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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Orimo et al. (US 2018/0374619 – previously cited).
Considering claim 1, Orimo teaches a magnetic material including a soft metallic grain containing Fe and a multilayer oxide film (abstract). The grain comprises a core of Fe and one or more of Si, Zr, etc. (Paragraph 20) (e.g. a core of an optional Fe-Si alloy) with an outermost coating (F13) of Fe2SiO4 (Fig. 1; Paragraph 70).
While not expressly teaching a singular example of the instantly claimed alloy particle this would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date in view of the teachings of Orimo as this is considered a conventionally known combination of a core comprising Fe and Si with a Fe2SiO4 coating known to offer excellent insulation properties (Paragraph 33) and one would have had a reasonable expectation of success. Further, while not expressly teaching the claimed XRD diffraction ratio of FeO/ Fe2SiO4, Orimo teaches an outermost coating only of Fe2SiO4 (e.g. silent regarding the presence of FeO) and therefore is expected to meet the claimed ratio due to the recitation of “or lower” as ~zero is encompassed by the claimed range. See MPEP §§ 2111.01, 2111.03, 2112.01 and 2144.05.
Considering claim 2, Orimo teaches a magnetic core of an aggregate of the soft metallic material (Paragraph 21).
Considering claims 3-5, Orimo teaches where the core is formed into a coil and an element and devices (Paragraph 146).
Considering claims 6-7, Orimo teaches where the core is an electromagnetic motor and generator (Paragraph 146).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11 March 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments are addressed as follows:
Applicant argues that Orimo is not silent regarding the presence of FeO as set forth by the examiner as Orimo teaches FexOy for the first oxide layer which may encompass FeO (remarks p.5, 1st full paragraph). This is not persuasive as Paragraph 68 of Orimo sets forth where FexOy is typically Fe2O3 or Fe3O4 (Paragraph 68) indicating these as acceptable materials for the first layer indicating that FeO is not a required material.
Applicant argues that the examiner failed to set forth any rational underpinning to conclude obviousness (remarks p.5, 2nd full paragraph). This is not persuasive as Orimo teaches where the outermost coating is Fe2SiO4 (Paragraph 70), SixOy for the middle coating (Paragraph 69), and Fe2O3 or Fe3O4 for the inner coating (Paragraph 68). Therefore, this renders obvious the instant claims as this is considered a combination of conventionally known elements (e.g. materials for each layer) known to afford a magnetic material with improved insulation properties (Paragraph 9). See MPEP 2143 (I)(A).
Applicant argues that the Fe2SiO4 set forth by Orimo is not expressly for the coating (remarks p.6, continuing paragraph). This is not persuasive as Orimo states in Paragraph 70, “Fe, Si, and O contained in the third layer may exist in the form of Fe2SiO4, for example.” This reasonably teaches this material for the third oxide layer.
Applicant argues that no reasonable expectation of success has been set forth by the examiner (remarks p.6, continuing paragraph). This is not persuasive as Orimo positively sets forth the materials for the layers and therefore one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that each of the disclosed materials as acceptable to form the coated powder and would successfully form said coated powder.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 SETH DUMBRIS whose telephone number is (571)272-5105. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:00 AM - 3:30 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, Humera Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-0604. 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.
SETH DUMBRIS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1784
/SETH DUMBRIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Prosecution Insights