DETAILED ACTION
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 final rejection. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on February 13, 2026 has been entered.
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 .
Priority
The pending application claims priority to: PCT/US 2020/041558 filed July 10, 2020 and published as WO 2021/011360; and US Provisional 62/921,887 filed July 12, 2019.
Claim Status
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s Claim Amendments and Remarks filed February 13, 2026.
Claims Filing Date
February 13, 2026
Amended
1
Cancelled
2, 3, 9, 14-17
Pending
1, 4-8, 10-13, 18-28
Withdrawn
4-6, 11, 19, 21, 23, 24, 27, 28
Under Examination
1, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 18, 20, 22, 25, 26
Claim 26 has a status identifier of “Currently Amended”. However, there are no amendments in claim 26. This status identifier is improper. 37 C.F.R. 1.121. MPEP 714(II)(C).
Withdrawn Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following 112(a) rejections are withdrawn due to claim amendment:
Claim 1 lines 6-7 “stress annealing the magnetic ribbon to induce a first anisotropy having a non-uniaxial direction”.
Claim 13 stress annealing with a thermal process zone in combination with claim 1 stress annealing to induce anisotropy with a non-uniaxial direction.
Claim 22 stress annealing by applying tensile stresses to a magnetic ribbon surface along a longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon in combination with claim 1 stress annealing to induce anisotropy with a non-uniaxial direction.
The following 112(a) rejections are withdrawn due to claim cancellation:
Claim 3 stress annealing along a longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon and magnetic field annealing in a magnetic field transverse to the longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon in combination with claim 1 stress annealing to induce anisotropy with a non-uniaxial direction and magnetic field annealing to induce anisotropy having a uniaxial direction fails.
Claim 9 generating a nanocomposite structure following a combination of stress and magnetic field annealing in combination with claim 1 stress annealing to induce anisotropy with a non-uniaxial direction and magnetic field annealing to induce anisotropy having a uniaxial direction.
The following 112(b) rejections are withdrawn due to claim amendment:
Claim 1 lines 6-7 “first anisotropy having a non-uniaxial direction”.
Claim 22 lines 1-3 “stress annealing comprises applying tensile stresses to a surface of the magnetic ribbon along a longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon”.
The following 112(a) rejections are withdrawn due to claim cancellation:
Claim 3 lines 2-6 “stress annealing the magnetic ribbon in order to generate the target permeability comprises stress annealing the magnetic ribbon along a longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon, and wherein magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon comprises magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon in a magnetic field transverse to the longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon”.
Claim 9 lines 3-4 “the combination of stress and magnetic field annealing”.
Response to Remarks filed February 13, 2026
112(a); 112(b)
Applicant's arguments filed February 13, 2026 with respect to the 112(a) and 112(b) rejections have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues the claims have been amended to clarify the claimed invention in view of the specification (Remarks para. spanning pp. 7-8) and that [0055] supports the claims (Remarks p. 8 para. 2).
The claim amendments are not supported nor are clarified regarding inducing a second anisotropy having a uniaxial direction by magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon in a magnetic field transverse to the longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon as recited in claim 1 and in combination with dependent claims directed to magnetic field annealing.
In light of claim amendment the following 112(a) rejection has been updated:
Previous claim 1 lines 8-9 “magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon to induce a second anisotropy having a uniaxial direction” to amended claim 1 lines 7-8 “inducing a second anisotropy in the magnetic ribbon, the second anisotropy having a uniaxial direction”.
Miguel
Applicant's arguments filed February 13, 2026 with respect to Miguel have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues claim 1 specifies the magnetic field annealing and the stress annealing are performed until the magnetic ribbon reaches the target permeability and exhibits a nanocomposite structure (Remarks p. 9 para. 1), which is alleged as being disclosed in Miguel Section II (Remarks p. 9 para. 2), but Miguel does not disclose controlling any process parameters or other actions to generate a target permeability (Remarks p. 9 para. 3), and, while Miguel Fig. 4 discloses a crystallized phase, Miguel does not suggest a target permeability (Remarks para. spanning pp. 9-10).
Miguel discloses inducing magnetic anisotropy by stress and axial magnetic-field annealing to drastically affect soft magnetic character (Abstract, IV. Conclusions). Miguel also discloses how stress and field (SFA) annealing under different temperatures (II. Experimental Procedure) influences magnetic properties (III.B. Induced magnetic anisotropy and coercivity, Figs. 6, 10-13). This disclosure of Miguel anticipates or renders obvious generating a target permeability along one or more axes of the magnetic ribbon.
In support, Soyka discloses coercive force increases whereas permeability decreases (220:1) and that the domain structure and related properties, such as coercive force and permeability, can be easily controlled by stress applied during stress/field annealing (221:2). Therefore, Miguel’s control of soft magnetic properties (Abstract, IV. Conclusions), including coercive field (force) (III.B. Induced magnetic anisotropy and coercivity, Fig. 10), relates to a target permeability.
The applicant argues amended claim 1 specifies the induced second anisotropy (Remarks p. 10 para. 2) because applying a current as disclosed by Miguel would produce a circulating field and would not produce a modified domain structure nor would it produce an anisotropy having a uniaxial direction with a transverse magnetic field and any anisotropy created by such current would vary spatially within the magnetic ribbon (Remarks p. 10 para. 3).
Objective evidence should be supported by actual proof. MPP 716.01(c)(I). Arguments presented by the applicant cannot take the place of evidence in the record. MPEP 716.01(c)(II). Evidence to substantiate applicant’s allegations that Miguel would not produce a modified domain structure and that any anisotropy created by the disclosure of Miguel would vary spatially within the magnetic ribbon has not been presented. Further, an explanation of how anisotropy that varies spatially within the magnetic ribbon differentiates from the claimed subject matter has not been presented.
Miguel discloses how stress and field annealing influence magnetic properties of an amorphous alloy (I. Introduction), such as hysteresis loops, coercive field, and induced magnetic anisotropy (II.B. Induced magnetic anisotropy and coercivity, Figs. 6, 10). Since the magnetic domain structure is responsible for the magnetic behavior, and the process of Miguel is disclosed as changing magnetic properties (behavior), then, the process of Miguel reads on the claimed method that produces a modified domain structure.
Contrary to applicant’s argument, Miguel recites the disclosed treatments, which include tensile stress annealing, axial magnetic field annealing, and tensile and magnetic field annealing (II. Experimental Procedure), result in “a uniaxial in-plane magnetic anisotropy” (Abstract, IV. Conclusions). Therefore, Miguel discloses magnetic field annealing induces a second anisotropy having a uniaxial direction.
Finally Miguel discloses applying an axial magnetic field longitudinally to the ribbon (Abstract, II. Experimental Procedure para. 2). This produces a circulating field, which reads on a magnetic field transverse to the longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon.
For the above cited reasons, the rejection over Miguel is maintained.
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.
Kane in view of Miguel; Kane in view of Gonzalez
The rejections of Kane in view of Miguel and Kane in view of Gonzalez were added in the August 14, 2025 Final Rejection in response to applicant’s 6/26/25 claim 1 lines 6-7 recitation of “stress annealing the magnetic ribbon to induce a first anisotropy having a non-uniaxial direction”. Applicant’s 2/13/26 claim 1 lines 4-6 amendments remove this limitation.
Due to the current amendments, the previous rejections of Kane in view of Miguel and Kane in view of Gonzalez are withdrawn to keep with compact prosecution practices.
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, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 18, 20, 22, 25, and 26 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.
Applicant’s reply filed February 13, 2026 did not point out support for this claim amendment. Applicant should specifically point out the support for any amendments made. MPEP 714.02.
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.
Applicant’s specification does not mention induction of a “second anisotropy”.
Applicant’s specification only mentions the uniaxiality of magnetic field annealing in [0055]: “uniaxial magnetic field annealing of the magnetic ribbon creates anisotropy where the induced easy axis is defined by the uniaxial field”. Applicant’s specification appears to support anisotropies that have an induced easy axis defined by the uniaxial field only when the magnetic field annealing is uniaxial. Applicant’s claim does not recite that the direction or uniaxiality of the magnetic field annealing is uniaxial. Further, applicant’s specification recites that the induced easy axis of the anisotropy created by uniaxial magnetic field annealing is “defined by the uniaxial field”, but applicant’s specification does not further explain or support what the definition is, such as how the definition of the uniaxial field relates to the direction of the anisotropy. Applicant’s specification does not provide support regarding this magnetic field annealing in a method that also includes stress annealing. Further, the direction of the stress annealing and the magnetic field annealing influences the anisotropy. Applicant’s specification does not support second anisotropy having a uniaxial direction induced by magnetic field annealing in a magnetic field transverse to the longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected as depending from claim 1.
Claim 10 the temperature of the magnetic field relative to the stress annealing and the reduction of high frequency losses in combination with claim 1 magnetic field annealing to induce second anisotropy having a uniaxial direction fails to comply with the written description requirement. Claim 10 depends from claim 1. Applicant’s specification does not support how the induced anisotropy and induced second anisotropy are influenced by the relative annealing temperatures and how they are related to reducing high frequency losses. Therefore, applicant’s specification does not support the combination of claims 1 and 10.
Claim 12 line 2 simultaneously stress and magnetic field annealing in combination with claim 1 stress annealing to induce anisotropy and magnetic field annealing to induce a second anisotropy having a uniaxial direction fails to comply with the written description requirement. Claim 12 depends from claim 1. Applicant’s specification recites how stress annealing is not generally uniaxial and how magnetic field annealing is uniaxial, but does not support induction of an anisotropy and induction of a second anisotropy as recited in claim 1 in combination with simultaneous stress annealing and magnetic field annealing. Therefore, applicant’s specification does not support the combination of claims 1 and 12.
Claim 13 is rejected as depending from claim 1.
Claim 18 magnetic field annealing with the magnetic ribbon forming part of a magnetic path in combination with claim 1 magnetic field annealing to induce anisotropy having a uniaxial direction fails to comply with the written description requirement. Claim 18 depends from claim 1. Applicant’s specification does not recite how the magnetic ribbon being part of the magnetic path relates to the second induced anisotropy that has a uniaxial direction. Therefore, applicant’s specification does not support the combination of claims 1 and 18.
Claim 18 magnetic field annealing with the magnetic ribbon forming part of a magnetic path in combination with claim 1 magnetic field annealing in a magnetic field transverse to the longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon fails to comply with the written description requirement.
Applicant’s specification, such as [0061], discloses the magnetic ribbon being a part of the magnetic path of the magnetic field, but is silent to the orientation of the magnetic field and the magnetic ribbon. Applicant’s specification, such as [0043], [0060], [0069]-[0071], and [0073], discloses applying a magnetic field transverse to the longitudinal axis, but is silent to the magnetic ribbon also forming part of a magnetic path. Therefore, applicant’s specification does not support the combination of claims 1 and 18.
Claim 20 magnetic field annealing such that a Curie temperature of at least one of a crystalline phase and an amorphous phase is higher than the processing temperature in combination with claim 1 inducing a second anisotropy having a uniaxial direction by magnetic field annealing fails to comply with the written description requirement. Claim 20 depends from claim 1. Applicant’s specification does not relate magnetic field annealing temperature, including being lower than a Curie temperature, to the induction of the second anisotropy that has a uniaxial direction. Therefore, applicant’s specification does not support the combination of claims 1 and 20.
Claim 22 is rejected as depending from claim 1.
Claim 25 the magnetic ribbon being a tape wound core before magnetic field annealing in combination with claim 1 magnetic field annealing to induce a second anisotropy having a uniaxial direction by magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon in a magnetic field transverse to the longitudinal of the magnetic ribbon fails to comply with the written description requirement. Claim 25 depends from claim 1. Applicant’s specification does not support inducing a second anisotropy in the uniaxial direction in a magnetic ribbon that is a tape wound core by magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon in a magnetic field transverse to the longitudinal of the magnetic ribbon. Therefore, applicant’s specification does not support the combination of claims 1 and 25.
Claim 26 varying the magnetic permeability over a length of the magnetic ribbon annealing in combination with claim 1 magnetic field annealing to induce anisotropy having a uniaxial direction fails to comply with the written description requirement. Claim 26 depends from claim 1. Applicant’s specification does not support inducting an anisotropy and a second anisotropy while also varying the magnetic permeability along the ribbon length. Therefore, applicant’s specification does not support the combination of claims 1 and 26.
For the above cited reasons, the pending claims fail to comply with the written description requirement.
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, 7, 8, 10, 12-13, 18, 20, 22, and 25-26 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 lines 6 and 8 “anisotropy” renders the claim indefinite. The term “anisotropy” is defined as a property that has non-uniformity in different directions. Claim 1 does not specify what property has anisotropy (or non-uniformity). For the purpose of examination claim 1 will be given the broadest reasonable interpretation of “anisotropy” referring to magnetic anisotropy.
Claim 1 line 7 “second anisotropy” renders the claim indefinite. The claim does not recite a first anisotropy. It is unclear if the stress annealing induced anisotropy (claim 1 line 4) is a first anisotropy. It is also unclear how the second anisotropy is related to the stress annealing induced anisotropy. For the purpose of examination claim 1 will be given the broadest reasonable interpretation of “second anisotropy” referring to anisotropy induced by magnetic field annealing.
Claim 1 lines 7-8 “the second anisotropy having a uniaxial direction” renders the claim indefinite. The term “anisotropy” is defined as a property that has non-uniformity in different directions. Therefore, it is unclear how a second anisotropy, which has non-uniformity in different directions, also has a uniaxial direction.
Claim 1 lines 7-9 “inducing a second anisotropy in the magnetic ribbon, the second anisotropy having a uniaxial direction, by magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon in a magnetic field transverse to the longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon” renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear how magnetic field annealing in a magnetic field transverse to the longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon relates to inducing a second anisotropy having a uniaxial direction. For example, the magnetic field transverse to the longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon could necessarily induce a second anisotropy having a uniaxial direction or further control could be required. For the purpose of examination claim 1 will be given the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed magnetic field annealing in a magnetic field transverse to the longitudinal axis of the ribbon necessarily also satisfying the magnetic field annealing inducing a second anisotropy having a uniaxial direction.
Claim 7 lines 1-2 “employing a MANC alloy material as the magnetic ribbon” renders the claim indefinite. Applicant’s specification at [0049] defined MANC as “metal amorphous nanocomposite material”. It is unclear if the alloy material is required to be a metal amorphous nanocomposite material before, during, or after the claimed stress annealing and/or magnetic field annealing steps recited in claim 1. For the purpose of examination claim 7 will be given the broadest reasonable interpretation of the MANC alloy required anytime during the process of claim 1, such as before, during, and/or after stress annealing and/or magnetic field annealing.
Claim 8 is rejected as depending from claim 7.
Claim 10 is rejected as depending from claim 1.
Claim 12 line 2 “simultaneously stress and magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon” renders the claim indefinite. Claim 12 depends from amended claim 1. Amended claim 1 lines 7-9 recite “inducing a second anisotropy in the magnetic ribbon, the second anisotropy having a uniaxial direction, by magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon in a magnetic field transverse to the longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon”. It is unclear how simultaneous application of stress and magnetic field annealing induces both an anisotropy and a second anisotropy having a uniaxial direction. It is unclear how the simultaneous application of stress and magnetic field influences the presence or absence of an anisotropy and/or a second anisotropy. Further, it is unclear with simultaneous application, how an anisotropy and a second anisotropy are distinguished. For the purpose of examination claim 12 will be given the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed simultaneous stress annealing and magnetic field annealing necessarily also satisfying the stress annealing and magnetic field annealing of claim 1.
Claims 13, 18, 20, 22, 25, and 26 are rejected as depending from claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
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.
Claims 1, 7, 8, 10, 12, 20, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Miguel (Miguel et al. Effect of stress and/or field annealing on the magnetic behavior of the (Co77Si13.5B9.5)90Fe7Nb3 amorphous alloy. Journal of Applied Physics 97, 034911 (2005).).
Regarding claim 1, Miguel discloses a method of modifying a domain structure (walls) (Abstract, I. Introduction, II. Experimental Procedure, III.B. Induced magnetic anisotropy and coercivity, Figs. 6, 10) of a magnetic ribbon, comprising:
generating a target permeability along one or more axes of the magnetic ribbon (I. Introduction, II. Experimental Procedure, III.B. Induced magnetic anisotropy and coercivity, Figs. 6, 10, IV. Conclusions) by:
inducing an anisotropy (I. Introduction, III.B. Induced magnetic anisotropy and coercivity) in the magnetic ribbon by stress annealing the magnetic ribbon along a longitudinal direction of the magnetic ribbon (tensile stress applied longitudinally to the ribbon) (II. Experimental Procedure); and
inducing a second anisotropy in the magnetic ribbon, the second anisotropy having a uniaxial direction (I. Introduction, III.B. Induced magnetic anisotropy and coercivity, IV. Conclusions), by magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon in a magnetic field transverse to the longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon (a magnetic field applied longitudinally to the ribbon produces a field transverse to the longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon), resulting in a modified domain structure (II. Experimental Procedure, II.B. Induced magnetic anisotropy and coercivity, Figs. 6, 10-13), wherein the magnetic field annealing and the stress annealing are performed until the magnetic ribbon reaches the target permeability and exhibits a nanocomposite structure (I. Introduction, II. Experimental Procedure, II.A. Microstructural analysis, Figs. 1-5, IV. Conclusions).
Where applicant claims a process in terms of a function, property or characteristic and the process of the prior art is the same as that of the claim but the function is not explicitly disclosed by the reference, the examiner may make a rejection under both 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103. “There is nothing inconsistent in concurrent rejections for obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 and for anticipation under 35 U.S.C. 102.” MPEP 2112(III).
Regarding claim 7, Miguel discloses employing a MANC alloy material as the magnetic ribbon (I. Introduction, II. Experimental Procedure, III.A. Microstructural analysis, Figs. 1-5).
Regarding claim 8, Miguel discloses the MANC alloy is a Cobalt-rich MANC alloy ((Co77Si13.5B9.5)90Fe7Nb3) (Abstract. I. Introduction).
Regarding claim 10, Miguel discloses annealing the magnetic ribbon in the magnetic field at temperatures at or below temperatures utilized during the stress annealing (II. Experimental Procedure) in order to reduce high frequency losses (I. Introduction) by optimizing the domain structure of the magnetic ribbon (III.B. Induced magnetic anisotropy and coercivity, Figs. 6, 10).
The limitation of “in order to reduce high frequency losses by optimizing the domain structure of the magnetic ribbon without substantially affecting the desired permeability” has been considered and determined to be a characteristic that results from the claimed process of annealing the magnetic ribbon in the magnetic field at temperatures at or below temperatures utilized during the stress annealing. Since the prior art discloses annealing the magnetic ribbon in the magnetic field at temperatures at temperatures utilized during the stress annealing (Miguel II. Experimental Procedure), then the claimed result of reducing high frequency losses by optimizing the domain structure of the magnetic ribbon without substantially affecting the desired permeability is a resulting characteristic. Where applicant claims a process in terms of a function, property, or characteristic and the process of the prior art is the same as that of the claim but the function is not explicitly disclosed by the reference, the examiner may make a rejection under both 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103. “There is nothing inconsistent in concurrent rejections for obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 and for anticipation under 35 U.S.C. 102.” MPEP 2112(III).
Regarding claim 12, Miguel discloses simultaneously stress and magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon (II. Experimental Procedure).
Regarding claim 20, Miguel 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 273°C is just below the Curie point) (II. Experimental Procedure).
Regarding claim 22, Miguel discloses the stress annealing comprises applying tensile stresses to a surface of the magnetic ribbon along a longitudinal axis of the magnetic ribbon (II. Experimental Procedure).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 10, 25, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miguel (Miguel et al. Effect of stress and/or field annealing on the magnetic behavior of the (Co77Si13.5B9.5)90Fe7Nb3 amorphous alloy. Journal of Applied Physics 97, 04911 (2005). Citations as page:column:paragraph.) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Leary-2016 (US 2016/0319412).
In the event it is determined that the claim 10 lines 4-5 limitation of “in order to reduce high frequency losses by optimizing the domain structure of the magnetic ribbon without substantially affecting the desired permeability” is not a resulting characteristic of Miguel, then the below rejection in view of Leary-2016 is applied.
Regarding claim 10, Miguel discloses magnetic field annealing the magnetic ribbon comprises annealing the magnetic ribbon in the magnetic field at temperatures at or below temperatures utilized during the stress annealing (II. Experimental Procedure) in order to reduce high frequency losses (I. Introduction) by optimizing the domain structure of the magnetic ribbon (III.B. Induced magnetic anisotropy and coercivity, Figs. 6, 10).
Leary-2016 discloses stress and magnetic field annealing a magnetic ribbon ([0034], [0059]) in order to reduce high frequency losses by optimizing the domain structure of the magnetic ribbon without substantially affecting the target permeability (Leary-2016 [0003], [0009]-[0011], [0061]-[0062], Figs. 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Miguel to reduce high frequency losses by optimizing the domain structure of the magnetic ribbon without substantially affecting the target permeability in order to tune the anisotropy, which affects the magnetic permeability and makes the nanocomposite suitable for its desired application (Leary-2016 [0061]-[0062]).
Regarding claim 25, Miguel 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 Miguel 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, Miguel is silent to the desired permeability varying over a length of the magnetic ribbon.
Leary-2016 discloses the target 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 Miguel to vary the target 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]).
Claims 13 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miguel (Miguel et al. Effect of stress and/or field annealing on the magnetic behavior of the (Co77Si13.5B9.5)90Fe7Nb3 amorphous alloy. Journal of Applied Physics 97, 04911 (2005). Citations as page:column:paragraph.) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Vazquez (Vazquez et al. Induced magnetic anisotropy and change of the magnetostriction by current annealing in Co-based amorphous alloys. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials. Volume 53, Issue 4, January 1986, Pages 323-329.).
Regarding claim 13, Miguel discloses stress annealing comprises stress annealing the magnetic ribbon with a thermal process ((3), SFA) (II. Experimental Procedure) and cites the annealing process of Ref. 21, Vazquez (II. Experimental Procedure).
Vazquez discloses 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 (induction annealing, current produces an increase of the temperature of the sample) (Abstract, 2. Experimental procedure, Figs. 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Miguel for the annealing to include a thermal process via induction annealing because that is the annealing process Miguel discloses as using (Ref. 21, Vazquez) (Miguel II. Experimental procedure; Vazquez Abstract).
Regarding claim 18, Miguel cites the magnetic field annealing comprises the magnetic field annealing process of Ref. 21, Vazquez (II. Experimental Procedure).
Vazquez discloses annealing the magnetic ribbon in a magnetic field such that the magnetic ribbon forms a part of a magnetic path (magnetic field created by an electrical current flowing along the amorphous ribbon) (Abstract, 2. Experimental Procedure, Figs. 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in the process of Miguel for the magnetic field to be created by an electrical current flowing along the amorphous ribbon because that is the annealing process Miguel discloses as using (Ref. 21, Vazquez) (Miguel II. Experimental procedure; Vazquez Abstract).
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 (Miguel II. Experimental Procedure Vazquez Abstract, 2. Experimental Procedure, Figs. 1-2), 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.
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]).
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]).
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 Co-based MANC (1602:1:4) process by stress and field annealing (1602:2:2) and the resulting magnetic anisotropy (1603-1604).
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 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).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHANI HILL whose telephone number is (571)272-2523. The examiner can normally be reached Monday, Wednesday-Friday 7am-12pm.
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, KEITH WALKER can be reached on 571-272-3458. 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.
/STEPHANI HILL/Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights