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
Applicant’s election without traverse of amended claims 7-9 and newly presented claims 11-14 in the reply filed on July 20, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 10 (amended) and 15-22 (newly presented) are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on July 20, 2026.
The restriction by the examiner is still deemed proper as the main technical feature as claimed is not a special technical feature as it does not make a contribution over the prior art (see rejection of claim 7 below).
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. CN202110819841.5 and PCT/CN2022/106752, filed on July 20, 2021 and July 20, 2022, respectively.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the length of the abstract exceeds 150 words. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: in lines 5-6, the element "Zr" is listed twice in the Markush grouping for M2. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 9 recites the sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet having a “Br of 13.8 to 14.6 kG”. The term “Br” is understood in the art to denote remanence, a magnetic property. Thus, the meaning of “Br” will be interpreted as such.
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 7-9 and 11-14 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 7 recites a sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet which is prepared by a diffusion heat treatment using R1FeBM2 (substrate) and RHM1B (diffusion source). The only source of neodymium (Nd) is R1 in the substrate. However, R1 exists whereby it can be other rare earth elements that are not neodymium. If the prepared magnet is a neodymium-iron-boron magnet as claimed, then it must at a minimum have R1 include neodymium. Since R1 as claimed does not always include neodymium, then claim 7 is indefinite. Claims 8-9 and 11-14 are rejected as being dependent on, and failing to cure the deficiencies of, rejected independent claim 7. For the purposes of examination, R1 will be interpreted where R1 includes Nd and can further comprise “one, two or more” from the listing of elements as claimed.
Claim 7 also recites a limitation whereby y satisfies a relationship: y = 1-x-z. The term y relates to a weight percentage of M1 in a diffusion source alloy. For y to be a weight percentage, it should follow the same weight percentage relationship as defined by w for the substrate whereby w = 100%-m-n-p, so the equation for y should be: y = 100%-x-z as opposed to 1-x-z. Claims 8-9 and 11-14 are rejected as being dependent on, and failing to cure the deficiencies of, rejected independent claim 7.
Claim 11 similarly recites a limitation whereby y satisfies a relationship: y = 1-x-z. . The term y relates to a weight percentage of M1 in a diffusion source alloy. For y to be a weight percentage, it should follow the same weight percentage relationship as defined by w for the substrate whereby w = 100%-m-n-p, so the equation for y should be: y = 100%-x-z as opposed to 1-x-z. Thus, for the same reason as claim 7 above, claim 11 is also indefinite.
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 7-9 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu et al (US PGPub 20220285059) in view of Shi et al (CN110808158A) and Jiang et al (CN111636035A).
Regarding claim 7, Fu teaches preparation of a sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet. The magnet is formed by providing a raw material composition (paragraphs [0006-10] whereby: 29.5-32.5% (mass) of R’ where R’ is a rare earth element and includes Pr and Nd (Pr≥17.15%); Cu≥0.35% and preferably up to 1.3% according to paragraph [0021] (relevant to M2 as claimed); 0.9-1.2% of B; and 64-69.2% of Fe. This raw material composition encompasses the identity of the R1mFenBpM2w substrate as claimed (where m is between 27-35% thus R’ included entirely within range, n between 60-70% thus Fe included entirely within range, p between 0.8-1.5% thus B included entirely within range, and w=100%-m-n-p or the balance thus Cu and any elemental additives described below by Fu entirely within range as R1, Fe, and B are all within range as claimed). In paragraphs [0024-34], Fu also discloses additional elements that can be included in the raw material composition in further balancing amounts similar to Cu as provided. For instance, Al can be included at 3% or less, Ga at 1% or less, Zr at 0.3% or less, Co at 0.2-1.5%, Zn at 0.1% or less, and Mo at 0.1% or less. Fu also discloses Ag, In, Sn, V, Cr, Ta, Hf, and W in paragraph [0032] which would be assumed to be included at 0.1% or less due to the grouping with Zn and Mo. Fu further teaches that the raw material composition can be subjected to a diffusion heat treatment (paragraphs [0059-62]) whereby the surface of the neodymium-iron-boron magnet material are attached with Tb-containing substance and/or Dy-containing substance (thus alloy as diffusion source whereby RH is one or two selected from Dy and Tb). Fu does not specifically limit nor disclose the identity/composition of such “Tb-containing” and “Dy-containing” substances or alloys. Shi also teaches preparation of a neodymium-iron-boron magnet whereby an NdFeB substrate is treated by heat diffusion via a Tb and/or Dy alloy. Shi teaches a method for improving the magnetic performance of sintered Nd magnet coercive force by adhering an RM alloy (the Tb and/or Dy alloy) to the magnet surface and subjecting to diffusion heat treatment, thus analogous to the teachings of Fu. Shi teaches that R is at least one kind of heavy rare earth element (overlaps with RH as claimed) and that M is a “common metal element” which can be Al, Cu, Mg, Fe, Co, Nb, Zr, Ga in the “one kind of or more” (overlaps with M1 as claimed). R is included at 70.0-99.9wt% (overlaps with x as claimed whereby x is between 75-90%), and M composes the rest of the RM alloy (overlaps with y as claimed where y is the balance of RH and B). In example 1, Shi uses an RM alloy of 80%Dy and 20%Al (overlaps with claimed diffusion source outside of containing B). Thus, Shi teaches a relevant and analogous diffusion source that could be applied to the magnet preparation of Fu in order to improve magnetic performance and coercive force. However, neither Shi nor Fu specifically teach inclusion of B with the diffusion source. Analogously, Jiang teaches preparation of an NdFeB magnet whereby an NdFeB based magnet (substrate) is subjected to diffusion heat treatment with a heavy rare earth element containing alloy (diffusion source). Jiang teaches the diffusion source as RHX(Fe,Co)B alloy. RH is one or more heavy rare earth elements of Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, Lu and Sc whereby they are included within 30-100 wt% (but not 100% and thus overlaps within 75-90% and relevant to disclosed range of Shi). X is Ti and/or Zr included at 0-20% (analogous to M of Shi but includes Ti and within overlapping wt%). B is included at 0-1.1% (overlaps with z of 0.1-0.5% as claimed). However, Jiang teaches further inclusion of Fe and/or Co at 15-69%. Regardless, Shi teaches that M can be any kind of “common metal element” without specifically identifying metals such as Ti and B. Thus, it would be reasonable to include B as well as Ti into the RM diffusion alloy of Shi as known alternative metals to include for diffusion heat treatments of NdFeB based magnets and maintaining the disclosed wt% of B while incorporating Ti within 0-20% or the balance within M of RM. Jiang teaches inclusion of B at such content so that that heavy rare earth element (RH) cannot be combined with B so as to inhibit the over diffusion of RH from the grain boundary to the main phase and B combination in the main phase whereby such inhibition of over diffusion and “combination” is responsible for improving NdFeB magnet material performance. Overlapping ranges have been held to present a prima facie case of obviousness over the prior art. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to select from the overlapping portion of the range as known acceptable amounts of metals to include for improving magnetic performance to arrive at the invention as claimed. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to prepare a sintered NdFeB magnet following the diffusion heat treatment process of Fu using their disclosed NdFeB based substrate and exchanging the diffusion alloy source for a jointly made alloy source taught between Shi and Jiang whereby B is further included as a known alloy source material that can help inhibit over diffusion of a heavy rare earth element into the main phase and help further improve the NdFeB magnet material performance and arrive at the invention as claimed. Thus, Fu, Shi, and Jiang teach the claimed “A sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet, wherein the sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet is prepared by a diffusion heat treatment using a R1mFenBpM2w as a substrate and an RHxM1yBz alloy as a diffusion source; in the R1mFenBpM2w, R1 is one, two or more selected from Pr, Nd, Dy, Tb, Ho, Gd, Ce, La, and Y; Fe represents iron; B represents boron; M2 is one, two or more selected from Ti, Zr, Co, V, Nb, Ni, Cu, Zr, Al, and Ga; m represents a weight percentage content of R1, and 35% ≥ m ≥ 27%; n represents a weight percentage content of Fe, and 70% ≥ n ≥ 60%; p represents a weight percentage content of B, and 0.8% ≤ p ≤ 1.5%; and w represents a weight percentage content of M2, and w=100%-m-n-p; and in the RHxM1yBz alloy, the RH is one or two selected from Dy and Tb; M1 is one, two, or three selected from Ti, Zr, and Al; B represents boron; x, y, and z represent weight percentages of RH, M1 and B, and x, y, and z satisfy the following relationships: 75% ≤ x ≤ 90%; 0.1% ≤ z ≤ 0.5%; and y = 1-x-z.”
Regarding claim 8, Fu, Shi, and Jiang teach the sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet of claim 7. Fu teaches that the alloy serving as the substrate contains both Nd and Pr, whereby Pr is included at a wt% ≥ 17.15%, as opposed to Nd and Dy. Shi also teaches a similar substrate/main alloy of R1FeBM2 composition whereby R1 includes at a minimum Nd. R1 may also include Pr in a mixture of Pr and Nd but at a much lower weight % (0-10%) compared to what Fu discloses, thus suggesting that Pr does not necessarily need to exist at the disclosed amount of Fu without compromising the characteristics of the sintered magnet. Shi broadly teaches that other rare earth elements may be present in addition to just Nd, such as Dy whereby the content range of Dy is 0.5-6%. The total content of R in the substrate of Shi is 29-32.5% wt which is within the claimed range of m from claim 7. Shi teaches that Dy has a higher magnetic crystal anisotropy field and improves the coercive force of the magnet. Shi also teaches the main substrate or main alloy further contains a metal M which comprises one or more of Co, Cu, Al, Ga, Ti, Zr, W, Nb, V, Cr, Ni, Zn, Ge, Sn, Mo, Pb and Bi, thus overlapping with M2 as claimed. The content range of M is 2.5-4% by weight or mass which overlaps with “w” as claimed and is analogous in identity to what Fu teaches for their substrate. Fu teaches that “M2” equivalent may comprise Cu, Ga, and/or Co. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to use the substrate of Fu as taught and substitute the provided Pr for Dy, as informed by Shi, to improve coercive force of the magnet, or substitute the substrate entirely of Fu for the substrate disclosed by Shi as a known alternative substrate for preparing a neodymium-iron-boron magnet via diffusion heat treatment and arrive at the invention as claimed. Thus, Fu, Shi, and Jiang teach the claimed “The sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet according to claim 7 wherein in the R1mFenBpM2w, R1 is selected from Nd and Dy, and M2 is selected from Ti, Cu, Ga, and Co.”.
Regarding claim 9, Fu, Shi, and Jiang teach the sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet of claim 7. Fu discloses the magnetic properties of several prepared magnets in Table 2 representing relevant benchmarks or optimal parameters for Br and intrinsic coercivity (Hcj) of suitable magnets. 41/48 of the prepared samples have either a intrinsic coercivity of 21-29 kOe or a Br of 13.8-14.6 kG, with some of those 41 having both properties. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to ensure the subsequently prepared sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet prepared through the combined teachings of diffusion heat treatment process of Fu, Shi, and Jiang possess the same intrinsic coercivities and/or Br (remanence) properties as known suitable properties for sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnets and arrive at the invention as claimed. Thus, Fu, Shi, and Jiang teach the claimed “The sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet according to claim 7, wherein the sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet has an intrinsic coercivity of 21 to 29 kOe; the sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet has a Br of 13.8 to 14.6 kG; or the sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet has a density of 7.50 to 7.60 g/cm3.”
Regarding claim 9, Fu, Shi, and Jiang teach the sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet of claim 7. As described in the above rejection of claim 9, Fu teaches several prepared magnets which have both the intrinsic coercivity and Br or remanence values. However, Fu does not disclose a density of the prepared magnets. While the reference does not disclose the claimed properties, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect the exemplified sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnets prepared by the joint teachings of Fu, Shi, and Jiang to inherently have the any or all of the claimed properties absent any showing to the contrary since they fall within the claimed composition and are produced by the claimed process. See MPEP2112.01II. Thus, Fu, Shi, and Jiang teach the claimed “The sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet according to claim 7, wherein the sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet has an intrinsic coercivity of 21 to 29 kOe; the sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet has a Br of 13.8 to 14.6 kG; or the sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet has a density of 7.50 to 7.60 g/cm3.”
Regarding claim 11, Fu, Shi, and Jiang teach the sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet of claim 7. As described in the rejection of claim 7 above, Shi teaches a diffusion alloy RM whereby R (equivalent to RH as claimed) is present in a range of 70.0-99.9wt% (overlaps with x as claimed) and M (equivalent to M1 as claimed) is present as the balance (thus equivalent to y as claimed outside of considerations of boron and “z”). Jiang teaches a similar diffusion alloy source whereby the rare earth element is included at a wt% between 30-90% (overlaps with x as claimed and with Shi) with rationale for specifically including boron at 0-0.9% (or up to 1.1%). Thus, when viewing Shi in combination with Jiang, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to include the rare earth element in the overlapping ranges between Shi and Jiang as known relevant elemental compositions for diffusion sources in preparing a sintered NdFeB magnet by working within a range of 70.0-90%. Overlapping ranges have been held to present a prima facie case of obviousness over the prior art. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to select from the overlapping portion of the range as known elemental compositions suitable for preparing a diffusion alloy source for use in diffusion heat treatment to prepare a sintered NdFeB magnet and arrive at the invention as claimed. Thus, Fu, Shi, and Jiang teach the claimed “The sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet according to claim 7, wherein in the RHMlyBz alloy, x, y, and z satisfy the following relationships: 80% ≤ x ≤ 85%; 0.15% ≤ z ≤ 0.3%; and y = 1-x-z.”.
Regarding claim 12, Fu, Shi, and Jiang teach the sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet of claim 7. Jiang teaches a diffusion alloy which can include both Zr and Ti and discloses specifically when both are included then the mass ratio of Zr and Ti can be “1:99 to 99:1, such as 8:25 or 1:1”. Overlapping ranges have been held to present a prima facie case of obviousness over the prior art. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to select from the overlapping portion of the range as known mass ratios suitable for including both Zr and Ti, such as the disclosed value of 1:1, when preparing a diffusion alloy source in producing a sintered NdFeB magnet and arrive at the invention as claimed. Thus, Fu, Shi, and Jiang teach the claimed “The sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet according to claim 7, wherein in the RHM1yBZ alloy, M1 is any two of Ti, Zr, and Al, wherein the mass ratio of the two elements is 1:1 to 2:1”.
Regarding claim 13, Fu, Shi, and Jiang teach the sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet of claim 7 but do not disclose a specific thickness of a diffusion alloy. Shi teaches preparation of the diffusion alloy as a layer formed around the substrate which can be interpreted as a sheet. In Shi’s provided examples, the alloy layer is formed from particles whose average particle size is 0.1mm-5.0mm, thus the formed layer would be expected to have a thickness within a similar range (and less than 10mm) when melted into a coating layer for diffusion. Shi teaches the importance of forming a uniform layer around the substrate as nonuniformity can cause magnet performance degradation and limited improvement of the function of the magnet. Jiang specifically teaches preparation of the diffusion alloy as a sheet. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to specifically prepare the alloy layer as a sheet, as informed by Jiang, within a thickness that reflects the particle sizing or diameter when coating the substrate for diffusion heat treatment such that the sheet forms a uniform layer around the substrate to improve magnetic performance, as informed by Shi, and arrive at the invention as claimed. Thus, Fu, Shi, and Jiang teach the claimed “
Regarding claim 14, Fu, Shi, and Jiang teach the sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet of claim 7. Fu teaches (paragraph [0133]) that the sintered body (magnet after diffusion heat treatment or magnet without any diffusion heat treatment, thus the substrate) is processed into a magnet with a diameter of 20mm and a sheet thickness of less than 7mm in the direction of magnetic field orientation. Therefore, the substrate has a thickness of 1-30mm in an orientation direction since Fu teaches preparation in examples 1-42 and 45-48 of magnets without diffusion treatment which are effectively just substrates. Thus, Fu, Shi, and Jiang teach the claimed “The sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet according to claim 7, wherein the substrate has a thickness of 1-30 mm in an orientation direction”.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fu et al in view of Shi et al and Jiang et al as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Dong et al (US PGPub 20170062105).
Regarding claim 9, Fu, Shi, and Jiang teach the sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet of claim 7. As explained in the rejection of claim 9 above, Fu teaches appropriate properties for intrinsic coercivity and Br but does not disclose a density. Dong similarly teaches preparation of sintered NdFeB magnets through diffusion heat treatment with overlapping and analogous elemental compositions to Fu, Shi, and Jiang. Dong discloses in paragraph [0067] that the sintered NdFeB magnet density may be 6.0-9.0 g/cm3, preferably 6.5-8.0 g/cm3. In examples 1-3, Dong prepares two sintered NdFeB magnets with densities of 7.6, 7.62 and 7.63 g/cm3. Overlapping ranges have been held to present a prima facie case of obviousness over the prior art. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to select from the overlapping portion of the range, particularly around the disclosed densities hovering around 7.6 g/cm3, as known suitable densities of sintered NdFeB magnets to arrive at the invention as claimed. Thus, Fu, Shi, and Jiang teach the claimed “The sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet according to claim 7, wherein the sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet has an intrinsic coercivity of 21 to 29 kOe; the sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet has a Br of 13.8 to 14.6 kG; or the sintered neodymium-iron-boron magnet has a density of 7.50 to 7.60 g/cm3.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Noa W. F. Grooms whose telephone number is (571)272-9981. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-3:30PM EST.
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, Curtis 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.
/NWFG/Examiner, Art Unit 1759
/MELVIN C. MAYES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights