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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Atarashi in US5985466.
Regarding Claim 1: Atarashi teaches a method for producing magnetic particles (See Column 3, Lines 4-8). Atarashi teaches that a base particle (core) may be a magnetic particle of iron (See Column 6, Lines 59-63; See Examples 3 and 5-8). Atarashi teaches that a multilayer film is created on the base particle by dispersing the base particle into a solution of a metal alkoxide, the metal alkoxide is then hydrolyzed to obtain a metal oxide and deposit a film of the metal oxide on the base particle. Heat treating the dried metal oxide film to form a heat treated metal oxide film. Finally the process is repeated at least one more time to form a multilayered film (See Column 4, Lines 13-48). Thus Atarashi teaches a step of forming a second insulating coating film on a core made of a magnetic material and a step of forming a first insulating coating film on the second insulating coating film formed on the core made of a magnetic material (first repetition). The process of making each of the films of Atarashi is by a sol-gel reaction as is described at Column 7, Lines 46-548. Atarashi shows Examples 5-8, which each meet all of the claim limitations.
Regarding Claim 2: Atarashi teaches that a surfactant may be added to the mixture being hydrolyzed to reduce aggregation (See Column 8, Lines 50-51). The mixture being hydrolyzed includes the base particle (magnetic particle) and the metal alkoxide being hydrolyzed in a solvent(See Column 4, Lines 15-19). As both the first and second layer are provided through hydrolysis, such a surfactant may be added to the mixture being hydrolyzed in either or both steps.
Regarding Claim 4 and 6: Atarashi teaches that the second insulating coating film is formed of a material different from that of the first insulating coating film (See Column 7, Lines 18-26 and Examples 5-8).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 3, 5, and 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atarashi in 5985466 as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of Domichi in JP2001011342.
Regarding Claim 3 and 5: Atarashi teaches a method for producing magnetic particles, wherein the method of Atarashi includes a first and second sol-gel reaction step for forming a first and second insulating coating film on a core made of magnetic material (See above). The process of Atarashi may include providing surfactants to avoid aggregation during the sol-gel process.
Atarashi teaches that the step of forming either layer includes a step of mixing the core made of magnetic material with a metal alkoxide and a surfactant (See Above), but is silent in terms of the addition of a silane coupling agent during the creation of the first insulating coating film (outer layer).
However, Domichi also teaches the creation of silica coated pigments, wherein the outer layer of the pigment of Domichi is also formed from SiO2 applied through a sol-gel process (See Paragraph beginning “In the sol-gel reaction in the method of the present invention). Domichi teaches that by adding a silane coupling agent to the sol-gel mixture (See Paragraph 11), the surface of the powder can be provided with alkyl groups and the flowability of the pigment can be improved (See Paragraph 4). It would have been obvious to those of ordinary skill in the art to provide the silane coupling agents of Domichi to the sol-gel mixture of Atarashi during the creation of the outer shell of their composite structure as both Atarashi in view of Domichi are drawn to the creation of pigment materials having a silica shell. Those of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to add the silane coupling agent of Domichi to the sol gel mixture of Atarashi in order to improve the flowability of the pigment of Atarashi.
Regarding Claim 7-8: Atarashi teaches that the second insulating coating film is formed of a material different from that of the first insulating coating film (See Column 7, Lines 18-26 and Examples 5-8). It is noted that Atarashi’s coating is not limited to only two shells and may be any number of alternating shells (See Examples).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW E HOBAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3585. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30am-6:00pm.
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.
/Matthew E. Hoban/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights