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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement (IDS)
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 06/01/2026 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. Please refer to applicant’s copy of the 1449 herewith.
Election/Restrictions
Applicants’ election without traverse of claims 1-9 drawn to an article in the reply filed on 07/22/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 21-31 are added as part of election of Invention Group I (Claims 1-9). Claims 10-20 are canceled. Claims 1-9, 21-31 are pending.
NOTE: The Applicant cited Claims 1-20 are pending yet with Claims 10-20 cancelled and Claims 21-31 added, pending Claims are as cited by the Examiner.
Claim Interpretation
Claims 26 and 29 – Claims 26 recites “disposing the foil insert having a third sintering temperature” and Claim 29 recites “a third sintering temperature of the filler material” where” a third sintering temperature” is attached to differing material elements (foil insert, filler material). The Examiner understands “a third temperature” to mean a temperature different from a first sintering temperature and different from a second sintering temperature, where each of “a third sintering temperature” of the filler material and “a third sintering temperature” of the foil can be different temperatures or can be the same temperature regarding the temperature of the foil insert and the temperature of the filler material.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 4, 7 , 26 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 cites “a feed material having a first sintering temperature”, “a filler material having a second sintering temperature”. The Specification throughout references “sintering temperature” but is silent on the definition of “sintering temperature” if it is a) an intrinsic material constant regarding the materials directed to have “a first sintering temperature” and “a second sintering temperature”, or if b) “sintering temperature” is directed to process-driven/empirically observed/apparatus-dependent values regarding the materials directed to have “a first sintering temperature” and “a second sintering temperature”. [0058] defines fabrication temperatures and melting temperatures only.
Claim 4 cites “ the second sintering temperature of the filler material is higher than the first sintering
temperature of the feed material” and “ heating the feed material and the filler material to a temperature higher than the first sintering temperature of the feed material and lower than the second sintering temperature of the filler material”. The Specification throughout references “sintering temperature” but is silent on the definition of “sintering temperature” if it is a) an intrinsic material constant regarding the materials directed to have “a first sintering temperature” and “a second sintering temperature”, or if b) “sintering temperature” is directed to process-driven/empirically observed/apparatus-dependent values regarding the materials directed to have “a first sintering temperature” and “a second sintering temperature”. [0058] defines fabrication temperatures and melting temperatures only.
Claim 7 cites “ the second sintering temperature of the filler material is substantially similar to the first
sintering temperature of the feed material” and “heating the feed material and the filler material to a
temperature higher than the first sintering temperature of the feed material and higher than the second
sintering temperature of the filler material. The Specification throughout references “sintering
temperature” but is silent on the definition of “sintering temperature” if it is a) an intrinsic material
constant regarding the materials directed to have “a first sintering temperature” and “a second sintering
temperature”, or if b) “sintering temperature” is directed to process-driven/empirically
observed/apparatus-dependent values regarding the materials directed to have “a first sintering
temperature” and “a second sintering temperature”. [0058] defines fabrication temperatures and
melting temperatures only.
Claim 26 cites “ disposing the foil insert having a third sintering temperature higher than a first sintering
temperature of the first feed material and a second sintering temperature of the second feed
material” and “ heating the first feed material, the second feed material, and the filler material to a
temperature higher than the first sintering temperature of the first feed material and the
second sintering temperature of the second feed material and lower than the third sintering
temperature of the foil insert”. The Specification throughout references “sintering
temperature” but is silent on the definition of “sintering temperature” if it is a) an intrinsic material
constant regarding the materials directed to have “a first sintering temperature” “a second sintering
temperature”, and “ a third sintering temperature”, or if b) “sintering temperature” is directed to
process-driven/empirically observed/apparatus-dependent values regarding the materials directed to
have “a first sintering temperature” , “a second sintering temperature”, and a “third sintering
temperature”. [0058] defines fabrication temperatures and melting temperatures only.
Claim 29 cites “heating the first feed material, the second feed material, and the filler material to a
temperature higher than a first sintering temperature of the first feed material and a second
sintering temperature of the second feed material and lower than a third sintering temperature
of the filler material”. The Specification throughout references “sintering temperature” but is silent on
the definition of “sintering temperature” if it is a) an intrinsic material constant regarding the materials
directed to have “a first sintering temperature” “a second sintering temperature”, and “ a third sintering
temperature”, or if b) “sintering temperature” is directed to process-driven/empirically
observed/apparatus-dependent values regarding the materials directed to have “a first sintering
temperature” , “a second sintering temperature”, and a “third sintering temperature”. [0058] defines
fabrication temperatures and melting temperatures only.
Claims 26 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 26 cites “ the foil insert having a third sintering temperature” and Claim 29 cites “a third sintering temperature of the filler material”, where the Specification is absent the word “third” for any sintering temperature of any material.
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.
Claim 1, 4, 7, 26, 29 is/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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 7, 26, 29 recite the terms “a first sintering temperature” and “a second sintering temperature”. It is unclear, as the application as a whole comprises temperatures and pressures, if “sintering temperature” is a) an intrinsic material constant regarding the materials directed to have “a first sintering temperature” and “a second sintering temperature”, or if b) “sintering temperature” is directed to process-driven/empirically observed/apparatus-dependent values regarding the materials directed to have “a first sintering temperature” and “a second sintering temperature” . For the purposes of prosecution and prior art, the Examiner understands a), b), or a) and b) to be valid.
Claim(s) 26 and 29 recite the terms “a third sintering temperature”. It is unclear, as the application as a whole comprises temperatures and pressures, if “sintering temperature” is a) an intrinsic material constant regarding the materials directed to have “a thirds sintering temperature” or if b) “sintering temperature” is directed to process-driven/empirically observed/apparatus-dependent values regarding the materials directed to have “a third sintering temperature” . For the purposes of prosecution and prior art, the Examiner understands a), b), or a) and b) to be valid.
All remaining dependent claims not specifically cited are also considered to be indefinite at least because of their dependency on independent claim 1 or independent claim 21.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by USPGPUB
20100137997A1 (as submitted in the IDS dated 03/05/2025) by Casari et. al. (herein “Casari”).
Regarding Claim 1 – Casari teaches
a method of forming an article; Fig. 1-3, [0022[, “…a process for realizing….elements…”. Fig. 3 illustrates a forming process.
comprising,
placing a feed material having a first sintering temperature in one or more cavities of a die assembly of a sintering apparatus; Fig. 2, Fig.3 element 11, [0044], [0047], “…The layer 11 of powder material is arranged in the concave punch 8a…”. “…by means of a die 6 which comprises a…punch 7 and…punch 8a…”, “…the sintering temperature T1 of the layer of powder”. The die assembly of die 6 is illustrated in Fig. 3 (top punch 7, lower punch 8a, and matrix 8b).
placing a filler material having a second sintering temperature in at least one of the one or more cavities of the die assembly of the sintering apparatus; ; Fig.4 element 12, [0045], [0046], [0047]“…a quantity of…material is added to layer 11…containing granules 12…”. As material 12 is added to layer 11, where layer 11 is in a die of the die assembly, material 12 is in at least one of the one or more cavities; “…the granular material is selected from among those which have a melting temperature (can be considered a sintering temperature) T2 which is higher than the sintering temperature T1 of the layer of powder”.
and applying a heat and a pressure across the feed material and the filler material to form one or more sintered articles comprising the feed material; Fig 2. element 11, 0055], “…The system of punches, matrix, and powders is…heated… to a sintering temperature…contemporaneously applying…pressure…forming the powder into a single and dense (sintered) body”.
Regarding Claim 2 - Casari in the rejection of claim 1 above teaches all of the limitations of
claim 1.
Casari teaches wherein the die assembly comprises,
an upper punch;
a lower punch;
wherein,
the one or more cavities are defined by one of the upper punch and the lower punch;
and a die comprising a through hole configured to at least partially receive the upper punch and
the lower punch;
Annotated Fig. 3A, [0038]. See Annotated Fig. 3A below, illustrating the upper punch, lower punch, the
cavity defined by the upper and lower punch, the die with the through hole (bold black lines), and the
die through hole at least partially receiving the upper and lower punch.
Annotated Fig. 3A:
PNG
media_image1.png
969
1260
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3 - Casari in the rejection of claim 2 above teaches all of the limitations of
claim 2.
Casari teaches wherein placing the feed material in the die assembly comprises,
placing the feed material in a first cavity of the of the one or more cavities;
and placing the filler material in a second cavity of the one or more cavities;
the second cavity defined at least partially by the die and at least one of the lower punch and
the upper punch.
Annotated Fig. 3B, [0044], [0045]. See Annotated Fig. 3B below, illustrating the feed and filler materials
in their respective cavities and the second cavity defined at least partially by the die and
the upper punch.
Annotated Fig. 3B:
PNG
media_image2.png
970
1259
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 4 - Casari in the rejection of claim 1 above teaches all of the limitations of
claim 1.
Casari teaches wherein,
the second sintering temperature of the filler material is higher than the first sintering
temperature of the feed material; [0047], “…the granular material (filler material) is selected from among those which have a melting temperature (can be considered a sintering temperature) T2 which is higher than the sintering temperature T1 of the layer of powder”.
and wherein,
applying the heat and the pressure across the feed material and the filler material comprises
heating the feed material and the filler material to a temperature higher than the first sintering
temperature of the feed material and lower than the second sintering temperature of the filler
material;
[0055], Example 1, “…The system of punches, matrix, and powders is…heated… to a sintering temperature…of 790°C (less than the melting point of sodium chloride, which is 804°C)…forming the powder into a single and dense body”. Here, the sintering temperature is below the filler melting temperature (sintering temperature). Example 1 indicates the granules (filler material) are sodium chloride.
Regarding Claim 5 - Casari in the rejection of claim 4 above teaches all of the limitations of
claim 4.
Casari teaches wherein heating the feed material and the filler material comprises,
sintering the feed material without sintering the filler material; [0047],[0049], “…The granular
material used is selected from among those which have a melting temperature T2 which is higher
than the sintering temperature T1 of the layer of powder materials, e.g. titanium, and, for this
reason, when the layer 11 is formed and sintered internally of the die 6, the granules 12 are sunk
therein, maintaining their shape…”, “…when the forming material (feed material) is conductive, the
granules 12 are non-conductive (or poorly conductive) such that the electrical sintering current is
concentrated and passes only through the forming material (feed material), heating it up and
sintering it”. Here, only the forming material (feed material) is sintered.
Claim(s) 21-25, 27, 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by NPL
“Simultaneous Spark Plasma Sintering of Multiple Complex Shapes” (as submitted in the IDS dated
03/05/2025) by Manière et. al. (herein “Manière”).
Regarding Claim 21 – Manière teaches a method of forming an article comprising,
disposing a first feed material in a first cavity of a die assembly of a sintering apparatus;
disposing a second feed material (,) different in one or more material properties from the first (feed) material (,) in a second cavity of the die assembly of the sintering apparatus;
disposing a filler material in at least one of the first cavity and the second cavity of the die assembly of the sintering apparatus;
Fig. 2, Page 6 Para.1 lines 11-16, Page 2 Para. 1 lines 4-5, “…The different steps are the following: (1) the polymer gear part was inserted in the die, (2) the graphite foil was then imposed onto the gear surfaces; then, (3) the nickel powder was filled first in the central hole and the outer gear area; finally, (4) the polymer part was slowly removed and replaced by the nickel powder. At the end of these stages the nickel powder assembly with an internal complex shape foil interface was generated. The alumina powder is located at the upper and lower sample/punch interfaces and was introduced after these steps. The energy efficient SPS (Spark Plasma Sintering) configuration… allows the sintering…”. Fig. 6d illustrates the first feed material sintered = the outer gear (larger diameter, thinner wall) and the second feed material sintered = inner gear (smaller diameter, thicker wall) where the diameters and wall thickness are relative to the gears, and this same relative wall thickness difference is present when the first and second feed materials are in powder form. Wall thickness represents the ability of heat rate transfer of the material based upon the known physics mathematical equation of Fourier’s Law below:The rate of heat transfer Q through a material is,
Q=−k · A · ΔT/L , where
k = thermal conductivity (constant for the same material)
A = cross-sectional area
ΔT = temperature difference across the material
L = thickness (distance heat must travel)
Since there is a relative difference in L1 and L2 between the two different gears, then the
characteristic of the ability to transfer heat is different between the first feed material and the
second feed material.
and applying a heat and a pressure across the first feed material, the second feed material, and the filler material to form at least two sintered articles; Fig. 3a/b, Fig. 5a/b/c, 6d. Fig 3a/b illustrate temperature and pressure during sintering; Fig. 5a/b/c illustrate the feed and filler material in the sintering; Fig. 6d illustrates two sintered articles.
Regarding Claim 22 - Manière in the rejection of claim 21 above teaches all of the limitations of
claim 21.
Casari teaches wherein further comprising,
disposing a foil insert into one or more of the first cavity and the second cavity of the die
assembly of the sintering apparatus; Fig. 1, Page 6 Para.1 lines 11-16, Fig. 6a; “…The different
steps are the following: (1) the polymer gear part was inserted in the die, (2) the graphite foil
was then imposed onto the gear surfaces; then, (3) the nickel powder was filled first in the
central hole and the outer gear area; finally, (4) the polymer part was slowly removed and
replaced by the nickel powder. At the end of these stages the nickel powder assembly with an
internal complex shape foil interface was generated. Here, the removed polymer insert created
two cavities for loading the nickel powder. Fig. 6a illustrates the graphite foil insert during the
powder loading step.
Regarding Claim 23 - Manière in the rejection of claim 22 above teaches all of the limitations of
claim 22.
Manière teaches wherein disposing the foil insert into one or more of the first cavity and the second
cavity of the die assembly of the sintering apparatus comprises,
disposing the foil insert between the filler material and at least one of the first feed material
and the second feed material; Fig. 2., lower right “Powder Assembly 2D Section” illustrates
the graphite foil between the two nickel materials (feed materials) as well as between the
Al2O3 (filler material) and both of the two nickel materials (feed materials) at the bottom of the
“Powder Assembly 2D Section”.
Regarding Claim 24 - Manière in the rejection of claim 22 above teaches all of the limitations of
claim 22.
Casari teaches wherein disposing the foil insert into one or more of the first cavity and the second cavity
of the die assembly of the sintering apparatus comprises,
disposing the foil insert between the die assembly of the sintering apparatus;
and at least one of the first feed material, the second feed material, and the filler material;
Page 5 Para. 2 lines 8-9, Fig. 2. Sintering configuration on the left , lower right “Powder Assembly 2D
Section”; “…the double layer graphite foil (0.4 mm thick) at the punch/die and sample/die
interface. ”Here, the die assembly is the upper/lower punches, where the foil is between the
punches and the die. The sintering configuration on the left illustrates the graphite foil between the
die assembly (between the punches and the die) and the remaining sintering apparatus (steel
electrodes). “Powder Assembly 2D Section” illustrates the graphite foil between the two nickel
materials (feed materials) as well as between the Al2O3 (filler material) and both of the two nickel
materials (feed materials) at the bottom of the “Powder Assembly 2D Section”.
Regarding Claim 25 - Manière in the rejection of claim 22 above teaches all of the limitations of
claim 22.
Casari teaches wherein disposing the foil insert into one or more of the first cavity and the second cavity
of the die assembly of the sintering apparatus comprises,
disposing a graphite foil insert into the one or more of the first cavity and the second cavity of
the die assembly of the sintering apparatus; ; Fig. 1, Page 6 Para.1 lines 11-16, Fig. 2; “…The
different steps are the following: (1) the polymer gear part was inserted in the die, (2) the
graphite foil was then imposed onto the gear surfaces; then, (3) the nickel powder was filled
first in the central hole and the outer gear area; finally, (4) the polymer part was slowly
removed and replaced by the nickel powder. At the end of these stages the nickel powder
assembly with an internal complex shape foil interface was generated. Here, the removed
polymer insert created two cavities for loading the nickel powder. Fig. 2 illustrates the foil in
the die assembly, i.e. between the upper and lower punches.
Regarding Claim 27 - Manière in the rejection of claim 21 above teaches all of the limitations of
claim 21.
Manière teaches wherein disposing the first feed material in the first cavity of the die assembly of the
sintering apparatus comprises,
disposing the first feed material to at least partially surround a protrusion extending from a
bottom surface of the first cavity of the die assembly; Fig. 1, Page 6 Para.1 lines 11-16, Fig. 6
“…The different steps are the following: (1) the polymer gear part was inserted
in the die, (2) the graphite foil was then imposed onto the gear surfaces; then, (3) the nickel
powder was filled first in the central hole and the outer gear area; finally, (4) the polymer part
was slowly removed and replaced by the nickel powder. At the end of these stages the nickel
powder assembly with an internal complex shape foil interface was generated. The alumina
powder is located at the upper and lower sample/punch interfaces and was introduced after
these steps.” Here the graphite foil, as alumina powder (filler material) is introduced after the
graphite foil creates the interface between the first feed and the second feed, the graphite foil
rests on the bottom surface of the of the first cavity, created a protrusion upward from the
bottom of the first cavity. The nickel powder in the first cavity conforms to the outer surface of
the “gear teeth” formed by the graphite foil ( at least partially surround the protrusion). Fig. 6,
while after sintering, illustrates the first feed material in the first cavity conforming to the “gear
teeth” form of the graphite foil.
Regarding Claim 28 - Manière in the rejection of claim 21 above teaches all of the limitations of
claim 21.
Manière teaches wherein further comprising,
removing the filler material after applying the heat and the pressure across the first feed
material, the second feed material, and the filler material;
separating the at least two sintered articles;
Page 9, Para. 2 lines 1-5 ,Fig. 6b/c/d, “ Capture images of the overall process are reported in Figure
6. One can clearly see that the alumina powder (filler) in contact with the nickel specimen has little
consolidation (as predicted by the simulation in Figure 5) and almost no mechanical strength, which
allows its easy removal. The separation of the inner and outer gears (first feed material/second feed
material) was very easy”. Fig. 6b illustrates the compact (first feed/second feed/filler) immediately
after sintering (heat/pressure).
Claim(s) 26 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Manière in further
view of Evidentiary Reference NPL “Graphite Manufacturing Process”,
(http://www.substech.com/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=graphite_manufacturing_process/Wayback
Machine) (herein “Evidentiary Subtech”)and in further view of Evidentiary Reference NPL “Specimen
Temperature and Sinterability of Ni Powder by Spark Plasma Sintering” by Kim et. al. (herein
“Evidentiary Kim”).
Regarding Claim 26 - Manière in the rejection of claim 22 above teaches all of the limitations of
claim 22.
Manière teaches wherein disposing the foil insert into one or more of the first cavity and the second
cavity of the die assembly of the sintering apparatus comprises,
disposing the foil insert having a third sintering temperature higher than a first sintering
temperature of the first feed material and a second sintering temperature of the second feed
material; ; Fig. 1, Page 6 Para.1 lines 11-16, Fig. 2; “…The
different steps are the following: (1) the polymer gear part was inserted in the die, (2) the
graphite foil was then imposed onto the gear surfaces…”. Evidentiary Subtech discloses a
graphite manufacturing process where graphitization occurs at 2500°C. Evidentiary Kim
discloses nickel powder sintering temperature of 1073K (800°C). As the first feed material and
the second feed material of Manière are nickel (Page 5 Para. 1 line 6), the graphite foil has a
sintering temperature higher than a first sintering temperature of the first feed material and a
second sintering temperature of the second feed material.
and applying the heat and the pressure across the first feed material, the second feed material,
and the filler material; Page 5 Para. 1 lines 5-8, Fig. 2 Powder Assembly 2D Section, Fig. 3a/b, “
Two powders were considered, a nickel powder for the fabrication of the gears (first/second
feed materials)…and an alumina powder (filler material)”. Fig. 2 illustrates the 1st/2nd feed
materials/filler material in the sintering device and Fig. 3a/b illustrate the heat and pressure
applied to the first/second feed materials and the filler material.
heating the first feed material, the second feed material, and the filler material to a
temperature higher than the first sintering temperature of the first feed material and the
second sintering temperature of the second feed material and lower than the third sintering
temperature of the foil insert; Page 6 last line, Page 7 Para. 1 line 1, “…the sintering starts at
about 350°C and starts to decrease at 700 °C (to end at 850°C…). Here, the sintering
temperature is 850°C, which is greater than the first/second feed material sintering
temperatures (Evidentiary Kim, for nickel, 800°C) and less than the sintering temperature of
third sintering temperature of the foil (Evidentiary Subtech), for graphite, 2500°C.
Regarding Claim 29 - Manière in the rejection of claim 28 above teaches all of the limitations of claim
28.
Manière teaches wherein,
applying the heat and the pressure across the first feed material, the second feed material, and
the filler material; Page 5 Para. 1 lines 5-8, Fig. 2 Powder Assembly 2D Section, Fig. 3a/b, “
Two powders were considered, a nickel powder for the fabrication of the gears (first/second
feed materials)…and an alumina powder (filler material)”. Fig. 2 illustrates the 1st/2nd feed
materials/filler material in the sintering device and Fig. 3a/b illustrate the heat and pressure
applied to the first/second feed materials and the filler material.
comprises,
heating the first feed material, the second feed material, and the filler material to a
temperature higher than a first sintering temperature of the first feed material and a second
sintering temperature of the second feed material and lower than a third sintering temperature
of the filler material;
Evidentiary Subtech discloses a graphite manufacturing process where graphitization occurs at
2500°C. Evidentiary Kim discloses nickel powder sintering temperature of 1073K (800°C). As the
first feed material and the second feed material of Manière are nickel (Page 5 Para. 1 line 6), the
graphite foil has a sintering temperature higher than a first sintering temperature of the first
feed material and a second sintering temperature of the second feed material. Further, Page 6
last line, Page 7 Para. 1 line 1, “…the sintering starts at about 350°C and starts to decrease at
700 °C (to end at 850°C…). Here, the sintering temperature is 850°C, which is greater than the
first/second feed material sintering temperatures (Evidentiary Kim, for nickel, 800°C) and less
than the sintering temperature of third sintering temperature of the foil (Evidentiary Subtech),
for graphite, 2500°C.
to form a first sintered article from the first feed material;
and a second sintered article from the second feed material ;
Fig. 2, Fig 6b/c/d, Page 6 Para.1 lines 11-16, Page 2 Para. 1 lines 4-5, “…The different steps are the
following: (1) the polymer gear part was inserted in the die, (2) the graphite foil was then imposed
onto the gear surfaces; then, (3) the nickel powder was filled first in the central hole and the outer
gear area; finally, (4) the polymer part was slowly removed and replaced by the nickel powder. At
the end of these stages the nickel powder assembly with an internal complex shape foil interface
was generated. The alumina powder is located at the upper and lower sample/punch interfaces and
was introduced after these steps.” After adding the nickel powder and alumina to the die assembly,
Fig. 6b/c/d illustrate the first feed material of nickel as the larger diameter/thinner wall gear, and
the second feed material of nickel as the smaller diameter/thicker wall gear.
with a unsintered filler material neighboring the first sintered article and the second sintered
article;
Fig. 2, Fig. 6b, Page 9 Para. 2 lines 1-3, “Capture images of the overall process are reported in
Figure 6. One can clearly see that the alumina powder in contact with the nickel specimen has
little consolidation and almost no mechanical strength(i.e. no sintering, or unsintered) , which
allows its easy removal”. Fig. 2 illustrates the alumina (filler material) in contact with the
first/second feed materials (nickel) before sintering and Fig 6b illustrates the alumina in contact
with the nickel of both gears.
and removing the filler material comprises,
removing the unsintered filler material from the first sintered article and the second sintered
article; Fig. 6d, Page 9 Para. 1 lines 3-6, “The separation of the inner and outer gears was very
easy due to the presence of the graphite foils which helps the two parts to slide with respect to
each other. After polishing of the surfaces in contact with the alumina powder (removal of the
filler), the two gears are close to the near net shape quality. Fig. 6d illustrates the two gears
(first/second sintered articles) with the unsintered filler material removed.
Claim(s) 30-31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by NPL “Simultaneous
Spark Plasma Sintering of Multiple Complex Shapes” (as submitted in the IDS dated 03/05/2025) by
Manière et. al. (herein “Manière”).
Regarding Claim 30 – Manière teaches a method of forming an article the method comprising;
disposing a first feed material in a first cavity of a die assembly of a sintering apparatus;
disposing a foil insert in the first cavity of the die assembly of the sintering apparatus;
disposing a filler material in the first cavity of the die assembly of the sintering apparatus;
Fig. 2, Page 6 Para.1 lines 11-16, Fig. 6, “…The different steps are the following: (1) the polymer gear part was inserted in the die, (2) the graphite foil was then imposed onto the gear surfaces; then, (3) the nickel powder was filled first in the central hole and the outer gear area (outer gear area = first cavity); finally, (4) the polymer part was slowly removed and replaced by the nickel powder. At the end of these stages the nickel powder assembly with an internal complex shape foil interface was generated. The alumina powder is located at the upper and lower sample/punch interfaces and was introduced after these steps”. Here, the graphite foil separates the outer and inner gear, establishing the first and second cavities. The filler material, the alumina powder, is disposed at the bottom and the top of the first and second cavities. Fig. 6 illustrates the Al2O3 powder (filler material) disposed at the bottom and the top of the first and second cavities. Fig. 6, although post sintering, illustrates the graphite foil between the first and second cavities.
and applying a heat and a pressure across the first feed material, the foil insert, and the filler material to form at least one sintered article; Page 9, Para. 2 lines 1-5 ,Fig. 6b/c/d, “ Capture images of the overall process are reported in Figure 6. One can clearly see that the alumina powder (filler) in contact with the nickel specimen has little consolidation (as predicted by the simulation in Figure 5) and almost no mechanical strength, which allows its easy removal. The separation of the inner and outer gears (first feed material/second feed material) was very easy”. Fig. 6b illustrates the compact (first feed/second feed/filler) immediately after sintering (heat/pressure), where at least one (two in this case) sintered article is formed.
Regarding Claim 31 - Manière in the rejection of claim 30 above teaches all of the limitations of
claim 30.
Manière teaches wherein disposing the foil insert in the first cavity of the die assembly comprises,
disposing the foil insert between the first feed material and the filler material;
Fig. 2, Page 6 Para.1 lines 11-16, “…The different steps are the following: (1) the polymer gear part was inserted in the die, (2) the graphite foil was then imposed onto the gear surfaces; then, (3) the nickel powder was filled first in the central hole and the outer gear area (outer gear area = first cavity); finally, (4) the polymer part was slowly removed and replaced by the nickel powder. At the end of these stages the nickel powder assembly with an internal complex shape foil interface was generated. The alumina powder is located at the upper and lower sample/punch interfaces and was introduced after these steps”. Here, the graphite foil is between the first feed material ( nickel of outer gear= first cavity) and the filler material (alumina powder) is separated from the first feed material at the contact point of the graphite foil and the alumina powder (alumina powder located at the upper and lower punch interfaces) in Fig. 2
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
Claim 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Casari.
Regarding Claim 6 - Casari in the rejection of claim 4 above teaches all of the limitations of
claim 4.
Casari discloses a method to manufacture a single dense and sintered body (See Claim 1
[0039],[0041],[0042],[0055], “The system of punches, matrix, and powders is…heated… to a sintering temperature…by means of SPS…contemporaneously applying…pressure…forming the powder into a single and dense (sintered) body”) but does not disclose,
forming a plurality of discrete sintered articles.
Casari discloses the claimed invention except for the duplication. It would have been obvious to one
having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to
duplicate, or make a plurality of sintered articles, since it have been held that a mere duplication of
working parts involves only routine skill in the art. One would have been motivated to duplicate, or
make a plurality of sintered articles for the common purpose of industrial efficiency.
The court has held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and
unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). Further in regard
to motivation to duplicate parts, “Indeed, we have repeatedly held that an implicit motivation exists not
only when a suggestion may be gleaned from the prior art as a whole, but when the ‘improvement’ is
technology-independent and results in a product or process that is more desirable, for example because
it is stronger, cheaper, cleaner, faster, lighter, smaller, more durable, or more efficient. And because the
desire to enhance commercial opportunities by improving a product or process is universal—and even
common-sensical—we have held that there exists in these situations a motivation even absent any hint
of suggestion in the references themselves." In re Sernaker, 702 F.2d 989, 994-95, 217 USPQ 1, 5-6 (Fed.
Cir. 1983). See also Dystar Textilfarben GmbH & Co. Deutschland KG v. C.H. Patrick, 464 F.3d 1356, 1368,
80 USPQ2d 1641, 1651 (Fed. Cir. 2006).
Claim 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Casari in further view of NPL
Evidentiary Reference “ Densification of Graphite Under High Pressure and Moderate Temperature by
Aguilar et. al. (herein “Evidentiary Aguiar”) and in further view of NPL Evidentiary Reference “Plastic
Deformation and Sintering of Alumina under High Pressure “ by Liu et. al. (herein “Evidentiary Liu”).
Regarding Claim 7 - Casari in the rejection of claim 1 above teaches all of the limitations of
claim 1.
Casari teaches wherein,
the second sintering temperature of the filler material is substantially similar to the first
sintering temperature of the feed material;
sintering the feed material together with the filler material. [0055], “…The system of punches,
matrix and powders is heated…up to a sintering temperature of 790°C. for 5 minutes (less than the
melting point of sodium chloride, which is 804°C.) The powder is the feed material, the sodium
chloride is the filler material where the sintering temperatures of the powder and sodium chloride
are similar and wherein applying the heat and the pressure across the feed material and the filler
material.
Casari discloses an embodiment where alumina is the feed material, graphite is the filler material, and
the sintering temperature of the punches, matrix, and powders is 1550°C while applying axial pressure
of 40Mpa [0058], [0059], ([0063] lines 1-4), but does not disclose,
heating the feed material and the filler material to a temperature higher than the first sintering
temperature of the feed material and higher than the second sintering temperature of the filler
material;
Evidentiary Aguiar cites sintering temperatures for graphite at pressure as less than 1200°C
and less than 300Mpa, specifically citing 600°C at 200Mpa (Abstract, Fig 1.) Evidentiary Liu
cites sintering temperatures for alumina between 600-1200°C and at pressures between 2.0-5.5 GPa
(Abstract). Aguiar and Liu disclose that sintering temperatures of graphite and alumina depend on
pressure.
Casari discloses the claimed invention except for heating the feed material and the filler material to
a temperature higher than the first sintering temperature of the feed material and higher than the
second sintering temperature of the filler material. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary
skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize a temperature
higher than the first sintering temperature of the feed material and higher than the second sintering
temperature of the filler material , since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim
are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in
the art. One would have been motivated to invention to optimize the heating a temperature higher than
the first sintering temperature of the feed material and higher than the second sintering temperature of
the filler material as a means to ensure Joule heating occurs that heats the alumina particles to facilitate
densification, as noted by Casari. Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed
in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover optimum working ranges by routine experimentation. It
would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have determined the optimum values
of the relevant process parameters through routine experimentation in the absence
Claim 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Casari and in further view of
USPGPUB 20050087915A1 (as submitted in the IDS dated 03/05/2025) by Pope et. al. (herein “Pope”).
Regarding Claim 8 - Casari in the rejection of claim 1 above teaches all of the limitations of
claim 1.
Casari discloses extracting the article from the forming means ([0057] lines 1-4) but does not disclose,
placing a release agent in the die assembly;
In a similar endeavor of forming an article with a punch/die assembly [0063] where the article comprises
multiple powder layers ([0227], Fig. 11), Pope discloses a release agent between the mold and
container (Fig. 11, element 1108 is the container = bottom punch) for a bisque firing of materials.
Pope discloses the claimed invention except for use of the release agent in a sintering process. It would
have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to use the release agent of Pope in the die assembly of Casari, as one would be motivated to
do so for the purpose of ensuring the formed article can be removed following firing, as noted by Pope
([0227] lines 6-8).
Claim 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Casari and in further view of
USPGPUB 20180178415A1 by Wang et. al. (herein “Wang”).
Regarding Claim 9 - Casari in the rejection of claim 1 above teaches all of the limitations of
claim 1.
Casari does not disclose,
placing a liner in the die assembly.
In a similar endeavor of applying heat and pressure to ceramic powder using a punch/die assembly
([0038]-[0045]) Wang discloses female blocks 302 (liner) within the cavity of the outer sleeve 301 (outer sleeve = mold) (Fig. 3, [0036]), where the upper and lower pressing heads 303/304 (upper/lower punch) are inside the female blocks 302 [0038]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the female blocks (liner) of Wang in in the die assembly of Casari, as one would be motivated to do so for the purpose of uniformly distributing compressing force applied to the female outer sleeve and to avoid a damage to the mold due to a stress concentration occurred at corners of the inner wall of the mold, as noted by Wang [0037].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
Jankowiak et. al. (USPGPUB 20200115236A1) discloses uniaxial pressure and heat via Joule heating, applied to powders in multiple cavities of a die assembly to produce an article where the first powder is baked to a first density threshold and a second powder is baked to a second density threshold.
Bram et. al. (USPGPUB 20190070818A1) discloses uniaxial pressure and heat via Joule heating, applied to powders in a mold cavity to produce an article with different porosity in different areas of the compact.
Paulus et. al. (USPGPUB 20180304362A1) discloses uniaxial pressure and heat via Joule heating, applied to powders in a mold cavity where graphite paper is used between the punch tooling .
and the material to allow article release after densification. Further, fugitive tools are non-planar.
Fang, et. al. (CN113001720A) discloses a die assembly of hot pressing sintering mold with a sleeve, where graphite paper is used within the mold cavity.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER PAUL DAIGLER whose telephone number is (571)272-1066. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-4:30 CT.
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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached on 571-270-7001. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER PAUL DAIGLER/ Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/ERIN SNELTING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741
Prosecution Insights