DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1, 3-6 are amended
Claims 15-20 are cancelled
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 of this title, 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 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over … Yoon (US 20200105455 A1) in view of Kawaguchi (US 20190088413 A1).
Regarding Claim 1:
Yoon teaches that a coupled inductor, comprising:
a first coil-structure (11, Fig. 3; para 0037-0054), comprising at least one
a plurality of first conductive layer (11a), wherein each conductive layer is formed on a corresponding insulating layer (11c), wherein the first plurality of conductive layer comprises first conductive patterns for forming at least one first winding turn (construed from Fig. 2) of a first coil (11a), wherein an inner side surface of each of the first plurality of conductive layers is encapsulated by a first insulating layer (11c;. layer between two conductive layers 11a in Fig. 3), ;
a second coil-structure (12), comprising a one second plurality of
conductive layer (12a), wherein each conductive layer is formed on a corresponding insulating layer (12c), wherein the second plurality of conductive layer comprises second conductive patterns for forming at least one second winding turn (construed from Fig. 2) of a second coil (12a), ; wherein an inner side surface of each of the second plurality of conductive layers is encapsulated by a third insulating layer(12c;. layer between two conductive layers 12a in Fig. 3) and
a magnetic sheet (2, Fig. 1), wherein the first coil-structure is disposed over a top surface (upper surface of 2 in Fig. 3) of the magnetic sheet, and the second coil-structure is disposed over a bottom surface (bottom surface of 2 in Fig. 3) of the magnetic sheet, wherein the first coil-structure and the second coil-structure are on two opposite sides of the magnetic sheet.
Yoon does not teach an outer side surface of each of the first plurality of conductive layers is encapsulated by a second insulating layer and an outer side surface of each of the second plurality of conductive layers is encapsulated by a fourth insulating layer.
However, Kawaguchi teaches that an outer side surface of each of the first plurality of conductive layers (231, Fig. 2; para 0041-0042) is encapsulated by a second insulating layer (232A) and an outer side surface of each of the second plurality of conductive layers (221) is encapsulated by a fourth insulating layer (222B).
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 an outer side surface of each of the first plurality of conductive layers is encapsulated by a second insulating layer and an outer side surface of each of the second plurality of conductive layers is encapsulated by a fourth insulating layer to provide a coil component capable of inhibiting a reduction in inductance, and a method of manufacturing the same (para 0004).
Regarding Claim 2:
As applied to claim 1, Yoon teaches that a first magnetic body (3a, Fig. 6a) and a second magnetic body (3b), wherein the first magnetic body is disposed on the top surface of the magnetic sheet to encapsulate the at least one first winding turn of the first coil, and wherein the second magnetic body is disposed on the bottom surface of the magnetic sheet to encapsulate the at least one second winding turn of the second coil (construed from Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 3:
As applied to claim 2, Yoon teaches that wherein each conductive layer of the first plurality of conductive layers (11a, 11b) is formed sequentially on a corresponding insulating layer starting from a first bottom insulating layer (top part of 200 in Fig. 5), wherein the first bottom insulating layer is in contact with the top surface of the magnetic sheet.
Regarding Claim 4:
As applied to claim 2, Yoon teaches that wherein each conductive layer of the first plurality of conductive layers is formed sequentially on a corresponding insulating layer starting from a first bottom insulating layer (top part of 200 in Fig. 5), wherein the first plurality of conductive layers are located between the first bottom insulating layer and a first top insulating layer (300, Fig. 4), wherein the first bottom insulating layer is in contact with the top surface of the magnetic sheet construed from Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 5:
As applied to claim 2, Yoon teaches that wherein each conductive layer of the second plurality of conductive layers is formed sequentially on a corresponding insulating layer starting from a second bottom insulating layer (bottom part of 200 in Fig. 5), wherein the second bottom insulating layer is in contact with the bottom surface of the magnetic sheet.
Regarding Claim 6:
As applied to claim 2, Yoon teaches that wherein each conductive layer of the second plurality of conductive layers 12a-12b) is formed sequentially on a corresponding insulating layer starting from a second bottom insulating layer, wherein the second plurality of conductive layers are located between the second bottom insulating layer and a second top insulating layer, wherein the second bottom insulating layer is in contact with the bottom surface of the magnetic sheet.
Regarding Claim 7:
As applied to claim 2, Yoon teaches that wherein the first magnetic body comprises a first unitary magnetic body (i.e. element 3a, 2 and 11 formed the unitary body in Fig. 6) that encapsulates the at least one first winding turn of the first coil and extends into a first hollow space (construed from Fig. 1) of the first coil.
Regarding Claim 8:
As applied to claim 2, Yoon teaches that wherein the first magnetic body comprises a second unitary magnetic body (i.e. element 3b, 2 and 12 formed the unitary body in Fig. 6) that encapsulates the at least one second winding turn of the first coil and extends into a first hollow space (construed from Fig. 1) of the first coil.
Regarding Claim 9:
As applied to claim 2, Yoon teaches that the first winding turn is formed on the first bottom insulating layer, wherein a corresponding insulating layer is formed on a first conductive layer comprising the first winding turn, wherein said corresponding insulating layer encapsulates the first winding turn and extends into an un patterned area of the first conductive layer (construed from Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 10:
As applied to claim 2, Yoon teaches that wherein the second winding turn is formed on the second bottom insulating layer, wherein a corresponding insulating layer is formed on a second conductive layer comprising the second winding turn, wherein said corresponding insulating layer encapsulates the second winding turn and extends into an un patterned area of the second conductive layer (construed from Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 11:
As applied to claim 1, Yoon teaches that each of the at least one first conductive layer except first conductive layer is formed by a film process.
The process limitations “first conductive layer is formed by a film process” in claim (11), do not carry weight in a claim drawn to structure. MPEP 2113 states, “[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). However this process limitation implied a structure i.e., a conductive layer which has been disclosed by Yoon (element 11a in fig. 3). Therefore, this limitations are not patentable over Yoon.
Regarding Claim 12:
As applied to claim 1, Yoon teaches that wherein each of the at least one first conductive layer is formed by a thin film process as explained in claim 11 analysis above in light of MPEP 2113.
Regarding Claim 13:
As applied to claim 2, Yoon teaches that wherein the first magnetic body is formed by a first material, and the magnetic sheet is formed by a second material that is different from the first material (see para 0046).
Regarding Claim 14:
As applied to claim 2, Yoon teaches that where each of the first magnetic body and the second magnetic body is formed by a first material, and the magnetic sheet is formed by a second material that is different from the first material (see para 0046).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of different interpretation of the previously applied reference, and/or newly found prior art reference(s).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. A list of pertinent prior art is attached in form 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kazi Hossain whose telephone number is 571-272-8182. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday from Monday to Thursday 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM (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 https:/www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Shawki Ismail can be reached on 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.
/KAZI HOSSAIN/
Examiner, Art Unit 2837
/SHAWKI S ISMAIL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837