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
Claims 1, 2, 4, and 5 are directed to a product containing allowable subject matter. Pursuant to the procedures set forth in MPEP § 821.04(B), claims 6-9, directed to the process of making or using a product containing allowable subject matter, previously withdrawn from consideration because of a restriction requirement, Claims 6-9 are hereby rejoined and fully examined for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104.
Because all claims previously withdrawn from consideration under 37 CFR 1.142 have been rejoined, the restriction requirement as set forth in the Office action mailed on 01/14/2026 is hereby withdrawn. In view of the withdrawal of the restriction requirement as to the rejoined inventions, applicant(s) are advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is contains allowable subject matter in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application. Once the restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01.
Status of Claims
Claims 1 and 2 are currently amended, Claims 3 and 10 are canceled, Claim 4 is as previously presented, Claim 5 is as originally filed, Claims 6, 7, and 9 are withdrawn and currently amended, and Claim 8 is withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: “S2” in line 7 should be deleted. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1, 2, and 4-9 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 recites the limitation "the RL" in line 36. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
In Claim 1, lines 39 and 40, “RH” is defined for a second time since it was already defined in lines 3-5. If the “RH” in lines 3-5 regarding the grain boundary phase is different from the “HR” in lines 39 and 40 regarding the diffusion source, then the incidents of “HR” need to be distinguished in name.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the multi-stage heating with variable-rate thermal ramping" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the sintering step" in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the mass ratio" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims dependent on any of the rejected claims are likewise rejected under this statute.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 2, and 4-9 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the response filed 08/07/2026 incorporates the subject matter of Claim 3 into independent Claim 1. The office action mailed 05/07/2026 indicates the allowability of the subject matter in Claim 3.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot because the new grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as stated above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tima M. McGuthry-Banks whose telephone number is (571)272-2744. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 7:30 am to 4:00 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 D. 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.
Tima M. McGuthry-Banks
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1733
/Tima M. McGuthry-Banks/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733
Prosecution Insights