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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of a certified copy of JP 2022-071901 filed April 25, 2022 as required by 37 CFR 1.55. Receipt is also acknowledged of WO 2023/210568, the WIPO publication of PCT/JP2023/016077 filed April 24, 2023.
Response to Restriction Election
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 14-18, in the reply filed on February 20, 2026 is acknowledged.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I, claims 14, 16, and 17, drawn to a hole in the reply filed on July 20, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 6-13, 15, and 18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected inventive group or species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Status
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s Restriction Elections filed February 20, 2026 and July 20, 2026.
Claims Filing Date
October 23, 2024
New
6-18
Cancelled
1-5
Pending
6-18
Withdrawn
6-13, 15, 18
Under Examination
14, 16, 17
Specification Objection
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
[0080] line 3 “”Straight line L222” appears to be an error. The lines in Figs. 8 and 9 are labelled as L21 to L27. It appears that “L222” refers to “L22” in Figs. 8 and 9, which is listed in [0103], the Reference Signs List.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN 114378295 machine translation) in view of Sonoda (US 2017/0320136) and Ishimine (WO 2021/038879 with citations from US 2022/0299097) as evidenced by Oberg (Oberg et al. Machinery’s Handbook 32nd edition. 2024. Industrial Press, Inc. “Cemented Carbides and Other Hard Materials.” pp. 848-858.) and Haynes (Haynes, W.M. (ed.). CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 95th Edition. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton: FL 2014-2015, p.3-424.).
Regarding claim 14, Zhou discloses a method of manufacturing a sintered member ([0013], [0032]), the method comprising:
pressing the raw material powder to produce a green compact (cemented carbide blank) ([n0005], [0011], [0025]);
subjecting the green compact to hole drilling to produce a workpiece having a hole having a diameter x1 (mm) and a depth y1 (mm), the diameter x1 and the depth y1 satisfying requirements (a1) to (a7) below ([0012], [0026]; and
sintering the workpiece ([0013], [0032]):
(a1) when 0.05 ≤ x1 < 0.08, y1 > 2.67x1 + 0.217;
(a2) when 0.08 ≤ x1 < 0.1, y1 > 28.5x1 – 1.85;
(a3) when 0.1 ≤ x1 < 0.3, y1 > 10x1;
(a4) when 0.3 ≤ x1 < 0.8, y1 > 8x1 + 0.6;
(a5) when 0.8 ≤ x1 < 1.5, y1 > 32.9x1 – 19.3;
(a6) when 1.5 ≤ x1 < 2.0, y1 > 20x1; and
(a7) when 2.0 ≤ x1, y1 > 10x1 + 20 (x1 is 10 mm, y1 is 279 mm and is greater than 120 mm) ([0026]).
As evidenced by Oberg, the cemented carbide blank (Zhou [0011], [0025]) is produced by powder metallurgy and is a precursor to the cemented (sintered) final product, where the cemented carbide blank includes a metallic binder (Oberg p. 848 paras. 1-2), which reads on preparing a raw material powder containing a metal powder.
Zhou is silent to preparing a raw material powder containing a lubricant, wherein the ratio of the lubricant contained in the raw material powder is 0.025% by mass to 0.2% by mass and the lubricant has a melting point of 150°C or lower.
Sonoda discloses a method for manufacturing a sintered member ([0001], [0010], [0012], [0059]-[0060]), the method comprising subjecting a green compact to hole drilling ([0073]-[0074]), wherein a raw material powder contains a lubricant ([0066]), wherein the ratio of the lubricant contained in the raw material powder is 0.025% by mass to 0.2% by mass (0.1 mass% or more and 2 mass% or less) ([0066]-[0067]).
As evidenced by Haynes, a stearic acid amide lubricant (Sonoda [0066]) has a melting point of 107°C (Haynes), such that the lubricant of Sonoda has a melting point of 150°C or lower.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the instant invention in the process of Zhou to include 0.1 mass% or more and 2 mass% or less of a lubricant of stearic acid amide to increase lubricity upon molding, enhance moldability, easily obtain a high-density sintered component, and serves as a lubricant for a drill when the powder-compact green body is drilled, where 0.1 to 2 mass% lubricant suppresses volumetric shrinkage due to lubricant dissipation and obtains enhanced precision (Sonoda [0066]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Zhou in view of Sonoda discloses a densified powder-compact green body that obtains a high-density sintered component (Sonoda [0066]-[0068]).
Zhou in view of Sonoda is silent to a green compact having a relative density of 95% or more.
Ishimine discloses a method of manufacturing a sintered member ([0004]), the method comprising: pressing the raw material powder to produce a green compact having a relative density of 95% or more (93% or more) ([0022], [0024], [0122], [0136], [0139], [0158], [0170]-[0171]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Zhou in view of Sonoda to produce a green compact having a relative density of 93% or more for more excellent cutting machinability and shorter cutting time (Ishimine [0020]) with resistance to chipping, a higher yield (Ishimine [0021]-[0022]), and a low sintering temperature that reduces thermal energy (Ishimine [0023]). Further, a green compact having a relative density of 93% or more leads to a closely-packed sintered material having a relative density of 93% or more and 99.5% or less even when the sintering temperature is a relatively low temperature lower than the liquidus temperature (Ishimine [0139]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 17, Zhou in view of Sonoda and Ishimine as evidenced by Oberg and Haynes discloses the method of manufacturing a sintered member according to claim 14 as cited above, wherein the lubricant is stearic acid, erucic acid amide, or stearic acid amide (stearic acid amide) (Sonoda [0066]).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN 114378295 machine translation) in view of Sonoda (US 2017/0320136) and Ishimine (WO 2021/038879 with citations from US 2022/0299097) as evidenced by Oberg (Oberg et al. Machinery’s Handbook 32nd edition. 2024. Industrial Press, Inc. “Cemented Carbides and Other Hard Materials.” pp. 848-858.) and Haynes (Haynes, W.M. (ed.). CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 95th Edition. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton: FL 2104-2015, p.3-424.) as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Wallace (US 2,852,965).
Regarding claim 16, Zhou in view of Sonoda and Ishimine as evidenced by Oberg and Haynes discloses the method of manufacturing a sintered member according to claim 14 as cited above.
Zhou in view of Sonoda and Ishimine as evidenced by Oberg and Haynes is silent to the hole drilling being step feed drilling.
Wallace discloses hole drilling deep or small diameter holes, wherein a hole drilling is step feed drilling (1:15-40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the instant invention in the process of Zhou in view of Sonoda and Ishimine as evidenced by Oberg and Haynes for the hole drilling to be step feed drilling to control the feed of the drill by drilling partially through, withdrawing the drill to advantageously facilitate cooling and clearing of ships, then returning the drill for another step until the operation is completed, where controlling the feed results in a rapid approach of the drill to the workpiece (Wallace 1:15-40, 5:1-12).
Claims 14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kondoh (US 2010/0178121) in view of Sonoda (US 2017/0320136) and Ishimine (WO 2021/038879 with citations from US 2022/0299097) and as evidenced by Haynes (Haynes, W.M. (ed.). CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 95th Edition. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton: FL 2104-2015, p.3-424.).
Regarding claim 14, Kondoh discloses a method of manufacturing a member (die or part) ([0001], [0235]), the method comprising:
subjecting the die or part to hole drilling to produce a workpiece having a hole having a diameter x1 (mm) and a depth y1 (mm), the diameter x1 and the depth y1 satisfying requirements (a1) to (a7) below:
(a1) when 0.05 ≤ x1 < 0.08, y1 > 2.67x1 + 0.217;
(a2) when 0.08 ≤ x1 < 0.1, y1 > 28.5x1 – 1.85;
(a3) when 0.1 ≤ x1 < 0.3, y1 > 10x1;
(a4) when 0.3 ≤ x1 < 0.8, y1 > 8x1 + 0.6;
(a5) when 0.8 ≤ x1 < 1.5, y1 > 32.9x1 – 19.3;
(a6) when 1.5 ≤ x1 < 2.0, y1 > 20x1; and
(a7) when 2.0 ≤ x1, y1 > 10x1 + 20.
(drilled hole diameter D and drilled hole depth L, where D is 1 mm or less and L/D is 15 or more, which overlaps with the conditions of (a1) to (a5)) ([0001], [0014], [0023], [0036], [0092], [0107]).
In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Kondoh is silent to the die or part being a green compact.
Sonoda discloses a method of manufacturing a sintered member ([0001], [0010], [0012], [0059]-[0060]), the method comprising:
preparing a raw material powder containing a metal powder ([0063]-[0065]) and a lubricant ([0066]);
pressing the raw material powder to produce a green compact ([0071]-[0072]);
subjecting the green compact to hole drilling ([0073]-[0074]); and
sintering the workpiece ([0087]-[0090]),
wherein the ratio of the lubricant contained in the raw material powder is 0.025% by mass to 0.2% by mass (0.1 mass% or more and 2 mass% or less) ([0066]-[0067]).
As evidenced by Haynes, a stearic acid amide lubricant (Sonoda [0066]) has a melting point of 107°C (Haynes), such that the lubricant has a melting point of 150°C or lower.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the die or part of Kondoh to be a green compact as disclosed by Sonoda that is produced by pressing then subject after drilling to sintering to suppress the occurrence of edge chipping when the through-hole is formed with good productivity (Sonoda [0001], [0011], [0039]), where cutting resistance (thrust load) is significantly reduced when drilling is performed on the powder-compact green body since bonding between metal particles is weak, such that a machining time can be reduced, a precision of a machined hole can be enhanced, a tool life can be improved, and burrs hardly occur and are easily removed (Sonoda [0023]). Furthermore, the raw material containing a lubricant increases lubricity upon molding, enhancing moldability, easily obtains a high-density sintered component, and serves as a lubricant for a drill when the powder-compact green body is drilled, where 0.1 to 2 mass% lubricant suppresses volumetric shrinkage due to lubricant dissipation and obtains enhanced precision (Sonoda [0066]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Kondoh in view of Sonoda discloses a densified powder-compact green body that obtains a high-density sintered component (Sonoda [0066]-[0068]).
Kondoh in view of Sonoda is silent to a green compact having a relative density of 95% or more.
Ishimine discloses a method of manufacturing a sintered member ([0004]), the method comprising: pressing the raw material powder to produce a green compact having a relative density of 95% or more (93% or more) ([0022], [0024], [0122], [0136], [0139], [0158], [0170]-[0171]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Kondoh in view of Sonoda to produce a green compact having a relative density of 93% or more for more excellent cutting machinability and shorter cutting time (Ishimine [0020]) that is resistant to chipping and has a higher yield (Ishimine [0021]-[0022]) with a low sintering temperature that reduced thermal energy (Ishimine [0023]). Further, a green compact having a relative density of 93% or more leads to a closely-packed sintered material having a relative density of 93% or more and 99.5% or less even when the sintering temperature is a relatively low temperature lower than the liquidus temperature (Ishimine [0139]). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 17, Kondoh in view of Sonoda and Ishimine as evidenced by Haynes discloses the method of manufacturing a sintered member according to claim 14 as cited above, wherein the lubricant is stearic acid, erucic acid amide, or stearic acid amide (stearic acid amide) (Sonoda [0066]).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kondoh (US 2010/0178121) in view of Sonoda (US 2017/0320136) and Ishimine (WO 2021/038879 with citations from US 2022/0299097) and as evidenced by Haynes (Haynes, W.M. (ed.). CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 95th Edition. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton: FL 2104-2015, p.3-424.) as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Wallace (US 2,852,965).
Regarding claim 16, Kondoh in view of Sonoda and Ishimine as evidenced by Haynes discloses the method of manufacturing a sintered member according to claim 14 as cited above.
Kondoh in view of Sonoda and Ishimine as evidenced by Haynes is silent to the hole drilling being step feed drilling.
Wallace discloses hole drilling deep or small diameter holes, wherein a hole drilling is step feed drilling (1:15-40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the instant invention in the process of Kondoh in view of Sonoda and Ishimine as evidenced by Haynes for the hole drilling to be step feed drilling to control the feed of the drill by drilling partially through, withdrawing the drill to advantageously facilitate cooling and clearing of ships, then returning the drill for another step until the operation is completed, where controlling the feed results in a rapid approach of the drill to the workpiece (Wallace 1:15-40, 5:1-12).
Related Art
Byun (KR 20170064057 machine translation)
Byun discloses forming a metal body (green compact) using metal powder under a predetermined pressure, drilling a hole in the body, then sintering to eliminate burr removal and present ingress of foreign substances caused by a burr ([0010], [0015]-[0020]).
Shimauchi (WO 2020/179520 with citations from US 2022/0143696)
Shimauchi discloses machining a compacted part then sintering ([0005]-[0007], [0015]-[0019], [0023]), where the compact part is produced by compression molding of metal powder such as iron to a density of greater than or equal to 7.5 g/cm3 ([0038]-[0042]) and the metal powder is mixed with a stearic acid amide lubricant ([0043]).
Ellingsworth (US 2014/0352128)
Ellingsworth discloses a preform 1 for producing a sintered component 2 ([0025]) compacted to a density corresponding to between 95% and 100% of the solid density of the material used ([0027], [0033]-[0036], [0091]), where higher density improves strength in the sintered component ([0060]).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHANI HILL whose telephone number is (571)272-2523. The examiner can normally be reached Monday, Wednesday-Friday 7am-12pm.
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, KEITH WALKER can be reached at 571-272-3458. 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.
/STEPHANI HILL/Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights