Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/761,886

INDUCTIVE COMPONENT AND METHOD FOR ADJUSTING AN INDUCTANCE VALUE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 18, 2022
Examiner
LIAN, MANG TIN BIK
Art Unit
2837
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Philip Morris Products, S.A.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
921 granted / 1312 resolved
+2.2% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+26.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
82 currently pending
Career history
1394
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
53.4%
+13.4% vs TC avg
§102
23.5%
-16.5% vs TC avg
§112
20.8%
-19.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1312 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/25/2025 has been entered. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 11/25/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Tsunemi does not teach “a non-magnetic carrier layer” as claimed in claim 16. Applicant asserts that the adhesive layer 34 of Tsunemi is formed on one of the major surfaces of the composite material in a sheet form to constitute the composite magnetic material sheet (para. [0072]). Therefore, applicant contends that the adhesive layer 34 does not represent the “carrier layer” as claimed. After careful consideration without passion or prejudice, the argument is respectfully found not persuasive. When the adhesive layer 34 of Tsunemi adheres the magnetic sheets 35 of the composite magnetic material 31 (the claimed “magnetic foil”), the adhesive layer becomes a “carrier” or bearer or holder of the magnetic sheets. Accordingly, it’s reasonable to interpret the adhesive layer 34 as the “carrier layer” as claimed. Therefore, the examiner maintains Tsunemi teaches “a non-magnetic carrier layer” as claimed. 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 16-19 and 22-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsunemi et al. (US PG. Pub. No. 2008/0055034) in view of Hangzhou et al. (DE 20 2016 104 063), and Sawa et al. (U.S. PG. Pub. No. 2014/0239892 A1). With respect to claim 16, Tsunemi et al., hereinafter referred to as “Sawa,” teaches an inductive component 30 (Fig. 7), comprising: a wire winding 33, around which a magnetic foil 31 wrapped; wherein the magnetic foil comprises at least one magnetic layer and a non-magnetic carrier layer 34 in addition to the at least one magnetic layer, wherein the at least one magnetic layer comprises a magnetic material, and a non-magnetic and non-conductive insulating layer 14, which comprises a plastic and which is disposed between the magnetic foil and the wire winding (paras. [0066], [0071]-[0072]). PNG media_image1.png 275 299 media_image1.png Greyscale Tsunemi does not expressly teach an electrical shielding, which surrounds the magnetic foil. Hangzhou et al., hereinafter referred to as “Hangzhou,” teaches an inductive component (Fig. 1), comprising: an electrical shielding 5, which surrounds the magnetic foil 4 (para. [0021]). PNG media_image2.png 508 476 media_image2.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 electrical shielding as taught by Hangzhou to the inductive component of Tsunemi to reduce electromagnetic radiation emission to the outside during operation (para. [0003]). Tsunemi does not also expressly teach the magnetic material is a nanocrystalline iron alloy. Sawa et al., hereinafter referred to as “Sawa,” teaches an inductive component 11 (FIG. 11), wherein the magnetic material (magnetic material of magnetic foil 1) is a nanocrystalline iron alloy (para. [051]). 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 nanocrystalline iron alloy as taught by Sawa to the inductive component of Tsunemi to reduce the thickness of the magnetic foil. With respect to claim 17, Tsunemi in view of Hangzhou, and Sawa teaches the inductive component according to claim 16, wherein the magnetic foil is self-adhesive (para. [0071]). With respect to claim 18, Tsunemi in view of Hangzhou, and Sawa teaches the inductive component according to claim 16, wherein the magnetic foil is wrapped around the wire winding in a plurality of layers (Tsunemi, para. [0072]). With respect to claim 19, Tsunemi in view of Hangzhou, and Sawa teaches the inductive component according to claim 16, further comprising a magnetic core (winding core of drum core 32) disposed within the wire winding (para. [0071]). With respect to claim 22, Tsunemi in view of Hangzhou, and Sawa teaches the inductive component according to claim 16, wherein the magnetic material is configured in a form of particles, which are embedded in a non-magnetic material (paras. [0066]. With respect to claim 23, Tsunemi in view of Hangzhou, and Sawa teaches the inductive component according to claim 16, wherein the at least one magnetic layer is made entirely of the magnetic material (Hangzhou, para. [0021]). With respect to claim 24, Tsunemi in view of Hangzhou, and Sawa teaches the inductive component according to claim 16, wherein the magnetic foil has a maximum thickness of 100 μm (Tsunemi, para. [0068]). The thickness of the magnetic foil and the adhesive layer 24 are about the same, as shown in Fig. 9 of Tsunemi. Therefore, the thickness of the magnetic foil of Tsunemi would be less than 100 μm. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsunemi in view of Hangzhou, and Sawa as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Goodzeit et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,921,042 B1). With respect to claim 20, Tsunemi in view of Hangzhou, and Sawa teaches the inductive component according to claim 16. Tsunemi in view of Hangzhou, and Sawa does not expressly teach there is no magnetic core within the wire winding. Goodzeit et al., hereinafter referred to as “Goodzeit,” teaches an inductive component (FIG. 2), wherein there is no magnetic core within the wire winding 1 (col. 6, lines 28-33). PNG media_image3.png 579 546 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 wire winding without a magnetic core as taught by Goodzeit to the inductive component of Tsunemi in view of Hangzhou, and Sawa to reduce cost and or weight. Conclusion 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 18, 2022
Application Filed
Apr 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 04, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 25, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Nov 25, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 03, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603211
COIL COMPONENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597557
Dry High Voltage Instrument Transformer
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597554
ELECTRONIC COMPONENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597556
TRANSFORMER DEVICE AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE COMPRISING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12586715
Coil Component
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+26.4%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1312 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month