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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 22 August 2024 and 5 December 2025 were considered by the examiner.
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 1-9 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 regards to independent claim 1, this claim sets forth the term “a hard phase comprising W and C” in the second line of the claim. The metes and bounds of this particular limitation cannot be determined since it is not clear what would or would not constitute a hard phase within this claim beyond the presence of tungsten and carbon. The use of the term “hard’ in setting forth this phase indicates further properties are present. In particular, it is not clear if any material that contains tungsten and carbon, in particular those beyond tungsten carbide, would or would not be considered to be a hard phase or if there is another property that must be present for the material to be considered “hard” for the hard phase. If other properties or conditions are necessary, it is not clear what additional properties those would entail.
In further regards to independent claim 1, this claim sets forth the term “a condensed phase comprising Zr and Nb” in the fourth line of the claim. The metes and bounds of this particular limitation cannot be determined since it is not clear what would or would not constitute a condensed phase beyond the presence of zirconium and niobium. It is not clear if any composition that comprises zirconium and niobium would be considered to be a condensed phase or if the phase has a particular property as indicated by the term “condensed’ that was utilized when referring to this phase.
It is further unclear whether niobium is a required component or if the amount must merely meet the equation set forth in instant claim 1. In particular, a zero value of niobium would satisfy equation. It is not clear in the context of this claim whether zirconium and niobium are present and the equation is satisfied or if zirconium and niobium are provided in amounts that the equation is satisfied (viz. niobium is not necessarily present).
As to claims 2-9, these claims dependent from independent claim 1 and incorporate the limitations therein. Accordingly, these claims are rejected for the reasons set forth above in regards to independent claim 1.
In further regards to claim 3, this claim sets forth a second and third condensed phase. The metes and bounds of these limitations cannot be determined since it is not clear what constitutes these different phases. It is not clear if these phases are simply portions having different atomic ratio of the niobium and zirconium as set forth in the equation or If there is another differentiation between these phases, e.g. different mean particle diameter, hardness values, composition beyond the atomic ratio.
As to claims 4-5, these claims depend from claim 3 and incorporate the limitations therein. Accordingly, these claims are rejected for the reasons set forth above in regards to claim 3.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel Schleis whose telephone number is (571)270-5636. The examiner can normally be reached 10 AM to 4 PM Monday through Friday.
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.
Daniel J. Schleis
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1784
/Daniel J. Schleis/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Prosecution Insights