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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending and are currently under examination.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rios et al. (US 9,963,770).
In regard to claim 1, Rios et al. (‘770) discloses aluminum-cerium-iron alloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (column 11 and claims, particularly 27).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Rios et al. (‘770)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Ce
5 – 12
about 6 – 30
about 6 – 12
Fe
0.1 – 1
0 – 0.6
0.1 – 0.6
Al
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of cerium and iron in the aluminum base alloys disclosed by Rios et al. (‘770) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of cerium and iron from the amounts disclosed by Rios et al. (‘770) because Rios et al. (‘770) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select cerium from the group of cerium, lanthanum and mischmetal as one having ordinary skill in the art could clearly envisage the result of each of these species being alloyed individually. MPEP 2144.08.
With respect to the recitation “comprising” in claim 1, the Examiner notes that this recitation would include additional, unrecited elements. MPEP 2111.03.
In regard to claim 2, Rios et al. (‘770) discloses up to 0.25 weight percent titanium, which encompasses the range of the instant invention (claim 27).
With respect to the recitation “wherein yield strength at 150°C ranges from 62 to 80 MPa” in claim 3, Rios et al. (‘770) discloses a substantially similar composition. Therefore, the claimed yield strengths would be expected. MPEP 2112.01 I.
With respect to the recitation “wherein elongation at 150°C ranges from 10 to 26%” in claim 4, Rios et al. (‘770) discloses a substantially similar composition. Therefore, the claimed elongations would be expected. MPEP 2112.01 I.
In regard to claim 5, Rios et al. (‘770) discloses aluminum-cerium-iron alloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (column 11 and claims, particularly 27).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Rios et al. (‘770)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Ce
10
about 6 – 30
10
Fe
0.1
0 – 0.6
0.1
Al
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of cerium and iron in the aluminum base alloys disclosed by Rios et al. (‘770) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of cerium and iron from the amounts disclosed by Rios et al. (‘770) because Rios et al. (‘770) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select cerium from the group of cerium, lanthanum and mischmetal as one having ordinary skill in the art could clearly envisage the result of each of these species being alloyed individually. MPEP 2144.08.
In regard to claim 6, Rios et al. (‘770) discloses aluminum-cerium-iron alloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (column 11 and claims, particularly 27).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Rios et al. (‘770)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Ce
7.5
about 6 – 30
7.5
Fe
0.2
0 – 0.6
0.2
Al
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of cerium and iron in the aluminum base alloys disclosed by Rios et al. (‘770) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of cerium and iron from the amounts disclosed by Rios et al. (‘770) because Rios et al. (‘770) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select cerium from the group of cerium, lanthanum and mischmetal as one having ordinary skill in the art could clearly envisage the result of each of these species being alloyed individually. MPEP 2144.08.
In regard to claim 7, the content of cerium, lanthanum and mischmetal in the aluminum based alloys may be as low as about 5 weight percent according to Rios et al. (‘770), which would overlap or be close enough to 4.5 weight percent cerium as claimed to establish prima facie obviousness (column 11). MPEP 2144.05 I. The claims suggest up to 0.6 weight percent iron, which would encompass the range of the instant invention.
In regard to claim 8, Rios et al. (‘770) discloses cast aluminum-cerium-iron alloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (column 11 and claims, particularly 27).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Rios et al. (‘770)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Ce
5 – 12
about 6 – 30
about 6 – 12
Fe
0.1 – 1
0 – 0.6
0.1 – 0.6
Al
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of cerium and iron in the aluminum base alloys disclosed by Rios et al. (‘770) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of cerium and iron from the amounts disclosed by Rios et al. (‘770) because Rios et al. (‘770) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select cerium from the group of cerium, lanthanum and mischmetal as one having ordinary skill in the art could clearly envisage the result of each of these species being alloyed individually. MPEP 2144.08.
With respect to the recitation “comprising” in claim 8, the Examiner notes that this recitation would include additional, unrecited elements. MPEP 2111.03.
In regard to claim 9, Rios et al. (‘770) discloses cast aluminum-cerium-iron alloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (column 11 and claims, particularly 27).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Rios et al. (‘770)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Ce
10
about 6 – 30
10
Fe
0.1
0 – 0.6
0.1
Al
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of cerium and iron in the aluminum base alloys disclosed by Rios et al. (‘770) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of cerium and iron from the amounts disclosed by Rios et al. (‘770) because Rios et al. (‘770) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select cerium from the group of cerium, lanthanum and mischmetal as one having ordinary skill in the art could clearly envisage the result of each of these species being alloyed individually. MPEP 2144.08.
In regard to claim 10, Rios et al. (‘770) discloses cast aluminum-cerium-iron alloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (column 11 and claims, particularly 27).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Rios et al. (‘770)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Ce
7.5
about 6 – 30
7.5
Fe
0.2
0 – 0.6
0.2
Al
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of cerium and iron in the aluminum base alloys disclosed by Rios et al. (‘770) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of cerium and iron from the amounts disclosed by Rios et al. (‘770) because Rios et al. (‘770) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select cerium from the group of cerium, lanthanum and mischmetal as one having ordinary skill in the art could clearly envisage the result of each of these species being alloyed individually. MPEP 2144.08.
In regard to claim 11, the content of cerium, lanthanum and mischmetal in the aluminum based alloys may be as low as about 5 weight percent according to Rios et al. (‘770), which would overlap or be close enough to 4.5 weight percent cerium as claimed to establish prima facie obviousness (column 11). MPEP 2144.05 I. The claims suggest up to 0.6 weight percent iron, which would encompass the range of the instant invention.
In regard to claim 12, Rios et al. (‘770) discloses up to 0.25 weight percent titanium, which encompasses the range of the instant invention (claim 27).
With respect to the recitation “wherein yield strength at 150°C ranges from 62 to 80 MPa” in claim 13, Rios et al. (‘770) discloses a substantially similar composition. Therefore, the claimed yield strengths would be expected. MPEP 2112.01 I.
With respect to the recitation “wherein elongation at 150°C ranges from 10 to 26%” in claim 14, Rios et al. (‘770) discloses a substantially similar composition. Therefore, the claimed elongations would be expected. MPEP 2112.01 I.
In regard to claim 15, Rios et al. (‘770) discloses aluminum-cerium-iron alloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (column 11 and claims, particularly 27).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Rios et al. (‘770)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Ce
5 – 12
about 6 – 30
about 6 – 12
Fe
0.1 – 1
0 – 0.6
0.1 – 0.6
Al
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of cerium and iron in the aluminum base alloys disclosed by Rios et al. (‘770) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of cerium and iron from the amounts disclosed by Rios et al. (‘770) because Rios et al. (‘770) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select cerium from the group of cerium, lanthanum and mischmetal as one having ordinary skill in the art could clearly envisage the result of each of these species being alloyed individually. MPEP 2144.08.
With respect to the recitation “comprising” in claim 15, the Examiner notes that this recitation would include additional, unrecited elements. MPEP 2111.03.
Wit respect to the recitation “castable” in claim 15, Rios et al. (‘770) discloses wherein the alloy would be cast so obviously the alloy would be castable (claim 27).
With respect to the recitation “a ternary eutectic mixture”, while this recitation is not specified in claim 27, it would be expected due to a substantially similar composition.
In regard to claim 16, Rios et al. (‘770) discloses cast aluminum-cerium-iron alloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (column 11 and claims, particularly 27).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Rios et al. (‘770)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Ce
10
about 6 – 30
10
Fe
0.1
0 – 0.6
0.1
Al
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of cerium and iron in the aluminum base alloys disclosed by Rios et al. (‘770) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of cerium and iron from the amounts disclosed by Rios et al. (‘770) because Rios et al. (‘770) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select cerium from the group of cerium, lanthanum and mischmetal as one having ordinary skill in the art could clearly envisage the result of each of these species being alloyed individually. MPEP 2144.08.
In regard to claim 17, Rios et al. (‘770) discloses cast aluminum-cerium-iron alloys having compositions relative to that of the instant invention as set forth below (column 11 and claims, particularly 27).
Element
Instant Claim
(weight percent)
Rios et al. (‘770)
(weight percent)
Overlap
Ce
7.5
about 6 – 30
7.5
Fe
0.2
0 – 0.6
0.2
Al
Balance
Balance
Balance
The Examiner notes that the amounts of cerium and iron in the aluminum base alloys disclosed by Rios et al. (‘770) overlap the amounts of the instant invention, which is prima facie evidence of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 I. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select the claimed amounts of cerium and iron from the amounts disclosed by Rios et al. (‘770) because Rios et al. (‘770) discloses the same utility throughout the disclosed ranges.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the instant invention to select cerium from the group of cerium, lanthanum and mischmetal as one having ordinary skill in the art could clearly envisage the result of each of these species being alloyed individually. MPEP 2144.08.
In regard to claim 18, the content of cerium, lanthanum and mischmetal in the aluminum based alloys may be as low as about 5 weight percent according to Rios et al. (‘770), which would overlap or be close enough to 4.5 weight percent cerium as claimed to establish prima facie obviousness (column 11). MPEP 2144.05 I. The claims suggest up to 0.6 weight percent iron, which would encompass the range of the instant invention.
With respect to the recitation “wherein yield strength at 150°C ranges from 62 to 80 MPa” in claim 19, Rios et al. (‘770) discloses a substantially similar composition. Therefore, the claimed yield strengths would be expected. MPEP 2112.01 I.
With respect to the recitation “wherein elongation at 150°C ranges from 10 to 26%” in claim 20, Rios et al. (‘770) discloses a substantially similar composition. Therefore, the claimed elongations would be expected. MPEP 2112.01 I.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Czerwinski, Frank. "Cerium in aluminum alloys." Journal of materials science 55.1 (2020): 24-72.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jessee Roe whose telephone number is (571)272-5938. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 7:30 am to 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, Curt 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.
/JESSEE R ROE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights