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 .
Foreign 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 July 23, 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 37 CFR 1.98. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on July 23, 2025. These drawings are accepted.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
(i) The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Appropriate correction is required.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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 1-13 and 20 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.
With regard to claim 1 (and analogously, claim 10), the scope of the claim is indefinite due to inconsistencies between what is respectively recited in the preamble and body of claim 1 (and analogously, claim 10).
More specifically, the preamble indicates that claim 1 (and analogously, claim 10) is drawn to an "magnetic recording medium," per se. In contrast, the body of the claims recites at least one element which is extraneous to the "magnetic recording medium", i.e., "a magnetic head" and a first index Q (associated with attributes of the magnetic head, including CTH - temperature coefficient of the magnetic head, and CTQ, where CTQ is a temperature expansion coefficient [ppm/ºC] of a value most deviated from the temperature expansion coefficient of the magnetic head (among the temperature expansion coefficients of the magnetic recording medium under a relative humidity environment of 10%RH or more and 80%RH or less).
The positive quantitative attributes and relationships set forth between the magnetic recording medium and the magnetic head (extraneous element), appear to indicate that the claims are drawn to the combination of the magnetic recording medium and the magnetic head.
Such discrepancies with regard to the claim preamble and the body of claim 1 (and analogously, claim 10), and claims that depend therefrom, prevent any reasonable determination of the scope of protection to be afforded by these claims.
Additionally, since claims 3-9, 12, 13, and 20 depend directly or indirectly from claim 1, they too are thus rejected under the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112.
Analogously, as per claim 2 (and analogously, claim 11), the scope of the claim is indefinite due to inconsistencies between what is respectively recited in the preamble and body of claim 2 (and analogously, claim 11).
More specifically, the preamble indicates that claim 2 (and analogously, claim 11) is drawn to an "magnetic recording medium," per se. In contrast, the body of the claims recites at least one element which is extraneous to the "magnetic recording medium", i.e., "a magnetic head" and a second index R associated with attributes of the magnetic head, including CHH and CHR - (humidity expansion coefficients).
The positive quantitative attributes and relationships set forth between the magnetic recording medium and the magnetic head (extraneous element), appear to indicate that the claims are drawn to the combination of the magnetic recording medium and the magnetic head.
Such discrepancies with regard to the claim preamble and the body of claim 2 (and analogously, claim 11), prevent any reasonable determination of the scope of protection to be afforded by this claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14-19 are tentatively considered allowable over the art of record, pending an updated search, amendments or arguments presented by the Applicant and considered by the Examiner in reply to this office communication.
Reasons for allowance will be provided at the time prosecution on the merits is closed and a Notice of Allowability is issued, when all outstanding matters, including informalities, objections, rejections, and prior art - including any future prior art references cited by the Examiner and/or Applicant, have been fully addressed, in response to this office action.
Citation of Prior or Relevant Art on enclosed PTO-892
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The cited art made of record (see the enclosed PTO-892), not applied to the rejection of the claims, each disclose aspects of the claimed invention, including wherein magnetic recording media include chloride-containing materials within composite layers of magnetic recording media.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to William J Klimowicz whose telephone number is (571)272-7577. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 8:00AM-6PM, ET.
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, Steven Lim can be reached at (571)270-1210. 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.
/WILLIAM J KLIMOWICZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2688
Prosecution Insights