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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/12/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-3, 5, 7, and 9-16 are pending and presented for examination on the merits.
Claims 1 and 12 are currently amended. Claims 13-16 are new.
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 1-3, 5, 7, and 9-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0319409 (A1) to Theisen et al. (“Theisen”).
Regarding claim 1, Theisen discloses an iron-based soft magnetic alloy in the form of ribbons. Abstract; para. [0001], [0011]. The ribbon can be wound into a toroidal core or slit and stacked (magnetic core comprising a magnetic ribbon wound or stacked). Para. [0035].
The alloy has the following formula (abstract; para. [0014]):
PNG
media_image1.png
93
791
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The Mʹ component can be Nb (Fe-Cu-Si-B-Nb-base). Para. [0014].
The Si can be as high as 30 weight percent (para. [0014]), which encompasses the claimed range. In an example, Si is 8.6 wt.% (Table 2 – sole example), which converts to about 15 atomic percent and falls within the claimed range (the ribbon has a Si composition of 10-25 atomic percentage). Other alloy composition examples are disclosed in Table 3 and Table 4.
The alloy is at least 50% crystalline (crystallinity degree is 0.9 or higher) (para. [0014]), which encompasses the claimed range.
The permeability tested at 100 kHz is 13000 +/- 3000 (para. [0032]; Table 1), i.e., 10000-16000, which overlaps the claimed range.
The overlap between the ranges taught in the prior art and recited in the claims creates a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP § 2144.05(I). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to select from among the prior art ranges because there is utility over an entire range disclosed in the prior art.
Theisen is silent regarding the inductance at 10 kHz (L10) and 100 kHz (L100) and the ratio of L10/L100. However, it is well established that when a material is produced by a process that is identical or substantially identical to that of the claims and/or possesses a structure or composition that is identical or substantially identical to that of the claims, any claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. Such a finding establishes a prima facie case of anticipation or obviousness. See MPEP § 2112.01. In the present instance, the alloys in Theisen possess a chemical composition and microstructure that meet the claimed alloy. Therefore, any properties, such as inductance and ratio of inductance values, would be expected in the prior art alloys given the chemical composition of the alloys and their structures match that of the present invention.
Regarding claims 2, 9, and 11, Theisen is silent regarding the presence of a KIKUCHI pattern in the crystalline phase, the inductance of the alloy at 100 kHz (L100) and 1 MHz (L1M), and the ratio of L100/L1M. However, the alloys in Theisen possess a chemical composition and microstructure that meet the claimed ribbon. Therefore, any properties, such as presence of KIKUCHI pattern and ratio of inductance values L100/L1M, would be expected in the prior art alloys given the alloy compositions and structures match that of the present invention, as noted above and in accordance with MPEP § 2112.01.
Regarding claim 3, Theisen discloses that the ribbon has a thickness of 13 to 20 microns (para. [0020]), which falls within the claimed range.
Regarding claims 5 and 10 and further regarding claim 11, Theisen discloses that the average particle size of the crystals (average crystal grain size) is 100 nm or less (para. [0014]), which falls within the claimed range. Annealing of the ribbon induces the nanocrystalline state (grain size obtained by subjecting the magnetic core to heat treatment). Para. [0031].
Regarding claim 7, Theisen discloses that the ribbon is wound into a toroidal core. Para. [0035]. Nanocrystalline ribbons are also known to the used in choke coils or wound into a spool. Para. [0004]-[0010], [0019]-[0021].
Regarding claim 12, Theisen discloses an iron-based soft magnetic alloy in the form of ribbons. Abstract; para. [0001], [0011]. The ribbon can be wound into a toroidal core or slit and stacked (magnetic core comprising a magnetic ribbon wound or stacked). Para. [0035].
The alloy has the following formula (abstract; para. [0014]):
PNG
media_image1.png
93
791
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The Mʹ component can be Nb (Fe-Cu-Si-B-Nb-base). Para. [0014].
The Si can be as high as 30 weight percent (para. [0014]), which encompasses the claimed range. In an example, Si is 8.6 wt.% (Table 2 – sole example), which converts to about 15 atomic percent and falls within the claimed range (the ribbon has a Si composition of 10-25 atomic percentage). Other alloy composition examples are disclosed in Table 3 and Table 4.
The alloy is at least 50% crystalline (crystallinity degree is 0.9 or higher) (para. [0014]), which encompasses the claimed range.
The permeability tested at 100 kHz is 13000 +/- 3000 (para. [0032]; Table 1), i.e., 10000-16000, which overlaps the claimed range.
The overlap between the ranges taught in the prior art and recited in the claims creates a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP § 2144.05(I). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to select from among the prior art ranges because there is utility over an entire range disclosed in the prior art.
Theisen is silent regarding the inductance at 100 kHz (L100) and 1 MHz (L1M) and the ratio of L100/L1M. However, it is well established that when a material is produced by a process that is identical or substantially identical to that of the claims and/or possesses a structure or composition that is identical or substantially identical to that of the claims, any claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. Such a finding establishes a prima facie case of anticipation or obviousness. See MPEP § 2112.01. In the present instance, the alloys in Theisen possess a chemical composition and microstructure that meet the claimed alloy. Therefore, any properties, such as inductance and ratio of inductance values, would be expected in the prior art alloys given the chemical composition of the alloys and their structures match that of the present invention.
Regarding claim 13, Theisen is silent regarding the presence of a KIKUCHI pattern in the crystalline phase. However, the alloys in Theisen possess a chemical composition and microstructure that meet the claimed ribbon. Therefore, any properties, such as presence of KIKUCHI pattern, would be expected in the prior art alloys given the alloy compositions and structures match that of the present invention, as noted above and in accordance with MPEP § 2112.01.
Regarding claim 14, Theisen discloses that the ribbon has a thickness of 13 to 20 microns (para. [0020]), which falls within the claimed range.
Regarding claims 15 and 16, Theisen discloses that the average particle size of the crystals (average crystal grain size) is 100 nm or less (para. [0014]), which falls within the claimed range. Annealing of the ribbon induces the nanocrystalline state (grain size obtained by subjecting the magnetic core to heat treatment). Para. [0031].
Claims 1-3, 5, and 9-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2010/0201474 (A1) to Saito et al. (“Saito”).
Regarding claim 1, Saito discloses a toroidal core made of an Fe-base alloy having a microcrystalline structure, the core being a wound body or stacked body made of ribbon (magnetic core comprising magnetic ribbon wound or stacked). Para. [0023].
The alloy has the following formula (para. [0029]):
PNG
media_image2.png
78
266
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The M component can be a group 5a element (V, Nb, Ta) (Fe-Cu-Si-B-Nb-base). Para. [0029].
The Si ranges from 10 to 25 at.% (para. [0029]), which matches the claimed range.
Crystal grains having a grain diameter of 5-30 nm are 50% or more area ratio of the alloy, preferably 90% or more (crystallinity degree is 0.9 or higher) (para. [0030]), which encompasses or is identical to the claimed range.
The overlap between the ranges taught in the prior art and recited in the claims creates a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP § 2144.05(I). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to select from among the prior art ranges because there is utility over an entire range disclosed in the prior art.
Saito is silent regarding the inductance at 10 kHz (L10) and 100 kHz (L100), the ratio of L10/L100, and the magnetic permeability at 100 kHz. However, it is well established that when a material is produced by a process that is identical or substantially identical to that of the claims and/or possesses a structure or composition that is identical or substantially identical to that of the claims, any claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. Such a finding establishes a prima facie case of anticipation or obviousness. See MPEP § 2112.01. In the present instance, the alloys in Saito possess a chemical composition and microstructure that meet the claimed alloy. Therefore, any properties, such as inductance, ratio of inductance values, and permeability, would be expected in the prior art alloys given the chemical composition of the alloys and their structures match that of the present invention.
Regarding claims 2, 9, and 11, Saito is silent regarding the presence of a KIKUCHI pattern in the crystalline phase, the inductance of the alloy at 100 kHz (L100) and 1 MHz (L1M), and the ratio of L100/L1M. However, the alloys in Saito possess a chemical composition and microstructure that meet the claimed ribbon. Therefore, any properties, such as presence of KIKUCHI pattern and ratio of inductance values L100/L1M, would be expected in the prior art alloys given the alloy compositions and structures match that of the present invention, as noted above and in accordance with MPEP § 2112.01.
Regarding claim 3, Saito discloses that the thickness of the ribbon is preferably 30 µm or below, preferably 8-20 µm (para. [0031]), which falls within the claimed range.
Regarding claims 5 and 10 and further regarding claim 11, Saito discloses that crystal grains have a diameter of 5 to 30 nm (para. [0030]), which falls within the claimed range. The microcrystals are precipitated by thermal treatment (grain size obtained by subjecting the magnetic core to heat treatment). Para. [0031].
Regarding claim 12, Saito discloses a toroidal core made of an Fe-base alloy having a microcrystalline structure, the core being a wound body or stacked body made of ribbon (magnetic core comprising magnetic ribbon wound or stacked). Para. [0023].
The alloy has the following formula (para. [0029]):
PNG
media_image2.png
78
266
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The M component can be a group 5a element (V, Nb, Ta) (Fe-Cu-Si-B-Nb-base). Para. [0029].
The Si ranges from 10 to 25 at.% (para. [0029]), which matches the claimed range.
Crystal grains having a grain diameter of 5-30 nm are 50% or more area ratio of the alloy, preferably 90% or more (crystallinity degree is 0.9 or higher) (para. [0030]), which encompasses or is identical to the claimed range.
The overlap between the ranges taught in the prior art and recited in the claims creates a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP § 2144.05(I). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to select from among the prior art ranges because there is utility over an entire range disclosed in the prior art.
Saito is silent regarding the inductance at 100 kHz (L100) and 1 MHz (L1M), the ratio of L100/L1M, and the magnetic permeability at 100 kHz. However, it is well established that when a material is produced by a process that is identical or substantially identical to that of the claims and/or possesses a structure or composition that is identical or substantially identical to that of the claims, any claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. Such a finding establishes a prima facie case of anticipation or obviousness. See MPEP § 2112.01. In the present instance, the alloys in Saito possess a chemical composition and microstructure that meet the claimed alloy. Therefore, any properties, such as inductance, ratio of inductance values, and permeability, would be expected in the prior art alloys given the chemical composition of the alloys and their structures match that of the present invention.
Regarding claim 13, Saito is silent regarding the presence of a KIKUCHI pattern in the crystalline phase. However, the alloys in Saito possess a chemical composition and microstructure that meet the claimed ribbon. Therefore, any properties, such as presence of KIKUCHI pattern, would be expected in the prior art alloys given the alloy compositions and structures match that of the present invention, as noted above and in accordance with MPEP § 2112.01.
Regarding claim 14, Saito discloses that the thickness of the ribbon is preferably 30 µm or below, preferably 8-20 µm (para. [0031]), which falls within the claimed range.
Regarding claims 15 and 16, Saito discloses that crystal grains have a diameter of 5 to 30 nm (para. [0030]), which falls within the claimed range. The microcrystals are precipitated by thermal treatment (grain size obtained by subjecting the magnetic core to heat treatment). Para. [0031].
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 4,881,989 to Yoshizawa et al. (“Yoshizawa”).
Regarding claim 7, Saito does not teach a core comprising a wound coil.
Yoshizawa is directed to an Fe-base soft magnetic alloy containing Fe, Cu, Si, B, and Mʹ (e.g., Nb). Abstract; col. 1, lines 5-12; col. 3, lines 3-32. The alloy can be used for magnetic cores and choke coils. Col. 8, lines 55-60; col. 9, lines 58-60; col. 19, lines 57-64.
Given the chemical and microstructural similarities between the alloys of Saito and Yoshizawa and given their common utility as magnetic core materials, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have further manufactured a choke coil (core comprising a wound coils), disclosed by Yoshizawa, from the alloys in Saito because the manufacture of additional products from Saito’s alloys would expand their utility to other products that would benefit from the properties of microcrystalline magnetic ribbon.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered, but they are moot because the new grounds of rejection do not rely on Hasegawa to address claim limitations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VANESSA T. LUK whose telephone number is (571)270-3587. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30 AM - 4:30 PM ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Keith D. Hendricks, can be reached at 571-272-1401. 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.
/VANESSA T. LUK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733
March 02, 2026