Fe—N based magnetic materials of the present invention is in the range of 3 to 30% by atom for a rare earth component ([0094], reads on claimed if Sm is present, Sm constitutes less than 50 at% of a total R content)
Imaoka therefore reads on the limitation a coated rare earth-iron-nitrogen-based magnetic powder, comprising: a core region; the core region containing R, Fe, and N, where R represents at least one selected from the group consisting of Y, Ce, Pr, Nd, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Lu, and Sm, and if Sm is present, Sm constitutes less than 50 at% of a total R content of claim 1.
Regarding the first, second, and third coating portion of claims 1 and 19, Imaoka teaches the method of coating the magnetic material includes surface treating in phosphoric acid, metal salts, and combinations thereof, reacting with phosphate, adjusting pH, and plating ferrite by oxidizing ([0227]-[0234], one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect phosphoric acid and phosphate reactions to form a phosphorus-containing coating which reads on the claimed first coating portion). Imaoka teaches the ferrite-based magnetic material coating the surface of a rare earth-iron-nitrogen based magnetic material include oxide-based magnetic materials including ferrite-based magnetic materials having a spinel structure having a composition of (M′,Fe)3O4 as a main composition, such as Fe ferrites such as magnetite, maghemite and intermediates of magnetite and maghemite ([0148], oxide-based coating of Imaoka reads on claimed second coating portion; (M′,Fe)3O4, magnetite, maghemite and intermediates of magnetite and maghemite reads on claimed iron oxide). One of ordinary skill in the art understands that the first coating portion will contain P and R since the core contains R and is reacted with phosphate, which contains P. One of ordinary skill in the art understands the second coating portion of Imaoka with the ferrite-based coating will have a lower P content than the first coating portion resulting from the phosphate since the second coating portion has (M′,Fe)3O4 as a main composition, as taught by Imaoka.
Imaoka therefore reads on the limitation a first coating portion provided outside the core region; and a second coating portion of claim 1, the first coating portion containing P and R of claim 1, the second coating portion, wherein an average atomic concentration of P in the second coating portion is lower than the average atomic concentration of P in the first coating portion of claim 1, and wherein the second coating portion comprises an iron oxide of claim 1.
Regarding the P content of claims 2, 12, and 16, Imaoka teaches 0.01 to less than 50% by atom of a nitrogen component of a rare earth-iron-nitrogen based magnetic material may be substituted with P ([0097], P content of Imaoka overlaps with the claimed range). In the case where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP § 2144.05 I.
Imaoka therefore reads on the limitation having a P content that is at least 0.02% by mass but not higher than 4% by mass of claims 2, 12, and 16.
Regarding the resin of claims 7 and 18, Imaoka teaches magnetic material-resin composite material comprising: 5 to 99.9% by mass of the rare earth-iron-nitrogen based magnetic material with a coating of a ferrite-based magnetic material; and 0.1 to 95% by mass of a resin (claim 15, resin reads on claimed resin).
Imaoka therefore reads on the limitation further comprising a resin of claims 7 and 18.
Regarding claim 9, Imaoka teaches magnetic material for a high frequency wave wherein the high frequency field is 0.005 to 33 GHz (claim 9, magnetic material reads on claimed magnetic material and high frequency overlaps with claimed range) and a high selective absorption ratio at 1 GHz or higher ([0117], reads on claimed hyper-high frequency absorption). In the case where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP § 2144.05 I.
Imaoka therefore reads on the limitation magnetic material for hyper-high frequency absorption, the magnetic material comprising the coated rare earth-iron-nitrogen-based magnetic powder according to claim 1, wherein hyper-high frequency means frequencies in the range of 1 GHz to 1 THz of claim 9.
However, Imaoka does not explicitly disclose an average atomic concentration of R in the first coating portion being higher than an average atomic concentration of R in the core region, and the average atomic concentration of R in the first coating portion being not higher than twice the average atomic concentration of R in the core region, wherein the first coating portion includes a Fe-rich region in which at least an atomic concentration of Fe is higher than an average atomic concentration of Fe in the first coating portion of claim 1, wherein an average atomic concentration of R in the second coating portion is lower than the average atomic concentration of R in the first coating portion of claim 1, having a ratio of θ1/θ2 that is at least 0.8, where θ1 represents a phase angle at 100 MHz and θ2 represents a phase angle at 13 MHz of claims 4 and 14, having a phase angle θ at 13 MHz that is at least 80° of claims 5 and 15, magnetic material for magnetic field amplification of claim 6, for use in wireless power transfer of claim 8, and comprising a third coating portion containing P and/or R, further outside the second coating portion of claim 19.
One of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect the powder of Imaoka to possess the claimed first, second, and third coating portions with the claimed relationships of P and/or R contents given Imaoka teaches a powder composition, phosphate treatment, and ferrite-based coating overlapping with the claimed invention. Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP § 2112.01 I. “Products of identical chemical composition can not have mutually exclusive properties.” A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP § 2112.01 II. Therefore, it is expected that the powder of the prior art possesses the properties as claimed in the instant claims since a) the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in composition (see compositional analysis above), b) the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure (both are coated powders), and c) the claimed and prior art products are produced by identical or substantially identical processes (both powders undergo a phosphoric acid treatment, phosphate treatment and oxidizing steps). Since the Office does not have a laboratory to test the reference alloy, it is applicant’s burden to show that the reference alloy does not possess the properties as claimed in the instant claims. See In re Best, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977); In re Marosi, 218 USPQ 289, 292-293 (Fed. Cir. 1983); In re Fitzgerald et al., 205 USPQ 594 (CCPA 1980).
Absent any clear and convincing evidence and/or arguments to the contrary, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect the powder of Imaoka to possess the claimed average atomic concentrations in coating portions, ratios, phase angles, and third coating portion. A prima facie case of obviousness has been properly established herein.
Imaoka therefore reads on the limitation an average atomic concentration of R in the first coating portion being higher than an average atomic concentration of R in the core region, and the average atomic concentration of R in the first coating portion being not higher than twice the average atomic concentration of R in the core region, wherein the first coating portion includes a Fe-rich region in which at least an atomic concentration of Fe is higher than an average atomic concentration of Fe in the first coating portion of claim 1, wherein an average atomic concentration of R in the second coating portion is lower than the average atomic concentration of R in the first coating portion of claim 1, having a ratio of θ1/θ2 that is at least 0.8, where θ1 represents a phase angle at 100 MHz and θ2 represents a phase angle at 13 MHz of claims 4 and 14, having a phase angle θ at 13 MHz that is at least 80° of claims 5 and 15, magnetic material for magnetic field amplification of claim 6, for use in wireless power transfer of claim 8, and comprising a third coating portion containing P and/or R, further outside the second coating portion of claim 19.
Since the powder of Imaoka reads on all the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and given the limitations “for magnetic field amplification” of claims 6-8 and 12-15, “for hyper-high frequency absorption” of claims 9 and 16-18, and “for use in wireless power transfer” of claim 8 are interpreted as intended use (see Claim Interpretation section previously set forth in Non-Final Rejection mailed 02/09/2026), Imaoka therefore reads on the limitations a magnetic material for magnetic field amplification, comprising the coated rare earth-iron-nitrogen-based magnetic powder according to claim 1 of claim 6, the magnetic material for magnetic field amplification according to claim 6 for use in wireless power transfer of claim 8.
Imaoka therefore reads on all the limitations of claims 1-2, 4-9, 12, 14-16, and 18-19.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
WO 2022/004081 A1 of Sugimoto (using US 2023/0245807 A1 as its English translation) is considered relevant to the instant claims. Sugimoto teaches a rare earth-iron-nitrogen-based magnetic powder according to this invention contains, as main constituent components, a rare-earth element (R), iron (Fe), and nitrogen (N) and a shell layer containing a rare earth element (R) and iron (Fe) (claim 1). Sugimoto teaches the shell layer has a two-layer structure comprising an outer layer and an inner layer (claim 3) and the powder further comprises a phosphoric acid-derived compound coating (claim 5). Sugimoto does not explicitly disclose forming an iron oxide in the shell or phosphoric acid-derived compound coating.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action since amended claim 1 now requires wherein the second coating portion comprises an iron oxide instead of only Fe (emphasis added), as previously claimed. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAYELA ALDAZ whose telephone number is (571)270-0309. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Thursday: 10 am - 7 pm and alternate Friday: 10 am - 6 pm.
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, Keith Hendricks can be reached at (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.
/M.A./Examiner, Art Unit 1733
/REBECCA JANSSEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733
Prosecution Insights