Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/727,860

ALUMINUM POWDER PRODUCT, METHOD FOR PRODUCING SAME, AND ADDITIVE MANUFACTURED ARTICLE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jul 10, 2024
Examiner
LE, HOA T
Art Unit
1788
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Mitsubishi Materials Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
785 granted / 1080 resolved
+7.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
1125
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
37.3%
-2.7% vs TC avg
§102
29.6%
-10.4% vs TC avg
§112
23.2%
-16.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1080 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 Restriction is required under 35 U.S.C. 121 and 372. This application contains the following inventions or groups of inventions which are not so linked as to form a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1. In accordance with 37 CFR 1.499, applicant is required, in reply to this action, to elect a single invention to which the claims must be restricted. Group I, claims 1-5 and 10, drawn to an aluminum powder. Group II, claims 6-9, drawn to a process of making an aluminum powder product. The groups of inventions listed above do not relate to a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1 because, under PCT Rule 13.2, they lack the same or corresponding special technical features for the following reasons: Group I and II inventions lack unity of invention because the groups do not share the same or corresponding technical feature. The process as claimed is not tailored to make the product of invention I with specific properties as described. During a telephone conversation with Applicant’s Representative, Mitsuhiro Haraguchi, on January 8, 2026, a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of group I, claims 1-5 and 10. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 6-9 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 5 recites the same preamble of claim 1 without any additional claim limitation. Therefore, claim 5 fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 1 upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claims 1, 2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by NANBU (JP-2000/160371). Claim 1: Nanbu teaches coating aluminum powder with a corrosion inhibitor. The coated aluminum exhibits a purity of 99.9% (translation copy, page 5, 2nd paragraph) which indicates the impurity which would have included oxygen is less than 0.1% and thus meets the claimed range of 0.5 mass% or less. The coated aluminum was put to a test by leaving the coated in a solution at pH 8-10 at 20oC for 21 days (translation copy, para. 0030). No aluminum hydroxide was detected (Table 2 and 3, samples 8 and 10). Thus, this test shows equivalent to leaving the aluminum in water at 80C for a mere 12 hours as claimed. The burden is on Applicant to show the contrary. Claim 2: The average particle size of the aluminum is 16 mm (translation copy, page 5, 4th paragraph), which meets the claimed range of 10 µm to 50 µm. Claim 5: The aluminum powder comprises aluminum and aluminum-containing paint (product) (para. 0036). 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. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NANBU in view of NAKAMURA (US-2021/0069785). Nanbu teaches the aluminum powder product as claimed. However, Nanbu fails to teach an additive manufactured article comprising a sintered body of the aluminum powder product. Nakamura teaches a metal sintered body for additive manufacturing article comprising metal particles (para. 0006 and 0023), wherein the metal includes aluminum (Nakamura, para. 0065). Therefore, the POSITA would be motivated by the teaching of Nakamura to utilize the aluminum powder product of Nanbu in making an additive manufacturing article. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3-4 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art references of record fails to teach the specific particle size and corrosion inhibitor as claimed. Nakamura teaches particles size of metal particles for additive manufacturing articles; however, the average particle size is 4 mm or smaller which falls outside the claimed range. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOA (Holly) LE whose telephone number is (571)272-1511. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 10:00 am to 7:00 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, Alicia Chevalier can be reached at 571-272-1490. 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. /HOA (Holly) LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 10, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599965
NANOMETRIC COPPER FORMULATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12589929
RECYCLABLE BLANKS AND CONTAINERS MADE THEREFROM HAVING CONTROLLED FLUID PERMEABILITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12576611
Nonwoven Fabrics Suitable for Medical Applications
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569885
POWER PLANT BOILER SAND COMPRISING DISCARDED FOUNDRY SAND, USE OF POWER PLANT BOILER SAND, METHOD FOR PRODUCING POWER PLANT BOILER SAND AND APPARATUS FOR PRODUCING POWER PLANT BOILER SAND
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569814
SUPER-WET SURFACE AND PREPARATION METHOD THEREFOR AND APPLICATION THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+13.0%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1080 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month