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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of invention I in the reply filed on August 11, 2025 is acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 446 in Figure 4. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 18, 22 and 24-25 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 18, line 1, “the coating material” lacks proper antecedent basis. Claim 22 depends from itself. For examination purposes, it has been assumed that claim 22 should depend from claim 16, as mentioned in the Applicant’s Remarks dated August 11, 2025. Claim 24, line 1, “of the of the” should be “of the”. Claim 25, line 4, “of the of the” should be “of the”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-10 and 16-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “surface finishes selected to visually match or
coordinate with the housing”. It is unclear how the surface finishes coordinate with the housing. Claims 2-10 inherit this deficiency.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “a surface finish selected to visually match or coordinate with the housing”. It is unclear how the surface finish coordinates with the housing. Claims 17-20 inherit this deficiency.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “a surface finish selected to visually match or coordinate with the housing”. It is unclear how the surface finish coordinates with the housing.
Claim 23 recites the limitation “a surface finished selected to visually match or coordinate with the housing”. It is unclear how the surface finish coordinates with the housing. Claims 24-25 inherit this deficiency.
Claim 25 recites the limitation “a surface finish selected to visually match or coordinate with the housing”. It is unclear how the surface finish coordinates with the housing.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by the US patent application publication of Xu et al. (2016/0344195).
As to claim 1, Xu discloses an electronic device (320,620,810,820,1020) comprising: a housing (310a,610a,811,821,1010) having a window therethrough (see Figures 3, 4, 6, 8, and 10); a wireless power transfer coil (324, 624, 714, 724) disposed inside the housing adjacent the window (see Figures 3, 6, and 7); and a non-metallic cover (314, 614, 811a-c, 821a-c, 1020, the cover is non-metallic because it has magnetic particles in polymer, see paragraph [0039], lines 5-11 and paragraph [0047], lines 1-5) disposed within the window that protects the wireless power transfer coil, the non-metallic cover incorporating at least one ferromagnetic region (see paragraph [0039], lines 5-11 and paragraph [0047], lines 1-5) that improves magnetic coupling of the wireless power transfer coil to a corresponding wireless power transfer coil of another device by providing a high magnetic permeability flux path; wherein the non-metallic cover and the at least one ferromagnetic region have surface finishes selected to visually match or coordinate with the housing (see Figures 4, 6, 8, and 10, magnetically permeable material regions 314, 614, 811a-c, 821a-c, 1020 correspond to the non-metallic cover with a ferromagnetic region to be flush with the housing 310a, 610a, 811, 821, 1010).
As to claim 2, the non-metallic cover is formed from a polymer material (see paragraph [0039], lines 9-11 and paragraph [0047], lines 1-5).
As to claim 3, the non-metallic cover is plastic or rubber (see paragraph [0039], lines 9-11 and paragraph [0047], lines 1-5).
As to claim 4, the at least one ferromagnetic region has one or more dimensions selected to match a corresponding dimension of a core of the wireless power transfer coil (see Figure 8, regions 811a-c and 821a-c are aligned with core legs 713a-c and 723a-c).
As to claim 5, the at last one ferromagnetic region has a thickness selected to reduce or eliminate an air gap between the core of the wireless power transfer coil and a core of the corresponding wireless power transfer coil of another device (see Figures 6 and 8).
As to claim 6, the ferromagnetic region is formed from a non-metallic matrix or substrate material with ferromagnetic particles disposed therein (see paragraph [0039], lines 9-13 and paragraph [0047], lines 1-5).
As to claim 8, the non-metallic matrix or substrate material is the same material as the non-metallic cover (see paragraph [0039], lines 9-13 ana paragraph [0047], lines 1-5).
Claim(s) 16-17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by the Japanese patent of Nagai et al. (a copy and an English translation are attached).
As to claim 16, Nagai discloses an electronic device (12,22) comprising: a
housing (1,2) having a window therethrough (see Figure 1); a wireless power transfer coil (11,12) disposed inside the housing adjacent the window (see Figure 1); and a non-metallic cover (40) disposed within the window that protects the wireless power transfer coil (see Figure 6), the non-metallic cover incorporating at least one ferromagnetic region (see paragraph 22, lines 3-4) that improves magnetic coupling of the wireless power transfer coil to a corresponding wireless power transfer coil of another device by providing a high magnetic permeability flux path (see paragraphs [0003]-[0006]); wherein at least one of the non-metallic cover and ferromagnetic region are coated to provide a surface finish selected to visually match or coordinate with the housing (see Figure 6, cover and ferromagnetic region 40 are coated by auxiliary member 30).
As to claim 17, both the non-metallic cover and the ferromagnetic region are coated to provide a surface finish selected to visually match or coordinate with the housing (see Figure 6, cover and ferromagnetic region 40 are coated by auxiliary member 30).
As to claim 19, the ferromagnetic region is formed from a non-metallic matrix or substrate material with ferromagnetic particles disposed therein (see paragraph [0019], lines 1-6).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu in view of the US patent of Qiu et al. (2021/0050744).
As to claim 7, Xu discloses all of the claimed features, as set forth above, except
for the housing being metallic. Qiu discloses a wirelessly charged electronic device, wherein the device is in a metallic housing (325) (see paragraph [0035], lines 30-33, “Case 325 may be made of any number of materials that may be or include … metal”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have used a metallic housing, because metallic housings are common in wirelessly charged electronic devices.
Claims 9-10 and 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu in view of the US patent application publication of Jung et al. (2014/0176288).
As to claim 9, Xu discloses all of the claimed features, as set forth above,
except for the ferromagnetic particles being powdered causing the ferromagnetic region to have an anisotropic magnetic flux characteristic. Jung discloses an electromagnetic induction module for wireless charging including a ferromagnetic region formed from a substrate material with ferromagnetic particles disposed therein (see paragraph [0015], lines 3-4; paragraph [0019], lines 1-2; paragraph [0026], lines 1-2; and paragraph [0040], lines 1-3), wherein the ferromagnetic particles are powdered so as to cause the ferromagnetic region to have an anisotropic magnetic flux characteristic (see paragraph [0019], lines 1-2; paragraph [0026], lines 1-2; and paragraph [0040], lines 1-3). It would have been obvious to have used a substrate material with powdered ferromagnetic particles disposed therein, as taught by Jung, in the device of Xu, in order to provide a device with reduced thickness of the wireless charging element and improve the charging efficiency.
As to claim 10, Xu discloses all of the claimed features, as set forth above,
except for the ferromagnetic particles being flakes and oriented within the ferromagnetic region so as to cause the ferromagnetic region to have an anisotropic magnetic flux characteristic. Jung discloses an electromagnetic induction module for wireless charging including a ferromagnetic region formed from a substrate material with ferromagnetic particles disposed therein (see paragraph [0015], lines 3-4; paragraph [0019], lines 1-2; paragraph [0026], lines 1-2; and paragraph [0040], lines 1-3), wherein the ferromagnetic particles are flakes oriented within the ferromagnetic region so as to cause the ferromagnetic region to have an anisotropic magnetic flux characteristic (see paragraph [0019], lines 1-2; paragraph [0026], lines 1-2; and paragraph [0040], lines 1-3). It would have been obvious to have used a substrate material with ferromagnetic flakes disposed therein, as taught by Jung, in the device of Xu, in order to provide a device with reduced thickness of the wireless charging element and improve the charging efficiency.
As to claim 20, Xu discloses all of the claimed features, as set forth above,
except for the ferromagnetic particles being flakes and oriented within the ferromagnetic region so as to cause the ferromagnetic region to have an anisotropic magnetic flux characteristic. Jung discloses an electromagnetic induction module for wireless charging including a ferromagnetic region formed from a substrate material with ferromagnetic particles disposed therein (see paragraph [0015], lines 3-4; paragraph [0019], lines 1-2; paragraph [0026], lines 1-2; and paragraph [0040], lines 1-3), wherein the ferromagnetic particles are flakes oriented within the ferromagnetic region so as to cause the ferromagnetic region to have an anisotropic magnetic flux characteristic (see paragraph [0019], lines 1-2; paragraph [0026], lines 1-2; and paragraph [0040], lines 1-3). It would have been obvious to have used a substrate material with ferromagnetic flakes disposed therein, as taught by Jung, in the device of Xu, in order to provide a device with reduced thickness of the wireless charging element and improve the charging efficiency.
As to claim 21, Xu discloses an electronic device (320,620,810,820,1020) comprising: a housing (310a,610a,811,821,1010) having a window therethrough (see Figures 3, 4, 6, 8, and 10); a wireless power transfer coil (324, 624, 714, 724) disposed inside the housing adjacent the window (see Figures 3, 6, and 7); and a non-metallic cover (314, 614, 811a-c, 821a-c, 1020, the cover is non-metallic because it has magnetic particles in polymer, see paragraph [0039], lines 5-11 and paragraph [0047], lines 1-5) disposed within the window that protects the wireless power transfer coil, the non-metallic cover incorporating at least one ferromagnetic region (see paragraph [0039], lines 5-11 and paragraph [0047], lines 1-5) that improves magnetic coupling of the wireless power transfer coil to a corresponding wireless power transfer coil of another device by providing a high magnetic permeability flux path; wherein the ferromagnetic region has a surface finish selected to visually match or coordinate with the housing (see Figures 4, 6, 8, and 10, magnetically permeable material regions 314, 614, 811a-c, 821a-c, 1020 correspond to the non-metallic cover with a ferromagnetic region to be flush with the housing 310a, 610a, 811, 821, 1010). Xu does not disclose the ferromagnetic region formed from a non-metallic matrix or substrate material with ferromagnetic particles disposed therein, wherein the ferromagnetic particles are flakes oriented within the ferromagnetic region so as to cause the ferromagnetic region to have an anisotropic magnetic flux characteristic.
Jung discloses an electromagnetic induction module for wireless charging including a ferromagnetic region formed from a substrate material with ferromagnetic particles disposed therein (see paragraph [0015], lines 3-4; paragraph [0019], lines 1-2; paragraph [0026], lines 1-2; and paragraph [0040], lines 1-3), wherein the ferromagnetic particles are flakes oriented within the ferromagnetic region so as to cause the ferromagnetic region to have an anisotropic magnetic flux characteristic (see paragraph [0019], lines 1-2; paragraph [0026], lines 1-2; and paragraph [0040], lines 1-3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have used a substrate material with ferromagnetic flakes disposed therein, as taught by Jung, in the device of Xu, in order to provide a device with reduced thickness of the wireless charging element and improve the charging efficiency.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagai in view of the Chinese patent application publication of Tseng et al. (CN 104183901 A).
As to claim 18, Nagai discloses all of the claimed features, as set forth above,
except for the coating material being the same material as the non-metallic cover. Tseng discloses an electronic device comprising a non-metallic cover with a coating material that is the same material as the non-metallic cover (see paragraph [0030], lines 7-10; the non-metallic cover and coating are the same and are therefore the same material). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the claimed invention, to have used a non-metallic cover in the device of Nagai, in order to provide protection for the parts of the device underneath the non-metallic cover.
Claim(s) 22-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu in view of Jung as set forth above, and further in view of Nagai.
As to claim 22, Xu in view of Jung disclose all of the claimed features, as set forth above, except for the surface finish of the ferromagnetic region being a coating. Nagai discloses a device for contactless power supply, wherein the surface finish of a ferromagnetic region is a coating (see Figure 6, cover and ferromagnetic region 40 are coated by auxiliary member 30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have constructed the device with a coating on the surface of the ferromagnetic region, in order to provide protection for the surface of the device.
As to claim 23, the non-metallic cover of Nagai is coated to provide a surface finish selected to visually match or coordinate with the housing (see Figure 6, cover and ferromagnetic region 40 are coated by auxiliary member 30).
As to claim 24, the surface finish of the non-metallic cover of Nagai can be a coating (see Figure 6, cover and ferromagnetic region 40 are coated by auxiliary member 30).
As to claim 25, the non-metallic cover of Nagai also has a surface finish selected to visually match or coordinate with the housing (see Figure 6, cover and ferromagnetic region 40 are coated by auxiliary member 30); and the surface finish of the ferromagnetic region and the surface finish of the non-metallic cover are a coating (see Figure 6, cover and ferromagnetic region 40 are coated by auxiliary member 30).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-10, 18, 23-25 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 9 contains allowable subject matter because none of the prior art of record
discloses or suggests the ferromagnetic particles are powdered causing the ferromagnetic region to have an isotropic magnetic flux characteristic, in combination with the remaining claimed features.
Claim 10 contains allowable subject matter because none of the prior art of record discloses or suggests the ferromagnetic particles are flakes and are oriented within the ferromagnetic region so as to cause the ferromagnetic region to have an anisotropic magnetic flux characteristic, in combination with the remaining claimed features.
Claim 18 contains allowable subject matter because none of the prior art of record discloses or suggests the coating material is the same material as the non-metallic cover, in combination with the remaining claimed features.
Claim 20 contains allowable subject matter because none of the prior art of record discloses or suggests the ferromagnetic particles are flakes oriented within the ferromagnetic region so as to cause the ferromagnetic region to have an anisotropic magnetic flux characteristic, in combination with the remaining claimed features.
Claims 21 and 23-25 contain allowable subject matter because none of the prior art of record discloses or suggests the ferromagnetic particles are flakes oriented within the ferromagnetic region so as to cause the ferromagnetic region to have an anisotropic magnetic flux characteristic, in combination with the remaining claimed features.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAL KAPLAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8587. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at 571-272-7492. 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.
/HAL KAPLAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836