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 .
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-17, in the reply filed on 8/1/25 is acknowledged. Claims 18-20 have been withdrawn while claims 21-22 have been added. Claims 10 and 14 have been canceled. Claims 1-9,11-13,15-17 and 21-22 remain in the application for prosecution thereof.
Considering the amendment filed 1/8/26, the 35 USC 112 and 103 rejections have been withdrawn. However, the following rejections have been necessitated by the amendment.
The Examiner attempted 2 phone calls to overcome the 35 USC 112 rejections but never heard back. Hence, the rejection is being sent out for response.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 2-9,11,12 and 21 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.
Regarding claim 2, the term “the processing atmosphere” lacks antecedent basis as there is no recited “processing atmosphere in step (A)”. Should this be step (a)? Clarification is requested.
Regarding claim 3, the term “the reducing gas is supplied” lacks antecedent basis as no reducing gas is supplied in (A)? Should this be step (a)? Clarification is requested.
Regarding claim 5, the term “the processing atmosphere” lacks antecedent basis as there is no recited “processing atmosphere in step (A)”. Should this be step (a)? Clarification is requested.
Regarding claim 7, the term “the reducing gas” lacks antecedent basis as no reducing gas in (A) only in (a). Clarification is requested.
Regarding claim 8, the claims is confusing as should this be for (B) not for (A)? Clarifications is requested.
Regarding claims 4,6,9,11,12, and 21, these claims are rejected as being based upon a rejected base claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1,13,15-17 and 22 are allowed.
Claims 4-9,11,12 and 21 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.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-9,11-13 and 15-22 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
The rejections have been withdrawn, however, the following 35 USC 112 rejections have been necessitated by the amendment.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN K TALBOT whose telephone number is (571)272-1428. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 7-4PM.
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, MICHAEL CLEVELAND can be reached at 571-272-1418. 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.
/BRIAN K TALBOT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1715