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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 19 May 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1 and 3-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Athey et al. (WO 92/18659).
Considering claim 1, Athey teaches a Ni-based super alloy (abstract) for producing a fine grained article (p.2 lines 22-30). The compositional range of the alloy is set for in Table I in weight percent (p.4).
Component
Instant (wt.%)
Athey (wt.%)
Al
1.0-3.5
1.2-3.5
Ti
0.0-3.6
3 - 7
Nb
0.0-6.0
0-1
Ta
0.0-4.9
0-1
W
0.0-5.4
0-4.5
Mo
0.0-4.0
2-5.5
Co
8.9-30.0
10 - 20
Cr
10.8-20.6
12 - 20
C
0.02-0.35
0.005-0.25
B
0.001-0.2
0.005-0.5
Zr
0.001-0.5
0.01-0.1
Fe
1.0-6.0
0-2.0
Ni
Balance
Balance
While not expressly teaching a singular example of the claimed alloy this would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date in view of the teachings of Athey as the ranges of Al, Ti, Nb, Ta, W, Mo, Co, Cr, C, B, and Zr as well as the ratio of W+Mo and Al+Ti+Nb+Ta overlap those which are claimed and the courts have held that where claimed ranges overlap or line inside of those disclosed in the prior art a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05.
Considering claim 3, Athey teaches where the Al content ranges 1.2-3.5% (Table 1). See MPEP 2144.05.
Considering claim 4¸ Athey teaches where the W content ranges 0-4.5% (Table 1). See MPEP 2144.05.
Considering claim 5, Athey teaches where the Ti content ranges from 3-7% (Table 1). See MPEP 2144.05.
Considering claims 6-7, Athey teaches where the Co content ranges from 10-20% (Table 1). See MPEP 2144.05.
Considering claim 8, Athey teaches where the C content ranges from 0.005-0.25% (Table 1). See MPEP 2144.05.
Considering claim 9, Athey teaches where the B content ranges from 0.005-0.5% (Table 1). See MPEP 2144.05.
Considering claim 10, Athey teaches where the Nb content ranges from 0-1% (Table 1). See MPEP 2144.05.
Considering claim 11, the minimum contents of Al, Ti, Nb, and Ta set forth in Table 1 of Athey overlaps that which is claimed. See MPEP 2144.05.
Considering claim 12, Athey teaches where the Mo content ranges from 2-5.5% (Table 1). See MPEP 2144.05.
Considering claim 13, Athey teaches where the Ta content ranges from 0-1% (Table 1). See MPEP 2144.05.
Considering claim 14, Athey teaches where the W content ranges from 0-4.5% (Table 1). See MPEP 2144.05.
Considering claim 15, the minimum contents of Al, Ti, Nb, and Ta set forth in Table 1 of Athey overlaps that which is claimed. See MPEP 2144.05.
Considering claim 16, Athey teaches where the Al content ranges from 1.2-3.5% (Table 1). See MPEP 2144.05.
Considering claims 17-19, Athey teaches where the Cr content ranges from 12-20%. See MPEP 2144.05.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art to the instant claims is that of Athey as set forth above. Athey differs in that the content of Ti, Nb, and Ta divided by the content of Al does not always result in a value of 1.5 or less and therefore this would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SETH DUMBRIS whose telephone number is (571)272-5105. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:00 AM - 3:30 PM.
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.
SETH DUMBRIS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1784
/SETH DUMBRIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Prosecution Insights