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 Group I: claims 1-12 in the reply filed on 6/19/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 13-19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/19/2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 1, “method of claim 1” should read –method of claim 1, –.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-12 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 1 recites the limitation “pure Ti metal or elemental Ti,” which renders the claim indefinite, as it is unclear what the distinction between “pure Ti metal” and “elemental Ti” is. Is “pure Ti metal” not “elemental Ti” and vice versa? Claims 2-12 are dependent on claim 1 and are thus also rejected for the same reason.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “precipitation hardening by precipitates of the compound of aluminum with the alloying element and dissolved TiC,” which renders the claim indefinite, because it is unclear how precipitation hardening is performed by precipitates of the compound of aluminum with the alloying element and dissolved TiC. For the purposes of examination, claim 8 is given the broadest reasonable interpretation such that the limitation “precipitation hardening by precipitates of the compound of aluminum with the alloying element and dissolved TiC” is interpreted as –precipitation hardening by forming precipitates of the compound of aluminum with the alloying element and dissolved TiC–.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-12 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 1, the prior art fails to disclose or fairly suggest the method for manufacturing a structural component as recited. In particular, the closest prior art, Wang et al. (US 2019/0194785), hereinafter “Wang,” teaches a method for manufacturing a structural component, the method comprising reacting a salt mixture comprising K2TiF6-KBF4 with molten aluminum to form a first melt, casting an ingot with the first melt, remelting the ingot to form a second melt, forming a powder from the second melt using an atomization process, and fabricating the component utilizing the powder in an additive manufacturing process, wherein the ingot and the powder each comprise an aluminum matrix that contains dispersions of TiB2 particles and Al3Ti particles, the component is a metal matrix composite comprising an aluminum matrix that contains dispersions of TiB2 particles and Al3Ti particles, hwere wherein the metal matrix composite may also include particles of an intermetallic compound of aluminum and at least one alloying element (Abstract, [0007]-[0012], [0019], claims 1-3). However, Wang fails to each or adequately suggest reacting graphite to form the first melt and wherein the cast ingot has an Al-Ti-C metal matrix composite containing TiC particles, as required by claim 1. Thus, claim 1 is distinct over the teachings of the prior art. Claims 2-12 further limit the subject matter of claim 1 and are thus also distinct over the teachings of the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY M LIANG whose telephone number is (571)272-0483. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at (571)272-1177. 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.
/ANTHONY M LIANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights