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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that neither Nazarian alone nor Nazarian in view of Wu teaches “wherein the central tap terminal is coupled to the second one of the plurality of first sub-coils and the second one of the plurality of second sub-coils, wherein the inductor device further comprises a first connecting member and a second connecting member, the first connecting member is configured to couple the second one of the plurality of first sub-coils and the central tap terminal, the second connecting member is configured to couple the second one of the plurality of second sub-coils and the central tap terminal, and the first connecting member and the second connecting member are both intersected with a first crossing portion” as amended claim 1. Applicant asserts that the crossing portion 26 of Nazarian is fully occupied by the crossover arraignment including connecting members 26a-26d. Amended claim 1 requires that the central tap terminal be coupled to the second sub-coils specifically through first and second connecting members that intersect this precise crossing portion. However, the central tap terminal 16 of Nazarian is nearly straight line extension toward the left side, and the central tap terminal 16 is not configured to be extracted through the right-side crossing point.
Applicant also submits that if Nazarian is to be modified with Wu, an additional metal layer would be needed or the entire winding topology of the coils would need to be redesigned. Such modification would be beyond the skill of a person with ordinary skill in the art. In addition, Wu’s coil structure is materially simpler and does not involve a complex muti-crossing architecture comparable to Nazarian’s crossing portion.
In addition, applicant states that there would be no motivation to combine Nazarian with Wu because doing so would destroy Nazarian’s design purpose. Therefore, Nazarian teaches away from such modification of Wu.
After careful consideration without passion or prejudice, the argument is not found persuasive, respectfully. As seen in FIG. 5 of Nazarian, the first connecting member 26c connects the central tap terminal 26 and the second-one 1b of the first plurality of first sub-coils 1a-1c of the first winding. Similarly, the second connecting member 26d is connected to the central tap terminal 16 and the second one 2b of the second sub-coils 2a-2c of the second winding. While the central tap terminal 16 is connected to the first and second connecting members 26c and 26d inside the plurality of coils 1a-1c and 2a-2c, the claim actually does not require the connection be made at the exterior of the plurality of coils. The claim merely requires the first and second connecting members are coupled to the central tap terminal. So, Nazarian meets “the first connecting member is configured to couple the second one of the plurality of first sub-coils and the central tap terminal, the second connecting member is configured to couple the second one of the plurality of second sub-coils and the central tap terminal” as claimed. The first connecting member 26c and the second connecting member 26d meet at an end of the central tap terminal inside the crossing portion 26. This meets “the first connecting member and the second connecting member are both intersected with a first crossing portion” limitation.
The central tap terminal 16 in Nazarian extends beyond the crossing portion 28. This means, the central tap terminal 16 would need to be in a different layer that the layers the plurality coils 1a-1c, 2a-2c and the connecting members to avoid short circuiting with the connecting members, the plurality of the coils and or the input output terminals 12 and or 14. Therefore, adding another metal layer would not be beyond the skill of a person with ordinary skill in the art. Moreover, Wu’s coil structure is reasonably similar to that Nazarian. For example, the central tap terminals in both Nazarian and Wu are connected to the connective members inside the coil. The central tap terminal C of Wu would also need to be in a different metal layer that the coil layer so that there’s no short circuiting between the central tap terminal C and the connecting members in the first cross portion. Therefore, the combination of the central tap terminal of Wu to the inductor device of Nazarian would not destroy the objective of Nazarian, and as such Nazarian does not teach away from the combination of Nazarian in view of Wu.
Accordingly, the examiner maintains Nazarian in view of Wu sufficiently teaches all the limitations of claim 1, and the combination is proper with the motivation as set forth below in this Office action and the Office action dated 03/03/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 11-15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nazarian et al. (U.S. PG. Pub. No. 2011/0148558 A1)in view of Wu et al. (U.S. PG. Pub. No. 2018/0102737 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Nazarian et al., hereinafter referred to as “Nazarian,” teaches an inductor device 10 (FIG. 5), comprising:
a plurality of coils 1a-1c, and 2a-2c (annotated FIG. 5) comprising:
a first winding (winding formed by sub-coils 1a-1c) comprising a plurality of first sub-coils 1a-1c, wherein a first one 1a of the plurality of first sub-coils is configured in a first region A1, and a second one 1b and a third one 1c of the plurality of first sub-coils are configured in a second region A2 different from the first region;
a second winding (winding formed by sub-coils 2a-2c) comprising a plurality of second sub-coils 2a-2c, wherein a first one 2a of the plurality of second sub-coils is configured in the second region, and a second one 2b and a third one 2c of the plurality of second sub-coils are configured in the first region;
an input-output terminal 12 and or 14, located on a first side L1 (annotated FIG. 5) of the inductor device, and extending toward a first direction (-x axis direction in a Cartesian coordinate system as seen in annotated FIG. 5); and
a central tap terminal 16, located on a second side L2 of the inductor device;
wherein each of the plurality of coils is composed of one of the plurality of first sub-coils and one of the plurality of second sub-coils,
wherein the first sub-coils are configured to transmit first signals with a first polarity, and the second sub-coils are configured to transmit second signals with a second polarity,
wherein the central tap terminal is coupled to the second one 1b of the plurality of first sub-coils and the second one 2b of the plurality of second sub-coils,
wherein the inductor device further comprises a first connecting member 26c (annotated FIG. 5 above) and a second connecting member 26d, the first connecting member is configured to couple the second one 1b of the plurality of first sub-coils and the central tap terminal, the second connecting member 28d is configured to couple the second one 2b of the plurality of second sub-coils and the central tap terminal, and the first connecting member and the second connecting member are both intersected with a first crossing portion 26 (paras. 0048], [0056], [0059], [0060] and [0065]).
PNG
media_image1.png
247
341
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
299
448
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Nazarian does not expressly teach
a central tap terminal extending toward a second direction, wherein the first side and the second side are two opposite sides, the first direction and the second direction are two opposite directions.
Wu teaches an inductor device (FIG. 4B) comprising:
a central tap terminal C, located on a second side R2 (annotated FIG. 4B) of the inductor device and extending toward a second direction (positive x axis direction), wherein the first side R1 and the second side are two opposite sides (R1 and R2 are opposite sides), the first direction and the second direction (-x axis and +x axis direction) are two opposite directions (para. [0036]).
PNG
media_image3.png
262
362
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the opposite input/out and center tap sides and directions as taught by Wu to the inductor device of Nazarian to generate a stronger magnetic field and have a strong common mode coupling effect when the common mode currents flow in the inductor device (para. [0036]).
With respect to claim 3, Nazarian in view of Wu teaches the inductor device of claim 1, wherein the first one 2a of the plurality of second sub-coils and the second one 1b of the plurality of first sub-coils are spaced at a first interval, and the second one 1b of the plurality of first sub-coils and the third one 1c of the plurality of first sub-coils are spaced at a second interval, wherein the first interval is equal to the second interval (Nazarian, para. [0065]).
With respect to claim 4, Nazarian in view of Wu teaches the inductor device of claim 3, wherein the first one 1a of the plurality of first sub-coils and the second one 2b of the plurality of second sub-coils are spaced at the first interval, and the second one 2b of the plurality of second sub-coils and the third one 2c of the plurality of second sub-coils are spaced at the second interval (Nazarian, para. [0065]).
With respect to claim 11, Nazarian in view of Wu teaches the inductor device of claim 1, wherein the inductor device further comprises a second crossing portion 28, and the second crossing portion is configured to couple the first one 1a of the plurality of first sub-coils and the second one 1b of the plurality of first sub-coils, and is configured to couple the first one 2a of the plurality of second sub-coils and the second one 2b of the plurality of second sub-coils (Nazarian, para. [0060]).
With respect to claim 12, Nazarian in view of Wu teaches the inductor device of claim 11, wherein the second crossing portion comprises a third connecting member 28a (annotated FIG. 5 above) and a fourth connecting member 28b, the third connecting member 28a is configured to couple the first one 1a of the plurality of first sub-coils and the second one 1b of the plurality of first sub-coils, the fourth connecting member 28b is configured to couple the first one 2a of the plurality of second sub-coils and the second one 2b of the plurality of second sub-coils, and the third connecting member and the fourth connecting member are intersected with each other (Nazarian, para. [0060]).
With respect to claim 13, Nazarian in view of Wu teaches the inductor device of claim 11, wherein the inductor device further comprises the crossing portion 26, and the first crossing portion is configured to couple the first one 1a of the plurality of first sub-coils and the third one 1c of the plurality of first sub-coils, and is configured to couple the first one 2a of the plurality of second sub-coils and the third one 2c of the plurality of second sub-coils (Nazarian, para. [0060]).
With respect to claim 14, Nazarian in view of Wu teaches the inductor device of claim 13, wherein the first crossing portion comprises a third connecting member 26a and a fourth connecting member 26b, the third connecting member is configured to couple the first one 1a of the plurality of first sub-coils and the third one 1c of the plurality of first sub-coils, the fourth connecting member 26b is configured to couple the first one 2a of the plurality of second sub-coils and the third one 2c of the plurality of second sub-coils, and the third connecting member and the fourth connecting member are intersected with each other (Nazarian, para. [0060]).
With respect to claim 15, Nazarian in view of Wu teaches the inductor device of claim 13, wherein the second crossing portion is located on the first side L1 (annotated FIG. 5 above) of the inductor device, and the first crossing portion is located on the second side L2 of the inductor device, wherein the first side and the second side are two opposite sides (Nazarian, para. [0065]).
With respect to claim 18, Nazarian in view of Wu teaches the inductor device of claim 15, wherein the input-output terminal is coupled to the third one 1c of the plurality of first sub-coils and the third one 2c of the plurality of second sub-coils (Nazarian, para. [0054]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MANGTIN LIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5729. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 0800-1700.
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, Shawki S. Ismail can be reached at 571-272-3985. 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.
/MANG TIN BIK LIAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights