Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/110,704

METHOD FOR PRODUCING AN ABRADABLE COATING, ABRADABLE COATING AND COATED PART

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Mar 11, 2025
Examiner
CLARK, RYAN C
Art Unit
3745
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
UNIVERSITE PAUL SABATIER TOULOUSE III
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 12m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
231 granted / 265 resolved
+17.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 12m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
302
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.6%
-37.4% vs TC avg
§103
38.8%
-1.2% vs TC avg
§102
30.5%
-9.5% vs TC avg
§112
26.4%
-13.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 265 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . 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 and 13-17 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 1 recites, in in lines 3-5, “a matrix powder comprising a zirconia co-doped with a transition metal or a lanthanide and a ceramic filler precursor powder comprising a hydrate or a hydroxyl group”. It is unclear if the claim is intended to include, ‘ “a zirconia co-doped with a transition metal” or “a lanthanide and a ceramic filler precursor powder comprising a hydrate or a hydroxyl group” ‘ or for example: “a zirconia co-doped with a transition metal or a lanthanide, and a ceramic filler precursor powder comprising a hydrate or a hydroxyl group” and renders the claim indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites the limitation "the loading rate of the mixture" in lines 5-6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 2-9 and 13-17 are rejected based on their dependencies. Claim 5 recites the limitation "the loading rate" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 9 recites the limitation "a pulverulent composition" in line 2. However, there already exists antecedent basis for “a pulverulent composition” in claim 1, line 3; therefore, it is unclear if there is intended to be a second “a pulverulent composition” in claim 9, or if the claim is referring to the “a pulverulent composition” from claim 1. Claim 13 recites the limitation "a pulverulent composition" in lines 1-2. However, there already exists antecedent basis for “a pulverulent composition” in claim 1, line 3; therefore, it is unclear if there is intended to be a second “a pulverulent composition” in claim 9, or if the claim is referring to the “a pulverulent composition” from claim 1. Claim 14 recites, “flash sintering” in line 2. However; claim 1, already recites “reactive sintering” in line 9. The Examiner understands “reactive sintering” to be the process of sintering the matrix powder composition through a chemical reaction of the precursor powders under pressure and a particular temperature, and “flash sintering” to be the process of sintering the matrix powder composition by applying a voltage under pressure. It is unclear from the language of the claims if reactive sintering step of claim 1 is also intended to include flash sintering or if the step is mutually exclusive. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-9 and 13-17 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. Regarding claim 1, Zhao Meng et al. (Properties of Yttria-Stabilized-Zirconia Based Ceramic Composite Abradable Coastings) discloses a 8mol% YSZ “Yttria-stabilized Zirconia” and LaPO4 “Lanthanum Phosphate” sintered by either pressureless sintering at 1600C, and spark plasma sintering (e.g., Flash Sintering) at 1250C at 20MPa (see “Material preparation”). However, Zhao Meng et al. does not disclose, teach, or suggest, “a ceramic filler hydrated precursor powder comprising a hydrate or hydroxyl group”, “compressing the obtained pulverulent composition at a pressure greater than 150 MPa”, “reactive sintering of the obtained pulverulent composition during which the compression is maintained, at a temperature of less than 550C”, and “the particles of the matrix powder in the sintered pulverulent composition have an aspect ratio of 2 or greater.” Roussaddle Melanie et al. (“Phase Evolution and Sinterability of Lanthanum Phosphate – Towards a Below 600C Spark Plasma Sintering” teaches using a Lanthanum Phosphate hydrate (See Material and Method) “a lanthanide and a ceramic filler hydrated precursor powder comprising a hydrate or hydroxyl group” in a low temperature sintering (< 350C) at 400MPA. However, they do not teach, “A loading rate of the mixture being comprised between 5 and 40% in volume” or “and the particle of the matrix powder in the sintered pulverulent composition have an aspect ratio of 2 or greater” Selezneff et al. teaches in the field of abradable layers for gas turbine engines, nanometric ceramic particles having a number-average form factor grater than or equal to 3 ([0007]) and, “The presence of nanometric ceramic particles in the indicated contents advantageously further improves the erosion resistance of the abradable layer obtained without affecting the abradability. [0012]” Neither Zhao Meng et al., Roussaddle Melanie et al., or Selezneff et al. disclose, teach, or suggest, “wherein the loading rate of the mixture being comprises between 5 and 40% in volume” Claims 2-9 and 13-17 would be allowable based on their dependencies. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US PGPUB 2021/0172331 A1 discloses an abradable coating for rotating blades of a turbomachine. WO 2017/158265 A1 discloses a method for manufacturing an abradable plate and repairing a turbine shroud. FR 3044945 A1 discloses an abradable coating with variable density. US PGPUB 2017/0088471 A1 discloses cold sintering ceramics and composites. US PGPUB 2015/0211382 A1 discloses an abradable coating made of a material having a low surface roughness. US PGPUB 2013/0177740 A1 discloses a powder-based material system with stable porosity. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN C CLARK whose telephone number is (571)272-2871. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 0730-1730, Alternate Fridays 0730-1630. 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, Courtney D Heinle can be reached at (571)-270-3508. 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. /RYAN C CLARK/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 11, 2025
Application Filed
Mar 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12584459
A FLOATING HYBRID DARRIEUS-SAVONIUS TIDAL/WAVE/WIND HARVESTING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577884
RAPID ACTIVE CLEARANCE CONTROL SYSTEM OF INTER STAGE AND MID-SEALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12572724
Representing Full-Scale Wind Turbine Noise
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12571396
IMPELLER PUMP APPARATUS FOR PUMPING SHEAR SENSITIVE FLUIDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12570416
Quick Release Hub Of A Propulsion Mechanism
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
87%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+8.5%)
1y 12m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 265 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