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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/22/2026 was filed after the mailing date of the non-final rejection on 04/24/2026. The submission complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/12/2026 was filed after the mailing date of the non-final rejection on 04/24/2026. The submission complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: there are 8 instances of “substate” in the specification: [0006], [0025], [0054], [0055], three in [0083], and [0087].
Appropriate correction is required.
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 13, 14, 20, 26, 32, 33, 39, and 43 are currently amended, Claims 2, 3, 7, 12, 17, 21, 22, 31, 36, 40-42, and 44-46 are as previously amended, Claims 4-6, 8, 11, 15, 16, 18, 19, 23-25, 27, 30, 34, 35, 37, and 38 are as originally filed, and Claims 9, 10, 28, and 29 are canceled.
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 1-8, 11-27, and 30-46 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.
In Claims 1 and 20 as amended, the second material composition is formed into a powder. However, it is not clear how the second material composition can include a portion of the substrate material as at least a coating outside the powder or a solute inside the powder before the formation of the powder. According to the steps recited in Claim 1 and the description in Claim 20, the second material composition is formed by combining the molten source material with at least a portion of the substrate material. According to the specification in [0055], the second composition is the powder, not the mixture of the substrate and the molten source material before vibrating.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "heat generated by the molten source material" in line 2. 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 07/20/2026 have been fully considered. Claim 15 should have been included in the statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter since neither Zrodowski nor Materials suggests the substrate material to contain aluminum along with lithium, zinc, or magnesium.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of Claims 20 and 31 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) based on the three-prong test have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of the claims has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments regarding Claim 18 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The examiner notes that the specification in [0083] states the following: “The base material may include a material configured to dissipate heat generated by the molten source material and the vibrations.” There is support for the molten source material being capable of generating heat, but there is no support for the limitation “heat generated” since there is no active step or similar limitation for generating heat.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8, 11-17, 19-27, and 30-46 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.
Claim 18 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the reasons for allowability for Claims 1 and 20 are set forth in the office action mailed 04/24/2026 by the incorporation of allowable subject matter.
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 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