DETAILED ACTION
Examiner’s Note
This action is to replace/supersede the Non-Final Rejection mailed 5/28/2026 and restart the period for response for Applicant.
It is noted that the Examiner is maintaining the withdrawal of all rejections as noted in the 5/28/2026 action with this action including additional withdrawals.
Moreover, this action is a second Non-Final Rejection being sent in response to the request of the attorney, Christian Ehret, that a new Examiner be assigned this case and to address some of the agreements reached during the interview held 7/1/2026.
It is also noted that the previous action mailed 5/28/2026 was in response to a request for continued examination. The new Examiner is not going to again address the previously withdrawn claim rejections noted in the Non-Final Rejection mailed 5/28/2026.
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 .
Withdrawn 112(a) and 112(b) rejection
Upon consideration of the documents of record and the general knowledge in the art, the Examiner is withdrawing the following rejections
Claim 1 lines 7-8 “inducing a second anisotropy in the magnetic ribbon, the second anisotropy having a uniaxial direction” fails to comply with the written description requirement as well as the dependent claims. The Examiner analyzed paragraph [0055], in particular “uniaxial magnetic field annealing of the magnetic ribbon creates anisotropy where the induced easy axis is defined by the uniaxial field and associated domain structures can be simple stripe or bar domains,” as well as the general definitions of easy axis, anisotropy, uniaxial, and simple stripe/bar domains and determined that the second anisotropy could have a uniaxial direction when considering the magnetic field would be passed along the induced easy axis to form the parallel strips/bars that would be formed in a uniaxial direction. Therefore, the previous 112(a) and 112(b) rejections are being withdrawn.
The 112(a) and 112(b) rejections over Claims 10, 12, 20, 25, and 26.
As noted in the Interview summary, the 112(a) rejection over Claim 18 and the 112(b) rejection over “anisotropy” are also withdrawn.
Regarding the 112(b) rejection of claims 7 and 8, given that the newly amended claim 1 requires the two annealing processes be performed until the magnetic ribbon exhibits a nanocomposite structure and claim 7 requires a metal amorphous nanocomposite material, the MANC alloy material would be the resulting magnetic ribbon
Response to Remarks filed February 13, 2026
In response to the arguments and amendments filed 2/13/2026 regarding Miguel, the Examiner agrees that Miguel does not disclose or suggest that the magnetic field annealing occurs by passing the magnetic field transverse to the longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon, rather Miguel teaches the magnetic field is applied longitudinally to the ribbon (Miguel, pg. 2 “Experimental Procedure” second paragraph).
Soyka in view of Leary-2016
Applicant's arguments filed February 13, 2026 with respect to Soyka in view of Leary-2016 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues none of the prior art of record performs magnetic field annealing and stress annealing as claimed until the magnetic ribbon teaches the target permeability and exhibits a nanocomposite structure (Remarks para. spanning pp. 9-10).
Soyka in view of Leary-2016 discloses annealing with a magnetic field applied in the plane of the ribbon transversally to the ribbon axis while applying a tensile stress along the ribbon length and controlling the type and magnitude of anisotropy by controlled the applied stress to form a nanocrystalline sample (Soyka Abstract, 220:1 to 220:2, 222:2, Fig. 2) with a desired permeability (Leary-2016 [0008], [0011], Fig. 2, [0035]-[0036]).
For the above cited reasons, the rejection of Soyka in view of Leary-2016 is maintained. Moreover, Applicant’s did not present any specific arguments against the propriety of the rejections of Soyka in view of Leary.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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 the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 20, 22, 25, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Soyka (Soyka and Kraus. Magnetic properties of stress/field annealed nanocrystalline FeCoNbB alloys. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 203 (1999) 220-222. Citations as page:column) in view of Leary-2016 (US 2016/0319412).
Regarding claim 1, Soyka discloses a method of modifying a domain structure (221:2 to 222:1) of a magnetic ribbon, comprising:
generating a target permeability along one or more axes of the magnetic ribbon (the domain structure and related properties, such as permeability, can be easily controlled by stress applied during stress/field annealing) (Abstract, 220:2, Fig. 2, 221:2, 222:2) by:
inducing an anisotropy in the magnetic ribbon by (tensile) stress annealing the magnetic ribbon along a longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon (along the ribbon length) (Abstract, 220:1-2); and
inducing a second anisotropy in the magnetic ribbon, the second anisotropy having a uniaxial direction (221:1), by magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon in a magnetic field transverse to the longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon (Abstract, 220:1-2), resulting in a modified domain structure (221:2), wherein the magnetic field annealing and the stress annealing are performed until the magnetic ribbon reaches the target permeability (Abstract, 220:2, Fig. 2, 221:2, 222:2) and exhibits a nanocomposite structure (Abstract, 220:1, 222:2).
Soyka discloses the annealing process induces magnetic anisotropy (220:1 to 221:2).
Leary-2016 discloses modifying a domain structure ([0010]) by a combination of stress and magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon ([0034], [0059]) in order to generate a desired permeability along one or more axes of the magnetic ribbon ([0011], Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the annealing process of Soyka to generate a desired permeability along one or more axes of the magnetic ribbon because the magnetic field is applied transversally to the ribbon axis and the tensile strength along the ribbon axis (Soyka 220:1), where the direction of the magnetic easy axis determines permeability of the core with a longitudinally field annealed or strain annealed core resulting in primarily longitudinal domains (Fig. 2 Curve B) and a transverse field annealed or strain annealed core resulting in primarily transverse domains (Fig. 2 Curve C) (Leary-2016 [0011]).
Moreover, one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to determine that the stress annealing and magnetic field annealing are performed until desired properties are achieved including a target permeability and nanocomposite structure.
Regarding claim 7, Soyka in view of Leary-2016 discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising employing a MANC alloy material as the magnetic ribbon (Soyka Abstract, 220:1, 222:2; Leary-2016 [0034]-[0036]).
Regarding claim 8, Soyka discloses (CoxFe84-xNb7B9 (x is 21 to 33) (220:1).
Soyka is silent to the MANC alloy being a Cobalt-rich MANC alloy.
Leary-2016 discloses the MANC alloy being a Cobalt-rich MANC alloy ([0034], [0036]-[0037], [0055]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Soyka to use a Cobalt-rich MANC alloy because it has twice the strain annealing response of Fe-rich nanocomposite compositions, for a given stress level produces higher induced anisotropy, achieves higher induced anisotropy, and has improved mechanical properties, in particular strain to fracture (Leary-2016 [0037]).
Regarding claim 10, Soyka in view of Leary-2016 discloses magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon comprises magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon in a magnetic field at temperatures at or below temperatures utilized during the stress annealing (annealed at 550°C and 600°C with applied magnetic field and applied tensile strength, such that the magnetic field annealing is at the temperature utilized during stress annealing (Soyka 220:1) in order to reduce high frequency losses by optimizing the domain structure of the magnetic ribbon without substantially affecting the target permeability (Soyka 221:2; Leary-2016 [0003], [0009]-[0011], [0061]-[0062], Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 12, Soyka in view of Leary-2016 discloses simultaneously stress and magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon (Soyka 220:1; Leary-2016 [0034], [0059]).
Regarding claim 13, Soyka discloses stress annealing comprises stress annealing the magnetic ribbon with a thermal process zone via direct conduction, convection, induction annealing in order to allow for ease of access of magnetic field to the process zone, susceptor based induction annealing in order to allow for ease of access of magnetic field to the process zone, via radiation processing, annealing using one of laser and heat lamps in order to allow for ease of access of magnetic field to the process zone, or any combination thereof (heating, convection) (Soya 220:1; Leary-2106 [0067]).
Regarding claim 20, Soyka in view of Leary-2016 discloses magnetic field annealing comprises magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon in a magnetic field such that at least one of a crystalline phase and an amorphous phase of the magnetic ribbon has a Curie temperature higher than a processing temperature of the magnetic field (annealing at 550°C or 600°C) (Soyka 220:1) (Curie temperature of the amorphous phase in Co-rich alloys can exceed 600°C and the Curie temperature of the amorphous matrix is typically lower than the Curie temperature of the crystalline grains and operating temperatures approached the amorphous phase Curie temperature result in increased coercivity and higher losses as the random anisotropy between grains breaks down) (Leary-2016 [0037], [0060]).
Regarding claim 22, Soyka in view of Leary-2016 discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the stress annealing comprises applying tensile stresses to a surface of the magnetic ribbon along a longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon (along the ribbon length) (Soyka 220:1; Leary-2016 [0057]).
Regarding claim 25, Soyka is silent to forming the magnetic ribbon into a tape wound core before magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon.
Leary-2016 discloses forming the magnetic ribbon into a tape wound core before magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon ([0018], [0059], [0070]-[0073]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Soyka to form the magnetic ribbon into a tape wound core before magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon because it produces continuous sections of strain-annealed ribbon wherein the local permeability of each ribbon section is determined by the time, temperature, and applied tension to the tape-wound core while the tape-wound core is passing through a heating device and variable permeability can be controlled by tight bends, radii of the ribbon, and/or near pole faces (Leary-2016 [0071]-[0074]).
Regarding claim 26, Soyka is silent to the desired permeability varying over a length of the magnetic ribbon.
Leary-2016 discloses the desired permeability varies over a length of the magnetic ribbon ([0017]-[0018], [0069]-[0074]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Soyka to vary the desired permeability over a length of the magnetic ribbon to balance the flux level within the core to reduce flux concentrations (Leary-2106 [0069]), to avoid flux concentrations, to avoid stray fields, and to avoid imbalanced flux distribution (Leary-2106 [0074]).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Soyka (Soyka and Kraus. Magnetic properties of stress/field annealed nanocrystalline FeCoNbB alloys. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 203 (1999) 220-222. Citations as page:column) in view of Leary-2016 (US 2016/0319412) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wun-Fogle (US 6,176,943).
Regarding claim 18, Soyka is silent to the magnetic ribbon forming a part of a magnetic path.
Wun-Fogle discloses a combination of stress and magnetic field annealing (1:63-67, 2:41-57, Fig. 2) wherein magnetic field annealing comprises magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon in a magnetic field such that the magnetic ribbon forms a part of a magnetic path (a constant DC electrical current is applied to the wire, which results in the inducement of a magnetic field) (2:41-57).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Soyka to apply a constant DC electrical current to induce a magnet field because it results in a continued presence of a magnetic field within the wire while undergoing the final step of cooldown, which established the desired magnetic anisotropy (Wun-Fogle 2:41-57).
The limitations of reducing a maximum magnitude, a spatial extent, and a uniformity of the magnetic field required to generate the desired permeability have been considered and determined to result from the claimed annealing the magnetic ribbon in a magnetic field such that the magnetic ribbon forms a part of a magnetic path. Since the prior art discloses annealing the magnetic ribbon in a magnetic field such that the magnetic ribbon forms a part of a magnetic path (Wun-Fogle 2:41-57), then the claimed results of reducing a maximum magnitude, a spatial extent, and a uniformity of the magnetic field required to generate the desired permeability naturally flows.
Related Art
Dmitrieva (Dmitrieva et al. Thermal Stability of Magnetic Properties of Nanocrystalline (Fe0.7Co0.3)88Hf4Mo2ZraB4Cu1 Alloy with Induced Magnetic Anisotropy. The Physics of Metals and Metallography. 2016. Vol. 117, No. 10, pp. 976-981.)
Dmitrieva discloses nanocrystallizing annealing in the presence of both tensile stresses and ac magnetic field (Introduction) applied along the long axis of ribbons (TMMT) (Experimental) to influence magnetic properties, such as coercive force (Abstract, Results and Discussion, Conclusions, Figs. 1, 4).
Kane (Kane et al. On the microstructural origin of stress-induced anisotropy in Co67Fe4Mo1.5Si16.5B11 metallic glass. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 280 (2004) 84-89.)
Kane discloses a method of modifying a domain structure of a magnetic ribbon (Abstract, 1. Introduction, 4. Conclusions), comprising: generating a target permeability along one or more axes of the magnetic ribbon (Abstract) by: stress annealing the magnetic ribbon (2. Experimental details) to induce a first anisotropy having a non-uniaxial direction (stress-induced anisotropy from magnetoelastic coupling) (Abstract, 1. Introduction, 3. Results and discussions paras. 5, 7, Fig. 3), resulting in a modified domain structure (1. Introduction, 3. Results and discussions para. 1, Fig. 1).
Gonzalez (Gonzalez and Blanco. Effect of the direction of field annealing on the stress + field induced magnetic anisotropy in Co-Fe-Ni amorphous alloys. J. Mater. Res., Vol. 7, No. 7, Jul 1992. 1602-1605.)
Gonzalez discloses a method of modifying a domain structure (magnetic anisotropy) of a magnetic ribbon (1602:1:1, 1602:2:2), comprising: generating a target permeability along one or more axes of the magnetic ribbon (Abstract, 1602:2:4) by: stress annealing the magnetic ribbon; and magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon (1602:2:1) to induce a second anisotropy having a uniaxial direction, resulting in a modified domain structure (Abstract, 1603-1604) that contributes to directional ordering of atomic pairs and tetrahedral holes like 3Co-1Fe and 1Co-3Fe (Gonzalez 1603-1604).
Herzer (US 6,254,695)
Herzer discloses a method of modifying a domain structure of a magnetic ribbon, comprising: a combination of stress and magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon (1:56-65, 4:45-60) in order to generate a desired permeability (6:20-26) along one or more axes of the magnetic ribbon (4:45-60, 9:20-61) and optimizing (via heat treatment) (12:46-59) the domain structure (anisotropy) of the magnetic ribbon (4:45-60) without substantially affecting the desired permeability (magnetic properties, including permeability) (6:20-40).
Clark (US 7,479,193)
Clark discloses applying a compressive or tensile physical stress and a magnetic field during annealing of a magnetostrictive (3:47-65, Figs. 2, 3) ferromagnetic alloy (3:10-14).
Kernion (Kernion et al. Giant induced magnetic anisotropy in stain annealed Co-based nanocomposite alloys. Applied Physics Letters. 101, 102408 (2012).)
Kernion discloses stain annealing Co-rich nanocomposite alloys with tunable permeability (Abstract) manufactured by annealing at 550°C or 560°C under tension (102408-2 col. 2 para. 2).
A. Leary (A. Leary et al. Stress induced anisotropy in Co-rich magnetic nanocomposites for inductive applications. J. Mater. Res., Vol. 31, No. 20, Oct 28, 2016, 3089-3107.)
A. Leary discloses the results (IV. Results and Discussion) of annealing under stress Co-based metal/amorphous nanocomposites (MANCs) (Abstract, III. Experimental Procedure).
Leary-2014 (US 2014/0338793)
Leary-2014 discloses soft magnetic materials of nanocomposite ribbon with Co-rich compositions ([0018], [0034]-[0037]) that has tunable magnetic permeability and low core losses at high frequencies ([0002]) that are tuned by adjusting the composition, temperature, configuration, and magnitude of stress applied during annealing ([0015]).
Blanco (Blanco et al. Measurement of magnetostriction and induced magnetic anisotropy by SAMR method in Co-rich stress + field annealed amorphous ribbons. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 101 (1991) 35-36.)
Blanco discloses (Co0.95Fe0.05)80Si10B10 amorphous alloy ribbons subject to current-annealing under simultaneous action of a stress and magnetic field (Abstract, 2. Experimental) and the resulting magnetic properties (3. Results and their analysis, Figs. 1-2).
Kapoor (US 2015/0070124)
Kapoor discloses a soft magnetic core in which permeabilities that occur at least two different locations on the core are different ([0005]-[0006], [0036]).
Lachowicz (Lachowicz et al. Temperature dependence of stress-anneal-induced anisotropy in nanocrystalline magnets. J. Phys. IV France 8 (1998) Pr2-23 to Pr2-26.)
Lachowicz discloses stress-annealing a Fe73.5Cu1Nb3Si15.5B7 ribbon (2. Experimental) to nanocrystallize, where the anisotropy can originate from magnetoelastic coupling within the crystallites or in directional diatomic ordering within the volume of the nanocrystalline phase (Abstract, 3. Results and Discussion).
Hernando (Hernando et al. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 101 (1991) 6-10.)
Hernando reviews stress and field induced anisotropies in Co based amorphous ferromagnets (Abstract) that can have nanocrystals (Sections 1, 4.3).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIELLE CARDA whose telephone number is (571)270-1240. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-4:00 EST.
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, Sally Merkling can be reached at (571) 272-6297. 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.
/DANIELLE M. CARDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1738
Prosecution Insights