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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-23 are pending and are currently under examination.
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 1-4, 20 and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erickson (EP 0 577 316 A2).
In regard to claim 1, Erikson (EP ‘216) discloses nickel base superalloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (abstract and page 3).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Al
5.4 – 6.0
about 5 – 7
5.4 – 6
Ta
7.5 – 9.0
about 7 – 10
7.5 – 9
Ti
0.10 – 0.25
about 0.1 – 1.2
0.1 – 0.25
Co
5.5 – 7.5
about 1.5 – 9
5.5 – 7.5
Cr
4.0 – 5.5
about 1.8 – 4
4.0/about 4
Mo
0.10 – 0.70
about 0.25 – 2
about 0.25 – 0.7
W
4.0 – 5.0
about 3.5 – 7.5
4.0 – 5.0
Re
4.8 – 6.2
about 5 – 7
about 5 – 6.2
Hf
0.04 – 0.15
about 0 – 0.15
0.04 – 0.15
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Si
0 – 0.15
0
0
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon for the nickel base alloys disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon from the amounts disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) because Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
In regard to claim 2, Erikson (EP ‘216) discloses nickel base superalloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (abstract and page 3).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Al
5.4 – 5.8
about 5 – 7
5.4 – 6
Ta
8.0 – 9.0
about 7 – 10
8 – 9
Ti
0.10 – 0.25
about 0.1 – 1.2
0.1 – 0.25
Co
5.5 – 6.5
about 1.5 – 9
5.5 – 6.5
Cr
4.0 – 5.0
about 1.8 – 4
4.0/about 4
Mo
0.10 – 0.50
about 0.25 – 2
about 0.25 – 0.5
W
4.0 – 5.0
about 3.5 – 7.5
4.0 – 5.0
Re
4.8 – 5.2
about 5 – 7
about 5 – 5.2
Hf
0.04 – 0.15
about 0 – 0.15
0.04 – 0.15
Si
0 – 0.15
0
0
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon for the nickel base alloys disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon from the amounts disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) because Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
In regard to claim 3, Erikson (EP ‘216) discloses nickel base superalloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (abstract and page 3).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Al
5.4 – 5.8
about 5 – 7
5.4 – 6
Ta
8.0 – 9.0
about 7 – 10
8 – 9
Ti
0.10 – 0.25
about 0.1 – 1.2
0.1 – 0.25
Co
5.5 – 7.5
about 1.5 – 9
5.5 – 7.5
Cr
4.0 – 5.0
about 1.8 – 4
4.0/about 4
Mo
0.10 – 0.70
about 0.25 – 2
about 0.25 – 0.7
W
4.0 – 5.0
about 3.5 – 7.5
4.0 – 5.0
Re
5.3 – 5.7
about 5 – 7
5.3 – 5.7
Hf
0.04 – 0.15
about 0 – 0.15
0.04 – 0.15
Si
0 – 0.15
0
0
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon for the nickel base alloys disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon from the amounts disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) because Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
In regard to claim 4, Erikson (EP ‘216) discloses nickel base superalloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (abstract and page 3).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Al
5.4 – 5.8
about 5 – 7
5.4 – 6
Ta
7.5 – 8.5
about 7 – 10
7.5 – 8.5
Ti
0.10 – 0.25
about 0.1 – 1.2
0.1 – 0.25
Co
5.5 – 6.5
about 1.5 – 9
5.5 – 6.5
Cr
4.5 – 5.5
about 1.8 – 4
-
Mo
0.10 – 0.50
about 0.25 – 2
about 0.25 – 0.5
W
4.0 – 5.0
about 3.5 – 7.5
4.0 – 5.0
Re
5.8 – 6.2
about 5 – 7
5.8 – 6.2
Hf
0.04 – 0.15
about 0 – 0.15
0.04 – 0.15
Si
0 – 0.15
0
0
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon for the nickel base alloys disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon from the amounts disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) because Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
With respect to the claimed range of chromium, the Examiner notes that about 4 weight percent chromium as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) would be close enough to establish prima facie obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. Alternatively, Erickson (EP ‘216) teaches that chromium, tantalum and rhenium all impact the hot corrosion property attainment and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the chromium, tantalum and/or tungsten levels as these elements would be result effective variables to achieve the desired hot corrosion property. MPEP 2144.05 II.
In regard to claim 22, Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses wherein single crystal nickel base superalloys would normally be produced having the low-modulus (001) crystallographic orientation in order to provide extremely good thermal fatigue (page 2).
In regard to claims 20 and 23, Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses wherein the nickel base superalloys would be single crystal and used for blades in gas turbines (page 6 and page 10).
Claims 5-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erickson (EP 0 577 316 A2) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Sun et al. (The common strengthening effect of phosphorus, sulfur and silicon in lower contents and a problem of a net superalloy).
In regard to claim 5, Erikson (EP ‘216) discloses nickel base superalloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (abstract and page 3).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Al
5.6
about 5 – 7
5.6
Ta
8.5
about 7 – 10
8.5
Ti
0.20
about 0.1 – 1.2
0.20
Co
6
about 1.5 – 9
6
Cr
4.5
about 1.8 – 4
-
Mo
0.25
about 0.25 – 2
0.25
W
4.5
about 3.5 – 7.5
4.5
Re
5.0
about 5 – 7
5.0
Hf
0.04
about 0 – 0.15
0.04
Si
0.10
-
-
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon for the nickel base alloys disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon from the amounts disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) because Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
With respect to the claimed range of chromium, the Examiner notes that about 4 weight percent chromium as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) would be close enough to establish prima facie obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. Alternatively, Erickson (EP ‘216) teaches that chromium, tantalum and rhenium all impact the hot corrosion property attainment and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the chromium, tantalum and/or tungsten levels as these elements would be result effective variables to achieve the desired hot corrosion property. MPEP 2144.05 II.
With respect to the claimed silicon content, Erickson (EP ‘216) does not specify the presence of 0.10 weight percent silicon.
Sun et al. teaches that the life of the alloy would be best at silicon contents of about 0.10 weight percent (Figure 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the nickel base alloys, as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216), by adding about 0.10 weight percent silicon, as disclosed by Sun et al., in order to optimize the life of the superalloys, as disclosed by Sun et al. (Figure 3).
In regard to claim 6, Erikson (EP ‘216) discloses nickel base superalloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (abstract and page 3).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Al
5.6
about 5 – 7
5.6
Ta
8.5
about 7 – 10
8.5
Ti
0.20
about 0.1 – 1.2
0.20
Co
6
about 1.5 – 9
6
Cr
4.5
about 1.8 – 4
-
Mo
0.25
about 0.25 – 2
0.25
W
4.5
about 3.5 – 7.5
4.5
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Re
5.0
about 5 – 7
5.0
Hf
0.08
about 0 – 0.15
0.08
Si
0.10
-
-
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon for the nickel base alloys disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon from the amounts disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) because Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
With respect to the claimed range of chromium, the Examiner notes that about 4 weight percent chromium as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) would be close enough to establish prima facie obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. Alternatively, Erickson (EP ‘216) teaches that chromium, tantalum and rhenium all impact the hot corrosion property attainment and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the chromium, tantalum and/or tungsten levels as these elements would be result effective variables to achieve the desired hot corrosion property. MPEP 2144.05 II.
With respect to the claimed silicon content, Erickson (EP ‘216) does not specify the presence of 0.10 weight percent silicon.
Sun et al. teaches that the life of the alloy would be best at silicon contents of about 0.10 weight percent (Figure 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the nickel base alloys, as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216), by adding about 0.10 weight percent silicon, as disclosed by Sun et al., in order to optimize the life of the superalloys, as disclosed by Sun et al. (Figure 3).
In regard to claim 7, Erikson (EP ‘216) discloses nickel base superalloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (abstract and page 3).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Al
5.6
about 5 – 7
5.6
Ta
8.5
about 7 – 10
8.5
Ti
0.20
about 0.1 – 1.2
0.20
Co
6
about 1.5 – 9
6
Cr
4.5
about 1.8 – 4
-
Mo
0.25
about 0.25 – 2
0.25
W
4.5
about 3.5 – 7.5
4.5
Re
5.0
about 5 – 7
5.0
Hf
0.13
about 0 – 0.15
0.13
Si
0.10
-
-
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon for the nickel base alloys disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon from the amounts disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) because Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
With respect to the claimed range of chromium, the Examiner notes that about 4 weight percent chromium as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) would be close enough to establish prima facie obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. Alternatively, Erickson (EP ‘216) teaches that chromium, tantalum and rhenium all impact the hot corrosion property attainment and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the chromium, tantalum and/or tungsten levels as these elements would be result effective variables to achieve the desired hot corrosion property. MPEP 2144.05 II.
With respect to the claimed silicon content, Erickson (EP ‘216) does not specify the presence of 0.10 weight percent silicon.
Sun et al. teaches that the life of the alloy would be best at silicon contents of about 0.10 weight percent (Figure 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the nickel base alloys, as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216), by adding about 0.10 weight percent silicon, as disclosed by Sun et al., in order to optimize the life of the superalloys, as disclosed by Sun et al. (Figure 3).
In regard to claim 8, Erikson (EP ‘216) discloses nickel base superalloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (abstract and page 3).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Al
5.6
about 5 – 7
5.6
Ta
8.5
about 7 – 10
8.5
Ti
0.20
about 0.1 – 1.2
0.20
Co
7
about 1.5 – 9
7
Cr
4.5
about 1.8 – 4
-
Mo
0.50
about 0.25 – 2
0.50
W
4.5
about 3.5 – 7.5
4.5
Re
5.0
about 5 – 7
5.0
Hf
0.04
about 0 – 0.15
0.04
Si
0.10
-
-
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon for the nickel base alloys disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon from the amounts disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) because Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
With respect to the claimed range of chromium, the Examiner notes that about 4 weight percent chromium as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) would be close enough to establish prima facie obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. Alternatively, Erickson (EP ‘216) teaches that chromium, tantalum and rhenium all impact the hot corrosion property attainment and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the chromium, tantalum and/or tungsten levels as these elements would be result effective variables to achieve the desired hot corrosion property. MPEP 2144.05 II.
With respect to the claimed silicon content, Erickson (EP ‘216) does not specify the presence of 0.10 weight percent silicon.
Sun et al. teaches that the life of the alloy would be best at silicon contents of about 0.10 weight percent (Figure 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the nickel base alloys, as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216), by adding about 0.10 weight percent silicon, as disclosed by Sun et al., in order to optimize the life of the superalloys, as disclosed by Sun et al. (Figure 3).
In regard to claim 9, Erikson (EP ‘216) discloses nickel base superalloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (abstract and page 3).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Al
5.6
about 5 – 7
5.6
Ta
8.5
about 7 – 10
8.5
Ti
0.20
about 0.1 – 1.2
0.20
Co
7
about 1.5 – 9
7
Cr
4.5
about 1.8 – 4
-
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Mo
0.50
about 0.25 – 2
0.50
W
4.5
about 3.5 – 7.5
4.5
Re
5.5
about 5 – 7
5.5
Hf
0.08
about 0 – 0.15
0.08
Si
0.10
-
-
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon for the nickel base alloys disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon from the amounts disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) because Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
With respect to the claimed range of chromium, the Examiner notes that about 4 weight percent chromium as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) would be close enough to establish prima facie obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. Alternatively, Erickson (EP ‘216) teaches that chromium, tantalum and rhenium all impact the hot corrosion property attainment and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the chromium, tantalum and/or tungsten levels as these elements would be result effective variables to achieve the desired hot corrosion property. MPEP 2144.05 II.
With respect to the claimed silicon content, Erickson (EP ‘216) does not specify the presence of 0.10 weight percent silicon.
Sun et al. teaches that the life of the alloy would be best at silicon contents of about 0.10 weight percent (Figure 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the nickel base alloys, as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216), by adding about 0.10 weight percent silicon, as disclosed by Sun et al., in order to optimize the life of the superalloys, as disclosed by Sun et al. (Figure 3).
In regard to claim 10, Erikson (EP ‘216) discloses nickel base superalloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (abstract and page 3).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Al
5.6
about 5 – 7
5.6
Ta
8.5
about 7 – 10
8.5
Ti
0.20
about 0.1 – 1.2
0.20
Co
7
about 1.5 – 9
7
Cr
4.5
about 1.8 – 4
-
Mo
0.50
about 0.25 – 2
0.50
W
4.5
about 3.5 – 7.5
4.5
Re
5.5
about 5 – 7
5.5
Hf
0.13
about 0 – 0.15
0.13
Si
0.10
-
-
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon for the nickel base alloys disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon from the amounts disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) because Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
With respect to the claimed range of chromium, the Examiner notes that about 4 weight percent chromium as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) would be close enough to establish prima facie obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. Alternatively, Erickson (EP ‘216) teaches that chromium, tantalum and rhenium all impact the hot corrosion property attainment and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the chromium, tantalum and/or tungsten levels as these elements would be result effective variables to achieve the desired hot corrosion property. MPEP 2144.05 II.
With respect to the claimed silicon content, Erickson (EP ‘216) does not specify the presence of 0.10 weight percent silicon.
Sun et al. teaches that the life of the alloy would be best at silicon contents of about 0.10 weight percent (Figure 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the nickel base alloys, as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216), by adding about 0.10 weight percent silicon, as disclosed by Sun et al., in order to optimize the life of the superalloys, as disclosed by Sun et al. (Figure 3).
In regard to claim 11, Erikson (EP ‘216) discloses nickel base superalloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (abstract and page 3).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Al
5.6
about 5 – 7
5.6
Ta
8
about 7 – 10
8
Ti
0.20
about 0.1 – 1.2
0.20
Co
6
about 1.5 – 9
6
Cr
5
about 1.8 – 4
-
Mo
0.25
about 0.25 – 2
0.25
W
4.5
about 3.5 – 7.5
4.5
Re
6
about 5 – 7
6
Hf
0.04
about 0 – 0.15
0.04
Si
0.10
-
-
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon for the nickel base alloys disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon from the amounts disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) because Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
With respect to the claimed range of chromium, Erickson (EP ‘216) teaches that chromium, tantalum and rhenium all impact the hot corrosion property attainment and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the chromium, tantalum and/or tungsten levels as these elements would be result effective variables to achieve the desired hot corrosion property. MPEP 2144.05 II.
With respect to the claimed silicon content, Erickson (EP ‘216) does not specify the presence of 0.10 weight percent silicon.
Sun et al. teaches that the life of the alloy would be best at silicon contents of about 0.10 weight percent (Figure 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the nickel base alloys, as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216), by adding about 0.10 weight percent silicon, as disclosed by Sun et al., in order to optimize the life of the superalloys, as disclosed by Sun et al. (Figure 3).
In regard to claim 12, Erikson (EP ‘216) discloses nickel base superalloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (abstract and page 3).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Al
5.6
about 5 – 7
5.6
Ta
8
about 7 – 10
8
Ti
0.20
about 0.1 – 1.2
0.20
Co
6
about 1.5 – 9
6
Cr
5
about 1.8 – 4
-
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Mo
0.25
about 0.25 – 2
0.25
W
4.5
about 3.5 – 7.5
4.5
Re
6
about 5 – 7
6
Hf
0.08
about 0 – 0.15
0.04
Si
0.10
-
-
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon for the nickel base alloys disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon from the amounts disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) because Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
With respect to the claimed range of chromium, Erickson (EP ‘216) teaches that chromium, tantalum and rhenium all impact the hot corrosion property attainment and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the chromium, tantalum and/or tungsten levels as these elements would be result effective variables to achieve the desired hot corrosion property. MPEP 2144.05 II.
With respect to the claimed silicon content, Erickson (EP ‘216) does not specify the presence of 0.10 weight percent silicon.
Sun et al. teaches that the life of the alloy would be best at silicon contents of about 0.10 weight percent (Figure 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the nickel base alloys, as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216), by adding about 0.10 weight percent silicon, as disclosed by Sun et al., in order to optimize the life of the superalloys, as disclosed by Sun et al. (Figure 3).
In regard to claim 13, Erikson (EP ‘216) discloses nickel base superalloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (abstract and page 3).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Al
5.6
about 5 – 7
5.6
Ta
8
about 7 – 10
8
Ti
0.20
about 0.1 – 1.2
0.20
Co
6
about 1.5 – 9
6
Cr
5
about 1.8 – 4
-
Mo
0.25
about 0.25 – 2
0.25
W
4.5
about 3.5 – 7.5
4.5
Re
6
about 5 – 7
6
Hf
0.13
about 0 – 0.15
0.13
Si
0.10
-
-
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon for the nickel base alloys disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon from the amounts disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) because Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
With respect to the claimed range of chromium, Erickson (EP ‘216) teaches that chromium, tantalum and rhenium all impact the hot corrosion property attainment and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the chromium, tantalum and/or tungsten levels as these elements would be result effective variables to achieve the desired hot corrosion property. MPEP 2144.05 II.
With respect to the claimed silicon content, Erickson (EP ‘216) does not specify the presence of 0.10 weight percent silicon.
Sun et al. teaches that the life of the alloy would be best at silicon contents of about 0.10 weight percent (Figure 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the nickel base alloys, as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216), by adding about 0.10 weight percent silicon, as disclosed by Sun et al., in order to optimize the life of the superalloys, as disclosed by Sun et al. (Figure 3).
In regard to claim 14, Erikson (EP ‘216) discloses nickel base superalloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (abstract and page 3).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Al
5.6
about 5 – 7
5.6
Ta
8.5
about 7 – 10
8.5
Ti
0.20
about 0.1 – 1.2
0.20
Co
6
about 1.5 – 9
6
Cr
4.5
about 1.8 – 4
-
Mo
0.25
about 0.25 – 2
0.25
W
4.5
about 3.5 – 7.5
4.5
Re
5
about 5 – 7
5
Hf
0.15
about 0 – 0.15
0.15
Si
0.10
-
-
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon for the nickel base alloys disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon from the amounts disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) because Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
With respect to the claimed range of chromium, the Examiner notes that about 4 weight percent chromium as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) would be close enough to establish prima facie obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. Alternatively, Erickson (EP ‘216) teaches that chromium, tantalum and rhenium all impact the hot corrosion property attainment and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the chromium, tantalum and/or tungsten levels as these elements would be result effective variables to achieve the desired hot corrosion property. MPEP 2144.05 II.
With respect to the claimed silicon content, Erickson (EP ‘216) does not specify the presence of 0.10 weight percent silicon.
Sun et al. teaches that the life of the alloy would be best at silicon contents of about 0.10 weight percent (Figure 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the nickel base alloys, as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216), by adding about 0.10 weight percent silicon, as disclosed by Sun et al., in order to optimize the life of the superalloys, as disclosed by Sun et al. (Figure 3).
In regard to claim 15, Erikson (EP ‘216) discloses nickel base superalloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (abstract and page 3).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Al
5.6
about 5 – 7
5.6
Ta
8.5
about 7 – 10
8.5
Ti
0.15
about 0.1 – 1.2
0.15
Co
6
about 1.5 – 9
6
Cr
4.5
about 1.8 – 4
-
Mo
0.25
about 0.25 – 2
0.25
W
4.5
about 3.5 – 7.5
4.5
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Re
5
about 5 – 7
5
Hf
0.15
about 0 – 0.15
0.15
Si
0.10
-
-
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon for the nickel base alloys disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon from the amounts disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) because Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
With respect to the claimed range of chromium, the Examiner notes that about 4 weight percent chromium as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) would be close enough to establish prima facie obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. Alternatively, Erickson (EP ‘216) teaches that chromium, tantalum and rhenium all impact the hot corrosion property attainment and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the chromium, tantalum and/or tungsten levels as these elements would be result effective variables to achieve the desired hot corrosion property. MPEP 2144.05 II.
With respect to the claimed silicon content, Erickson (EP ‘216) does not specify the presence of 0.10 weight percent silicon.
Sun et al. teaches that the life of the alloy would be best at silicon contents of about 0.10 weight percent (Figure 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the nickel base alloys, as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216), by adding about 0.10 weight percent silicon, as disclosed by Sun et al., in order to optimize the life of the superalloys, as disclosed by Sun et al. (Figure 3).
In regard to claim 16, Erikson (EP ‘216) discloses nickel base superalloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (abstract and page 3).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Al
5.6
about 5 – 7
5.6
Ta
8.5
about 7 – 10
8.5
Ti
0.20
about 0.1 – 1.2
0.20
Co
7
about 1.5 – 9
7
Cr
4.5
about 1.8 – 4
-
Mo
0.50
about 0.25 – 2
0.50
W
4.5
about 3.5 – 7.5
4.5
Re
5.5
about 5 – 7
5.5
Hf
0.15
about 0 – 0.15
0.15
Si
0.10
-
-
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon for the nickel base alloys disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon from the amounts disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) because Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
With respect to the claimed range of chromium, the Examiner notes that about 4 weight percent chromium as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) would be close enough to establish prima facie obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. Alternatively, Erickson (EP ‘216) teaches that chromium, tantalum and rhenium all impact the hot corrosion property attainment and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the chromium, tantalum and/or tungsten levels as these elements would be result effective variables to achieve the desired hot corrosion property. MPEP 2144.05 II.
With respect to the claimed silicon content, Erickson (EP ‘216) does not specify the presence of 0.10 weight percent silicon.
Sun et al. teaches that the life of the alloy would be best at silicon contents of about 0.10 weight percent (Figure 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the nickel base alloys, as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216), by adding about 0.10 weight percent silicon, as disclosed by Sun et al., in order to optimize the life of the superalloys, as disclosed by Sun et al. (Figure 3).
In regard to claim 17, Erikson (EP ‘216) discloses nickel base superalloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (abstract and page 3).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Al
5.6
about 5 – 7
5.6
Ta
8.5
about 7 – 10
8.5
Ti
0.15
about 0.1 – 1.2
0.15
Co
7
about 1.5 – 9
7
Cr
4.5
about 1.8 – 4
-
Mo
0.50
about 0.25 – 2
0.50
W
4.5
about 3.5 – 7.5
4.5
Re
5.5
about 5 – 7
5.5
Hf
0.15
about 0 – 0.15
0.15
Si
0.10
-
-
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon for the nickel base alloys disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon from the amounts disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) because Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
With respect to the claimed range of chromium, the Examiner notes that about 4 weight percent chromium as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) would be close enough to establish prima facie obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. Alternatively, Erickson (EP ‘216) teaches that chromium, tantalum and rhenium all impact the hot corrosion property attainment and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the chromium, tantalum and/or tungsten levels as these elements would be result effective variables to achieve the desired hot corrosion property. MPEP 2144.05 II.
With respect to the claimed silicon content, Erickson (EP ‘216) does not specify the presence of 0.10 weight percent silicon.
Sun et al. teaches that the life of the alloy would be best at silicon contents of about 0.10 weight percent (Figure 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the nickel base alloys, as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216), by adding about 0.10 weight percent silicon, as disclosed by Sun et al., in order to optimize the life of the superalloys, as disclosed by Sun et al. (Figure 3).
In regard to claim 18, Erikson (EP ‘216) discloses nickel base superalloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (abstract and page 3).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Al
5.6
about 5 – 7
5.6
Ta
8.0
about 7 – 10
8.0
Ti
0.20
about 0.1 – 1.2
0.20
Co
6
about 1.5 – 9
6
Cr
5
about 1.8 – 4
-
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Mo
0.25
about 0.25 – 2
0.25
W
4.5
about 3.5 – 7.5
4.5
Re
6
about 5 – 7
6
Hf
0.15
about 0 – 0.15
0.15
Si
0.10
-
-
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon for the nickel base alloys disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon from the amounts disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) because Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
With respect to the claimed range of chromium, Erickson (EP ‘216) teaches that chromium, tantalum and rhenium all impact the hot corrosion property attainment and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the chromium, tantalum and/or tungsten levels as these elements would be result effective variables to achieve the desired hot corrosion property. MPEP 2144.05 II.
With respect to the claimed silicon content, Erickson (EP ‘216) does not specify the presence of 0.10 weight percent silicon.
Sun et al. teaches that the life of the alloy would be best at silicon contents of about 0.10 weight percent (Figure 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the nickel base alloys, as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216), by adding about 0.10 weight percent silicon, as disclosed by Sun et al., in order to optimize the life of the superalloys, as disclosed by Sun et al. (Figure 3).
In regard to claim 19, Erikson (EP ‘216) discloses nickel base superalloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (abstract and page 3).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Erickson (EP ‘216)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Al
5.6
about 5 – 7
5.6
Ta
8.0
about 7 – 10
8.0
Ti
0.15
about 0.1 – 1.2
0.15
Co
6
about 1.5 – 9
6
Cr
5
about 1.8 – 4
-
Mo
0.25
about 0.25 – 2
0.25
W
4.5
about 3.5 – 7.5
4.5
Re
6
about 5 – 7
6
Hf
0.15
about 0 – 0.15
0.15
Si
0.10
-
-
Ni
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon for the nickel base alloys disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of aluminum, tantalum, titanium, cobalt, molybdenum, tungsten, rhenium, hafnium and silicon from the amounts disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216) because Erickson (EP ‘216) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
With respect to the claimed range of chromium, Erickson (EP ‘216) teaches that chromium, tantalum and rhenium all impact the hot corrosion property attainment and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the chromium, tantalum and/or tungsten levels as these elements would be result effective variables to achieve the desired hot corrosion property. MPEP 2144.05 II.
With respect to the claimed silicon content, Erickson (EP ‘216) does not specify the presence of 0.10 weight percent silicon.
Sun et al. teaches that the life of the alloy would be best at silicon contents of about 0.10 weight percent (Figure 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to modify the nickel base alloys, as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘216), by adding about 0.10 weight percent silicon, as disclosed by Sun et al., in order to optimize the life of the superalloys, as disclosed by Sun et al. (Figure 3).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erickson (EP 0 577 316 A2) as applied to claim 20, and further in view of Bruce et al. (US 5,683,825).
In regard to claim 21, Erickson (EP ‘316) discloses nickel superalloys that would be used for blades in turbine engines as set forth above, but Erickson (EP ‘316) does not specify wherein a protective coating comprising a metal sublayer deposited on the superalloy and a ceramic thermal barrier deposited on the metal sublayer.
Bruce et al. (‘825) discloses placing metallic bond layers formed from oxidation resistant alloys such as MCrAlY on superalloy components and then placing adherent ceramic layers on the metallic bond layers in order to provide resistance to hostile thermal environments that are subjected to impact and erosion by particles and debris (column 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to add metallic bond layers formed from oxidation resistant alloys such as MCrAlY on superalloy components and then placing adherent ceramic layers on the metallic bond layers, as disclosed by Bruce et al. (‘825), to the nickel base superalloy that would be used for blades in turbine engines, as disclosed by Erickson (EP ‘316), in order to provide resistance to hostile thermal environments that are subjected to impact and erosion by particles and debris, as disclosed by Bruce et al. (‘825) (column 3).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 29, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
First, the Applicant primarily argues that Erickson (EP ‘216) teaches a unique superalloy and explicitly explains that “it is extremely difficult to improve more than one or two of the design properties without significantly or even severely comprising the remaining properties” of the superalloy and this is confirmed in the description of Erickson (EP ‘216) which continuous teaches that the disclosed superalloy is very specific and cannot be changed and having a “critically balanced alloy chemistry” having a “unique blend of desirable properties”. The Applicant further argues that Erickson (EP ‘216) teaches away from changing any component of the superalloy and there is no teaching, suggestion or motivation for a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the composition of the superalloy in the manner proposed by the Office Action.
In response, the Examiner notes that Erickson (EP ‘216) recites the transitional language “comprising” and thus it would be open to additional unrecited elements such as silicon (abstract and claims). MPEP 2111.03. Additionally, the Examiner notes that silicon is not required before claim 5 and the Examiner has interpreted Applicant’s arguments to agree with the rejection of claims 1-4, 20 and 22-23 as being unpatentable over Erickson (EP ‘316) alone since there appear to be no arguments pertaining to the reference of Erickson (EP ‘316) alone and silicon is not required until dependent claim 5.
Second, the Applicant primarily argues that columbium is an effective strengthener in the nickel based superalloy of Erickson (EP 216) and Erickson (EP ‘216) is added for the purpose of gettering carbon and Erickson (EP ‘216) teaches away from changing a component in the nickel based superalloy of Erickson (EP ‘216) such that a person of ordinary skill in the art would find no teaching, suggestion or motivation to omit a component such as columbium in the nickel based superalloy of Erickson (EP ‘216) to obtain the claimed nickel based superalloy in claim 1.
In response, the Examiner notes that the instant claims recites the transitional language “comprising” and thus it would be open to additional unrecited elements such as columbium (niobium) and there need not be a motivation to omit due to the use of this transitional language. MPEP 2111.03.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Jessee Roe whose telephone number is (571)272-5938. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 7:30 am to 4 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, Curt Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
/JESSEE R ROE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights