DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendment received on 12/23/2025:
claims 1-2 and 4-20 are currently pending
claims 1, 10-13 and 18 are amended
previously presented 112b rejections are withdrawn in light of the amendment to the claims
new prior art grounds of rejection reapplying Kavanaugh, Culler and Braun are presented herein
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 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, 4-7 and 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kavanaugh et al. (US 8840696 B2), hereinafter referred to as KAVANAUGH, in view of Culler et al. (US 8123828 B2), hereinafter referred to as CULLER.
Regarding claim 1, KAVANAUGH teaches a method for making abrasive particles (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 4, line 8: methods of forming abrasive particles) comprising:
forming a mixture into a body (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 2, lines 46-48: contacting an exposed surface of a mixture to a texturing form to form a textured preform), wherein forming is conducted without the use of a mold or a production tool (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 2, lines 11-19: providing a paste on a substrate, texturing a first major surface and a second major surface opposite the first major surface of the paste to form a textured preform; providing can include forming the mixture using a process selected from the group consisting of casting, tape casting, printing, molding, extruding, sectioning, pressing; thus, KAVANAUGH discloses forming without using a mold such as extruding or pressing), wherein the mixture comprises ceramic (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 4, line 17: the term paste and mixture are used interchangeably; and Col. 5, lines 8-18: the paste can include an abrasive precursor material; the abrasive precursor material can include an alumina-based material, such as boehmite);
modifying the body to change the stress within the body (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 8, lines 9-13: the process of texturing can include processes such as embossing, etching, thermal treatment, radiation treatment, chemical treatment, sonic treatment, molding, pressing, punching, and a combination thereof); and
drying the body (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 10 lines 41-43: certain processes, such as drying, heating, curing, calcining and sintering, may be conducted to remove liquid materials from the paste).
While KAVANAUGH is silent with respect to the drying to induce cracking of the body and formation of a plurality of precursor abrasive particles, KAVANAUGH teaches drying, heating, curing, calcining and sintering, may be conducted to remove liquid materials from the paste (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 10 lines 41-43).
However, CULLER discloses a process that can produce several different types of the shaped abrasive particles from the same process line (see CULLER at Col. 1, lines 36-38). CULLER teaches the formation of an abrasive shard comprising the fractured surface; the fractured surface can be created by a drying process that cracks or fractures at least the majority of the precursor shaped abrasive particles into at least two pieces (see CULLER at Col. 4, lines 1-10). CULLER discloses that to make abrasive shards, the sol-gel is fractured while drying in the mold; a sufficient amount of the volatile component must be rapidly removed from the abrasive dispersion to bring rapid solidification thereof, thereby forming a plurality of precursor shaped abrasive particles that are fractured into at least two pieces, typically, up to 40 percent of the liquid is removed from the abrasive dispersion in this step (see CULLER at Col. 14, lines 48-59). Additionally, CULLER teaches that for a water dispersion of between about 40 to 50 percent solids, the drying temperature can be from about 90°C to about 165°C (see CULLER at Col. 15, lines 3-6). Furthermore, KAVANAUGH discloses a mixture in the form of gel having approximately 42% solids combined with 58 wt % water (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 25, lines 44-48).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have anticipated success when applying the fracturing step induced by drying at the temperature be from about 90°C to about 165°C as disclosed by CULLER to the method of forming abrasive particles of KAVANAUGH based on disclosure of KAVANAUGH describing drying, heating, curing, calcining and sintering that may be conducted to remove liquid materials from the paste (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 10 lines 41-43).
Moreover, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to apply the fracturing induced by drying disclosed by CULLER since CULLER explicitly teaches that to make abrasive shards, the sol-gel is fractured while drying in the mold; and the liquid is removed from the abrasive dispersion in this step (see CULLER at Col. 14, lines 48-59).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized drying step of KAVANAUGH to induce the fracturing of the textured preform. The rationale for such modification would have been combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP §2143(I) (Exemplary rationale (A)).
Regarding claim 2, KAVANAUGH as modified by CULLER teaches the method of claim 1, wherein modifying the body includes deforming at least a portion of a body (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 7, lines 46-48: texturing includes the formation of a plurality of features, which can include features such as grooves, protrusions).
Regarding claim 4, KAVANAUGH as modified by CULLER teaches the method of claim 1, wherein modifying includes changing a physical feature of a body (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 7, lines 46-48: texturing includes the formation of a plurality of features, which can include features such as grooves, protrusions).
Regarding claim 5, KAVANAUGH as modified by CULLER teaches the method of claim 1, wherein modifying includes forming a controlled distribution of features in at least a portion of the body (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 7, lines 30-33: texturing can include forming a patterned surface in the first major surface by a regular and repeating array of features; and Col. 8, lines 36-37: the features formed in the first major surface can be controlled).
Regarding claim 6, KAVANAUGH as modified by CULLER teaches the method of claim 5, wherein the controlled distribution of features includes an array of features having at least one repeating unit (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 7, lines 30-33: texturing can include forming a patterned surface in the first major surface by a regular and repeating array of features).
Regarding claim 7, KAVANAUGH as modified by CULLER teaches the method of claim 1, wherein drying includes creating controlled cracking conditions in the body by controlling at least one of:
a drying temperature within the range of at least 20°C and not greater than 250°C (see rejection of claim 1 above and CULLER at Col. 15, lines 3-6: the drying temperature can be from about 90°C to about 165°C). CULLER teaches a range which is within and anticipates the claimed range.
Regarding claim 9, KAVANAUGH as modified by CULLER teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of precursor abrasive particle is formed without comminution of the body or intentional vibration of the body to induce cracking of the body (see rejection of claim 1 above and CULLER at Col. 4, lines 1-10: the fractured surface can be created by a drying process that cracks or fractures at least the majority of the precursor shaped abrasive particles into at least two pieces).
Regarding claim 10, KAVANAUGH as modified by CULLER teaches the method of claim 5, wherein the body of at least one of the plurality of precursor abrasive particles includes a side surface portion having an irregular contour (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 23, line 11: irregular scalloped edge).
Regarding claim 11, KAVANAUGH as modified by CULLER teaches the method of claim 5, wherein the controlled distribution of features includes at least one protrusion or depression within the body (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 7, lines 46-48: texturing includes the formation of a plurality of features, which can include features such as grooves, protrusions).
Regarding claim 12, KAVANAUGH as modified by CULLER teaches the method of claim 5, wherein the controlled distribution of features includes an interconnected network of depressions formed in at least a portion of the body (see KAVANAUGH at Fig. 12A and Col. 23, lines 18-21: the liquid management texture 1203 can include intersecting grooves, and more particularly, t-shaped grooves 1204 extending across at least a portion of the major surface 1202; the t-shaped grooves 1204 can include a longitudinal groove 1205 and a lateral groove 1206 intersecting the longitudinal groove 1205).
Regarding claim 13, KAVANAUGH as modified by CULLER teaches the method of claim 5, wherein the controlled distribution of features includes a discontinuous distribution of depressions extending partially into the body (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 7, lines 36-39: the regular and repeating array of features (e.g., protrusions and grooves) that are arranged in a repetitive pattern).
Regarding claim 14, KAVANAUGH as modified by CULLER teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising sintering the plurality of precursor abrasive particles to form abrasive particles (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 25, lines 58-61: the precursors shaped abrasive particles were sintered; representative particles).
Regarding claim 15, KAVANAUGH as modified by CULLER teaches the method of claim 14, wherein the abrasive particles comprise alpha alumina (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 6, lines 64-65: the abrasive grains consist essentially of alpha alumina).
Regarding claim 16, KAVANAUGH as modified by CULLER teaches the method of claim 14, wherein the abrasive particles comprise a polycrystalline material having an average grain size of not greater than 20 microns (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 16, lines 33 and 39: abrasive grains having an average size of not greater than 25 microns; and Col. 6, lines 64-65: the abrasive grains consist essentially of alpha alumina).
Regarding claim 17, KAVANAUGH as modified by CULLER teaches the method of claim 14, further comprising incorporating the abrasive particles into a fixed abrasive article (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 24, lines 42-44: the coated abrasive can further include abrasive particulate material; the abrasive particulate material can include the shaped abrasive particles).
Regarding claim 18, KAVANAUGH as modified by CULLER teaches the method of claim 1, wherein drying includes forming a plurality of precursor abrasive particles (see rejection of claim 1 above and CULLER at Col. 4, lines 1-10: the fractured surface can be created by a drying process that cracks or fractures at least the majority of the precursor shaped abrasive particles into at least two pieces), wherein a majority of the precursory abrasive particles have a polygonal two-dimensional shape (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 25, line 20: a generally (reads on limitation “majority”) triangular two-dimensional shape).
Regarding claim 19, KAVANAUGH as modified by CULLER teaches the method of claim 1, wherein drying includes forming a plurality of precursor abrasive particles (see rejection of claim 1 above), wherein a minority of the precursory abrasive particles have an irregular two-dimensional shape (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 25, line 20: a generally triangular two-dimensional shape; the other type of abrasive particles can be diluent particles different than the shaped abrasive particles, for example, the diluent particles can differ from the shaped abrasive particles in composition, two-dimensional shape, for example, the abrasive particles can represent conventional, crushed abrasive grit having random shapes).
Regarding claim 20, KAVANAUGH as modified by CULLER teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the ceramic includes alumina (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 5, line 17: the abrasive precursor can include an alumina-based material).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KAVANAUGH in view of CULLER as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Braun et al. (WO 2013102177 A1), hereinafter referred to as BRAUN.
Regarding claim 8, KAVANAUGH as modified by CULLER teaches the method of claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the body is in the form of a layer having a first major surface, a second major surface, and a side surface, and wherein the first major surface defines a width (w), the side surface defines a height (h), and wherein the layer has an aspect ratio (w:h) of at least 10:1, and wherein the first major surface has a surface area of at least 10 cm2.
However, BRAUN discloses a method of forming a shaped abrasive particle comprises forming a mixture comprising a ceramic material into a sheet, sectioning at least a portion of the sheet with a mechanical object, and forming a shaped abrasive particle from the mixture, wherein the shaped abrasive particle comprises a two-dimensional shape (see BRAUN at lines 27-30, p. 1). BRAUN also discloses forming a mixture including a ceramic material and a liquid; in particular, the mixture can be a gel formed of a ceramic powder material and a liquid (see BRAUN at lines 17-19, p. 4). BRAUN teaches that the mixture may be extruded in the form of a sheet and onto a belt (see BRAUN at lines 5-7, p. 7). BRAUN teaches that the surface of the belt may be textured such that features of the texture are imparted to the sheet, and the finally-formed shaped abrasive particles (see BRAUN at lines 25-26, p. 9); and that particular processes of forming can include cutting, pressing, punching, crushing, rolling, twisting, bending, drying, and a combination thereof; in one embodiment, the process of forming can include sectioning of the sheet (see BRAUN at lines 35-36, p. 9). Additionally, BRAUN teaches that the process of forming the sheet from the mixture can include control of particular features and process parameters to facilitate suitable formation of shaped abrasive particles having one or more features, for example, in certain instances, the process of forming a sheet from the mixture can include forming a sheet having a particular height (see BRAUN at lines 6-10, p. 8). BRAUN also teaches that the height of the sheet may be not greater than about 10 mm (see BRAUN at line 1, p. 9), and that the sheet can have a secondary aspect ratio of length:height of at least about 10 (see BRAUN at lines 5-6, p. 9). Thus, BRAUN discloses the sheet having a surface area of 10 cm2: height is 10 mm/1 cm and aspect ratio length:height of 10.
Both KAVANAUGH and BRAUN disclose a method of forming shaped abrasive particles describing similar method steps including depositing a mixture on substrate (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 4, lines 32-33 and BRAUN at lines 5-7, p. 7); forming a sheet/layer (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 7, lines 12-15 and BRAUN at lines 5-7, p. 7); texturing the sheet/layer and forming abrasive particles (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 2, lines 14-15 and BRAUN at lines 25-26, p. 9).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have anticipated success when shaping a paste of KAVANAUGH into a sheet with the dimensions disclosed by BRAUN based on the teachings of KAVANAUGH describing formation of a film or layer of paste on the substrate (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 7, lines 12-14). Moreover, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the layer of KAVANAUGH to have dimensions, e.g., length and height, as disclosed by BRAUN since BRAUN explicitly teaches that the process of forming the sheet from the mixture can include control of particular features and process parameters to facilitate suitable formation of shaped abrasive particles having one or more features, for example, in certain instances, the process of forming a sheet from the mixture can include forming a sheet having a particular height (see BRAUN at lines 6-10, p. 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the layer of paste of KAVANAUGH by adjusting length and height to be within the claimed range to reap the benefits of the adjustment of the dimensions of a sheet as disclosed by BRAUN such as controlling particular features and process parameters to facilitate suitable formation of shaped abrasive particles having one or more features.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 12/23/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that KAVANAUGH or CULLER fail to disclose a method for making abrasive particles comprising forming a mixture into a body wherein forming is conducted without the use of a mold or production tool (see Remarks received on 12/23/2025 spanning paragraphs on page 5).
However, the examiner respectfully disagrees for the following reasons. As was discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above, KAVANAUGH discloses providing a paste on a substrate, texturing a first major surface and a second major surface opposite the first major surface of the paste to form a textured preform; providing can include forming the mixture using a process selected from the group consisting of casting, tape casting, printing, molding, extruding, sectioning, pressing (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 2, lines 11-19). Thus, KAVANAUGH explicitly teaches forming a mixture into a body wherein forming is conducted without the use of a mold or production tool. It is noted that according to MPEP § 2111, the proper claim interpretation includes giving claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification. Therefore, for the purpose of the claim interpretation, the examiner treats the limitation “wherein forming is conducted without the use of a mold or a production tool” according to the paragraph [0064] of Specification stating that “the process of forming the abrasive particles can include forming the mixture 101 into a body … forming can include applying a force on the mixture 101 to facilitate moving the mixture 101 through the die opening 105 … Still, in at least one non-limiting embodiment, the pressure utilized during extrusion”. Based on the aforementioned description of the process of forming the abrasive particles of Applicant’s claimed method, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that disclosure of KAVANAUGH describing forming the mixture using a process selected from the group consisting of casting, extruding, sectioning, pressing (see KAVANAUGH at Col. 2, lines 11-19) is equivalent to Applicant’s claim limitation “wherein forming is conducted without the use of a mold or production tool”.
Therefore, the rejection of claims as being unpatentable over KAVANAUGH in view of CULLER is maintained.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANASTASIA KUVAYSKAYA whose telephone number is (703)756-5437. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:00am-5:00pm.
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, Amber Orlando can be reached at 571-270-3149. 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.
/A.A.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1731
/ANTHONY J GREEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1731