-2DETAILED 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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of group I, claims 16-26 in the reply filed on 8/28/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that searching groups I-II together without placing undue burden on the Examiner. This is not found persuasive because searching group II require additional search and/or consideration in other areas, class/subclass. Claims 16-26 will be examined herewith.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 16 and 21-22, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Reddy [US 6,094,110].
Regarding claims 16 and 22, Reddy discloses a choke [figure 1] comprising
- a ferrite core [17] having a first diameter [D1];
- a conductor wound around the core into a plurality of windings [40, 42, 44] characteristic to a first frequency range of the RF signals, wherein a first end of the windings [40] is substantially aligned with a first end of the core and a subset of the windings [40, 42, 44], from a second end of the windings [40], extends beyond a second end of the core [end portion core 18], being configured to extend an upper frequency edge of the first frequency range [upper and better frequency, column 3, lines 65-67], wherein the conductor has a thickness from 0.9 mm to 1.6 mm [15AWG, column 3, line 29].
Regarding claim 21, Reddy discloses the core comprises a uniform piece of a ferrite rod [18].
Claim(s) 16 and 21-22, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Reddy et al. [US 6,339,364 B1].
Regarding claims 16 and 22, Reddy et al. discloses a choke [figure 1] comprising
- a ferrite core [17] having a first diameter [D1];
- a conductor wound around the core into a plurality of windings [40, 42, 44] characteristic to a first frequency range of the RF signals, wherein a first end of the windings [40] is substantially aligned with a first end of the core and a subset of the windings [40, 42, 44], from a second end of the windings [40], extends beyond a second end of the core [end portion core 18], being configured to extend an upper frequency edge of the first frequency range [upper and better frequency, column 6, lines 40-41], wherein the conductor has a thickness from 0.9 mm to 1.6 mm [15AWG, column 6, lines 2-3].
Regarding claim 21, Reddy et al. discloses the core comprises a uniform piece of a ferrite rod [18].
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.
Claim(s) 17-18 and 24-25, as best understood in view of the rejection under 35 USC 112 second paragraph, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reddy.
Regarding claim 17, Reddy discloses the number turns of the plurality of windings is from 10-20 [coil portion 40 of figure 1],
The specific number of turns of number of windings would have been an obvious design consideration for the purpose of providing specific frequency and/or inductance to the choke device.
Regarding claim 18, as best understood in view of the rejection under 35 USC 112 second paragraph, Reddy further discloses different “subset of windings” with different turns thereof.
The specific “subset of windings” and turns thereof would have been an obvious design consideration based on the intended applications and/or environments thereof.
Regarding claims 24-25, Reddy discloses the core having first diameter [D1 of core section 18] and a second diameter [D2 of core section 19] with different numbers of the first and second diameter [column 4, lines 50-55].
The specific diameters of the first and second core portion would have been an obvious design consideration for the purpose of facilitating different desired magnetic flux/field characteristics.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/19/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that:
[1], Reddy-1discloses the elongate stepped core structure contains two core sections each having a different diameter.
[2], Reddy-1 and Reddy-2 fail to disclose a subset of windings, from a second end of said windings, extends beyond a second end of the core as set for the in claim 16.
The Examiner disagrees.
Regarding [1], applicant has not claimed any specific diameter of the core structure.
Regarding [2], Reddy-1 and/or Reddy-2 discloses the winding sections [40, 42, 44] extend beyond core portion [18].
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 TUYEN T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1996. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30-5:30.
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 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.
/TUYEN T NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights