Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/728,077

RE-USED ALLOY POWDER FOR ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING PRODUCT

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jul 10, 2024
Priority
Jan 14, 2022 — JP 2022-004110 +1 more
Examiner
LE, HOA T
Art Unit
1788
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Proterial Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 0m
Est. Remaining
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allowance Rate
787 granted / 1084 resolved
+7.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
1134
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
68.6%
+28.6% vs TC avg
§102
18.6%
-21.4% vs TC avg
§112
10.4%
-29.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1084 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. 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 1-3, 5 and 10-12 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. In claim 1, the phrase “near an outermost surface” renders the claim indefinite because the term “near” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “near” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Here, the instant specification fails to define what distance range would constitute “near” the outermost surface, and thus the scope of the claim cannot be ascertainable. Other claims are deemed indefinite in view of their dependence on claim 1. Response to Arguments The amendment which recites the content of oxygen in the alloy powder being at least 0.031 and the oxygen film comprises mainly Ni has overcome the rejection. None of the prior art references of record, singly or combined, teaches a Ni-based alloy powder for additive manufacturing comprising more than 0.03 wt% of oxygen and an oxide film wherein the oxide film containing mostly nickel is next or nearest to the outermost surface. Daigo limits the oxygen to 0.03 wt% or less and the metal in the oxide film on the surface is mainly chromium. Other references that teach a Ni-based alloy powder comprising oxygen content of larger than 0.03 wt% does not teach an oxide film in the powder. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 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
Oct 01, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Dec 07, 2025
Interview Requested
Dec 16, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 27, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 30, 2025
Response Filed
May 05, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12637601
ABRASIVE ARTICLE INCLUDING SHAPED ABRASIVE PARTICLES
2y 2m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12630695
RESIN COMPOSITION, ACOUSTIC MEMBER, ULTRASOUND TRANSDUCER, ULTRASOUND PROBE, AND ULTRASOUND DIAGNOSTIC APPARATUS
3y 11m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12624221
COMPOSITION FOR COATING AN OVERHEAD CONDUCTOR
3y 11m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12624727
Ceramic Ball Material comprising a band-portion over surface of a spherical portion, and Method For Manufacturing Ceramic Ball
2y 10m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12624728
CERAMIC BALL MATERIAL, METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING CERAMIC BALL USING SAME, AND CERAMIC BALL
2y 2m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+12.6%)
2y 11m (~1y 0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1084 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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