Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/596,532

Method of Making Copper-Nickel Alloy Foams

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 05, 2024
Examiner
MORALES, RICARDO D
Art Unit
1738
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Cellmo Materials Innovation Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
350 granted / 431 resolved
+16.2% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+17.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
463
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
56.6%
+16.6% vs TC avg
§102
21.5%
-18.5% vs TC avg
§112
19.2%
-20.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 431 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 Election/Restrictions Claims 1-3 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 09/30/2025. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 4-5, 8, 10-15 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US20170025683A1) in view of Katay et al. (WO2017037482A2). Regarding Claim 4, Park teaches a method comprising: mixing copper oxide powder and nickel oxide powder to obtain a slurry solution; freeze casting the slurry solution of copper oxide powder and nickel oxide powder [0012, 0014]; reducing or sintering, or both, the freeze-casted slurry of copper oxide and nickel oxide powder at temperature of about 800 degrees C or more plus or minus 200 degrees, reading on the claimed range of about 800-1000 degrees C [0020]; and after the reducing and sintering [0017], producing a three dimensionally connected foam [0009]; Regarding the limitation of copper- nickel alloy foam having a composition of Cu9Ni1, Cu7Ni3, Cu5Ni5, Cu3Ni7, or CulNi9, while Park teaches metal oxides of Cu and Ni can be added together in the slurry, Park does not teach the claimed ratio of Cu:Ni used. However, Kaptay teaches a method of forming metal foams of Ni and Cu, and teaches NiO and Cu2O can be added in a molar ratio of 2:1 which lies inside of the claimed ratios of Cu:Ni of 9:1, 7:3, 5:5, 3:7, and 1:9 (Page 9, Lines 10-15). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use a Ni/Cu composition in a slurry which would be expected to yield a range merely close to the claimed ranges to achieve the predictable result of forming a Ni/Cu metal foam composite under the expectation that products formed by identical methods have similar properties (or compositions) (See MPEP 2112.01(I)). In the case where a range taught by the prior art lies inside or is merely close to a range taught by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (See MPEP 2144.05(I)). Regarding Claim 5, wherein the nickel oxide powder has an average size of about 10 nanometers to about 1000 nanometers, and the copper oxide powder has an average size of about 10 nanometers to about 1000 nanometers; Kaptay teaches the oxides have a particle size of 0.1-100 microns (100 nm to 100,000 nm), (Page 5, Lines 24-25) overlapping with the claimed range. In the case where a claimed range overlaps with a range taught by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (See MPEP 2144.05(I)). Regarding Claim 8, Park teaches stirring and sonication is used for the slurry [0019] but is silent regarding the stirring occurring for about 10 minutes to about 30 minutes; and after the stirring, sonicating the slurry solution for from about 30 minutes to about 60 minutes; however, an ordinary artisan would be motivated to stir and sonicate for a period such as claimed for the purpose of ensuring both that the slurry is well dispersed while minimizing the amount of time it takes to complete. Regarding Claims 10-11, Park teaches drying by freezing the slurry at a temperature of -10 degrees Celsius to obtain a foam green body of a composition of copper oxide and nickel oxide. [0055] Regarding Claim 12, The method of claim 10 comprising: reducing the foam green body of the composition copper oxide and nickel oxide at a temperature of 250 degrees Celsius in a 5 percent argon and hydrogen gas mixture. (See 5% hydrogen mixture gas in [0020] Interpreted to be Ar based from [0023]) [0056] Regarding Claim 13, after reducing, sintering the foam green body of the composition of copper oxide and nickel oxide at a temperature of 800 Celsius in an about 5 percent argon and hydrogen gas mixture, thereby transforming the foam green body of the composition of copper oxide in the copper-nickel alloy foam. (See 5% hydrogen mixture gas in [0020]) [0056] Regarding Claim 14, Park teaches the copper-nickel alloy foam comprises a three- dimensional pore structure with uniformly distributed pores having diameters from about several hundred nanometers to several microns [0040] overlapping with the claimed range of 2 microns to about 100 microns. In the case where a claimed range overlaps with a range taught by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (See MPEP 2144.05(I)). Regarding Claim 15, Park teaches the copper-nickel alloy foam comprises a three- dimensional pore structure with uniformly distributed pores having diameters from about several hundred nanometers to several microns [0040] overlapping with the claimed pore range of about 10 nanometers to about 400 nanometers in diameter; In the case where a claimed range overlaps with a range taught by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (See MPEP 2144.05(I)). Claims 6-7 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US20170025683A1) in view of Katay et al. (WO2017037482A2) as applied to claim 4 above, in further view of Hyungyung et al. ("Morphological Study of Directionally Freeze-Cast Nickel Foams."). Regarding Claims 6-7, wherein copper oxide powder and nickel oxide powder are mixed in water or other liquid solvent with a binder and a dispersant; Park teaches the powder slurry contained PVA binder in water solvent [0055] but did not teach the use of a dispersant. However, Hyungyung teaches a method of freeze casting nickel foams by reduction and sintering from NiO powder and teaches the use of dispersant can form thinner walls and increase the fraction of closed pores in the foam (abstract) and to simply improve dispersion of the dendrites during freeze casting (Introduction) and teaches sodium polyacrylate powder dispersant was added to the water/binder slurry (Page 2, Col. 2, Lines 1-7). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to add a dispersant to the freeze casting slurry of Park for the purpose of increasing dispersion of dendrites in the slurry and solidification, and to form thinner walls and increase the fraction of closed pores in the foam. Claims 16, 19 and 23-26 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US20170025683A1) in view of Katay et al. (WO2017037482A2) in further view of Bagge-Hansen et al. (US20160368047A1). Regarding Claims 16 and 19, Park does not teach that the copper oxide powder has an average size about 40-80 nm. However, Bagge-Hansen teaches a method of making porous metal material via freeze casting where an aerosolized solution of copper salt [0058] and where the foam can comprise a nanoporous material with an average diameter of 100 nm or less or 50 nm or less [0067] for the purpose of forming a nano-architecture which offers high specific surface area and ultralow density materials [0002]. Therefore, an ordinary artisan seeking to form a metallic foam from the copper oxide mixture of Park, would seek to use a copper oxide powder with an average size in the claimed range for the purpose of achieving a nanoporous metallic foam for the purpose of achieving a high specific surface area and ultralow density material. (See claim 4 rejection for additional limitations) Regarding Claim 23, Park teaches stirring and sonication is used for the slurry [0019] but is silent regarding the stirring occurring for about 10 minutes to about 30 minutes; and after the stirring, sonicating the slurry solution for from about 30 minutes to about 60 minutes; however, an ordinary artisan would be motivated to stir and sonicate for a period such as claimed for the purpose of ensuring both that the slurry is well dispersed while minimizing the amount of time it takes to complete. Regarding Claim 24, Park teaches drying by freezing the slurry at a temperature of -10 degrees Celsius to obtain a foam green body of a composition of copper oxide and nickel oxide. [0055] Regarding Claim 25, The method of claim 10 comprising: reducing the foam green body of the composition copper oxide and nickel oxide at a temperature of 250 degrees Celsius in a 5 percent argon and hydrogen gas mixture. (See 5% hydrogen mixture gas in [0020] Interpreted to be Ar based from [0023]) [0056] sintering the freeze-casted slurry of copper oxide and nickel oxide powder at temperature of about 800 degrees C or more plus or minus 200 degrees, reading on the claimed range of about 700-1100 degrees C [0020]; and after the reducing and sintering [0017] in 5% hydrogen mixture gas, producing a three dimensionally connected foam [0009] Regarding Claim 26, Park teaches the copper-nickel alloy foam comprises a three- dimensional pore structure with uniformly distributed pores having diameters from about several hundred nanometers to several microns [0040] overlapping with the claimed pore range of about 10 nanometers to about 400 nanometers in diameter; In the case where a claimed range overlaps with a range taught by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (See MPEP 2144.05(I)). Claims 21-22 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US20170025683A1) in view of Katay et al. (WO2017037482A2) in further view of Bagge-Hansen et al. (US20160368047A1) as applied to claim 19 above, in further view of Hyungyung et al. ("Morphological Study of Directionally Freeze-Cast Nickel Foams."). Regarding Claims 21-22, wherein copper oxide powder and nickel oxide powder are mixed in water or other liquid solvent with a binder and a dispersant; Park teaches the powder slurry contained PVA binder in water solvent [0055] but did not teach the use of a dispersant. However, Hyungyung teaches a method of freeze casting nickel foams by reduction and sintering from NiO powder and teaches the use of dispersant can form thinner walls and increase the fraction of closed pores in the foam (abstract) and to simply improve dispersion of the dendrites during freeze casting (Introduction) and teaches sodium polyacrylate powder dispersant was added to the water/binder slurry (Page 2, Col. 2, Lines 1-7). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to add a dispersant to the freeze casting slurry of Park for the purpose of increasing dispersion of dendrites in the slurry and solidification, and to form thinner walls and increase the fraction of closed pores in the foam. Claims 9, 23 and 27 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US20170025683A1) in view of Katay et al. (WO2017037482A2) in further view of Hyungyung et al. ("Morphological Study of Directionally Freeze-Cast Nickel Foams.") in further view of Nabaway (US9114457B2). Regarding Claims 9, 23 and 27, Park teaches a method comprising: mixing copper oxide powder and nickel oxide powder to obtain a slurry solution; freeze casting the slurry solution of copper oxide powder and nickel oxide powder [0012, 0014]; reducing the foam green body of the composition copper oxide and nickel oxide at a temperature of 250 degrees Celsius in a 5 percent argon and hydrogen gas mixture. (See 5% hydrogen mixture gas in [0020] Interpreted to be Ar based from [0023]) [0056] sintering the freeze-casted slurry of copper oxide and nickel oxide powder at temperature of about 800 degrees C or more plus or minus 200 degrees, reading on the claimed range of about 700-1100 degrees C [0020]; and after the reducing and sintering [0017] in 5% hydrogen mixture, producing a three dimensionally connected foam [0009] Regarding the limitation of copper- nickel alloy foam having a composition of Cu9Ni1, Cu7Ni3, Cu5Ni5, Cu3Ni7, or CulNi9, while Park teaches metal oxides of Cu and Ni can be added together in the slurry, Park does not teach the claimed ratio of Cu:Ni used. However, Kaptay teaches a method of forming metal foams of Ni and Cu, and teaches NiO and Cu2O can be added in a molar ratio of 2:1 which lies inside of the claimed ratios of Cu:Ni of 9:1, 7:3, 5:5, 3:7, and 1:9 (Page 9, Lines 10-15). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use a Ni/Cu composition in a slurry which would be expected to yield a range merely close to the claimed ranges to achieve the predictable result of forming a Ni/Cu metal foam composite under the expectation that products formed by identical methods have similar properties (or compositions) (See MPEP 2112.01(I)). In the case where a range taught by the prior art lies inside or is merely close to a range taught by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (See MPEP 2144.05(I)). Park teaches stirring and sonication is used for the slurry [0019] but is silent regarding the stirring occurring for about 10 minutes to about 30 minutes; and after the stirring, sonicating the slurry solution for from about 30 minutes to about 60 minutes; however, an ordinary artisan would be motivated to stir and sonicate for a period such as claimed for the purpose of ensuring both that the slurry is well dispersed while minimizing the amount of time it takes to complete. Park teaches different metal oxide powders can be added in a slurry with binder but does not teach mechanically mixing the copper oxide powder and nickel oxide powder for from about 10 minutes to about 60 minutes to obtain a uniform particle mixing before mixing with water, binder, and dispersant. However, Nabaway teaches a method of preparing a metallic foam from powdered material (abstract) and teaches metal and ceramic powder can be provided by mechanically milling (Col. 4, Lines 25-35) before forming a slurry (Col. 4, Lines 65-67). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to mechanically mix the metal oxide powders of Park as claimed before forming a slurry for the purpose of predictable forming a well dispersed slurry to form a metal foam. Park teaches drying by freezing the slurry at a temperature of -10 degrees Celsius to obtain a foam green body of a composition of copper oxide and nickel oxide. [0055] Regarding the limitation of copper oxide powder and nickel oxide powder are mixed in water or other liquid solvent with a binder and a dispersant; Park teaches the powder slurry contained PVA binder in water solvent [0055] but did not teach the use of a dispersant. However, Hyungyung teaches a method of freeze casting nickel foams by reduction and sintering from NiO powder and teaches the use of dispersant can form thinner walls and increase the fraction of closed pores in the foam (abstract) and to simply improve dispersion of the dendrites during freeze casting (Introduction) and teaches sodium polyacrylate powder dispersant was added to the water/binder slurry (Page 2, Col. 2, Lines 1-7). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to add a dispersant to the freeze casting slurry of Park for the purpose of increasing dispersion of dendrites in the slurry and solidification, and to form thinner walls and increase the fraction of closed pores in the foam. Park teaches different metal oxide powders can be added in a slurry with binder but does not teach mechanically mixing the copper oxide powder and nickel oxide powder for from about 10 minutes to about 60 minutes to obtain a uniform particle mixing before mixing with water, binder, and dispersant. However, Nabaway teaches a method of preparing a metallic foam from powdered material (abstract) and teaches metal and ceramic powder can be provided by mechanically milling (Col. 4, Lines 25-35) before forming a slurry (Col. 4, Lines 65-67). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to mechanically mix the metal oxide powders of Park as claimed before forming a slurry for the purpose of predictable forming a well dispersed slurry to form a metal foam. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 17-18 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding Claims 17-18 and 20, Kaptay and Park while teaching a method of freeze casting a metallic mixture of nickel and copper oxide where nickel oxide has a particle size of 0.1-100 microns followed by reduction and sintering; do not teach or suggest nickel oxide powder in the claimed size range of about 10-20 nm, significantly outside of the range of the prior art. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICARDO D MORALES whose telephone number is (571)272-6691. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9 am- 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, Sally Merkling can be reached at 5712726297. 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. /RICARDO D MORALES/Examiner, Art Unit 1738
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 05, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599970
DEVICE AND METHOD FOR ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING UNDER PROTECTIVE GAS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599964
BONDING COMPOSITION, CONDUCTOR BONDING STRUCTURE, AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595537
TIN BLACKPLATE FOR PROCESSING AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595526
HOT-ROLLED STEEL SHEET FOR HYPER TRAIN TUBE, AND MANUFACTURING METHOD FOR SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595539
QT HEAT TREATED HIGH CARBON HOT ROLLED STEEL SHEET, HIGH CARBON COLD ROLLED STEEL SHEET, QT HEAT TREATED HIGH CARBON COLD ROLLED STEEL SHEET, AND MANUFACTURING METHODS THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+17.0%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 431 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month