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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 05/15/26 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot in grounds of the new rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
1. Claims 1 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Timashov et al. (US 2013/0257575) in view of Cheng et al. (US 2018/0374637) and Chandrasekaran et al. (US 6,980,077).
Regarding claim 1, Timashov et al. (figure 8 and para 0043-0071) discloses a first magnetic core (872) including an interior portion and an exterior portion (see figure 8); a second magnetic core (874) in contact with the interior portion and the exterior portion (see figure 8); a plurality of primary windings formed around the interior portion (see figure 8 and para 0066); wherein the first magnetic core further comprises a third portion that extends across and is in contact with the interior portion and the exterior portion(see figure 8); wherein the third portion and the second magnetic core are made from a first magnetic material (see para 0045), and the exterior portion and the interior portion are made from a second magnetic material (see para 0018/0045).
Timashov et al. discloses a teaching wherein a secondary winding is formed around the interior portion (see figure 8 and para 0066) but, does not expressly disclose a plurality of secondary windings formed around the interior portion and wherein the third portion and the second magnetic core has a first magnetic material that has a lower magnetic permeability the exterior portion and the interior portion made from a second magnetic material.
Cheng et al. (figure 6 and para 0060-0061) discloses a teaching a plurality of secondary windings (610/612) formed around the interior portion.
Chandrasekaran et al. (figure 9b/drawing below, Col 4, lines 35-60 and Col 6, lines 25-60) discloses a teaching wherein the third portion (see drawing below) and the second magnetic core (see drawing below) that has a first magnetic material which has a lower magnetic permeability the exterior portion (see drawing below) and the interior portion (see drawing below) made from a second magnetic material.
(see drawing below disclosing the dark portions of the core 54 being made of low magnetic permeability light portions of the core which correlates to reference 52 being made of high permeability material).
PNG
media_image1.png
398
426
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant claimed invention to design wherein a plurality of secondary windings formed around the interior portion as taught by Cheng et al to the inductive device of Timashov et al. so as to allow for a high er inductance to be obtained.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant claimed invention to design wherein the third portion and the second magnetic core that has a first magnetic material which has a lower magnetic permeability the exterior portion and the interior portion made from a second magnetic material as taught by Chandrasekaran et al.to the inductive device of Timashov et al. so as to prevent core saturation and minimize eddy current losses.
Regarding claim 11, Cheng et al. (figure 6 and para 0060-0061) discloses wherein the plurality of primary windings and the plurality of secondary windings are enclosed by the first and second magnetic cores.
Regarding claim 12, Timashov et al. (figure 8 and para 0043-0071) discloses all the limitations as noted above but does not expressly disclose wherein the first magnetic material comprises magnetic powder material and the second magnetic material comprises ferrite material.
Chandrasekaran et al. (Col 5, lines 40-65 and Col 5, lines 1-40) discloses a teaching wherein the first magnetic material comprises magnetic powder material and the second magnetic material comprises ferrite material.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant claimed invention to design wherein the first magnetic material comprises magnetic powder material and the second magnetic material comprises ferrite material as taught by Chandrasekaran et al. to the modified inductive device of Timashov et al. so as allow the inductive device to have improved power density, stability, and minimized EMI.
3. Claims 1 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ando et al. (US 2018/0343742) in view of Chandrasekaran et al. (US 6,980,077).
Regarding claim 1, Timashov et al. (figure 4 and para 0055-0088) discloses a first magnetic core (2b) including an interior portion and an exterior portion (see figure 4); a second magnetic core (2a) in contact with the interior portion and the exterior portion (see figure 4); a plurality of primary windings formed around the interior portion (see figure 4/5a/5d); a plurality of secondary windings formed around the interior portion(see figure 4/5b/5c); wherein the first magnetic core further comprises a third portion that extends across and is in contact with the interior portion and the exterior portion (see figure 4); wherein the exterior portion, the third portion, and the second magnetic core are made from a first magnetic material (see figure 4 and para 0057), and the interior portion is made from a second magnetic material (see figure 4 and para 0057).
Ando et al. does not expressly disclose does not expressly disclose wherein the third portion and the second magnetic core has a first magnetic material that has a lower magnetic permeability the exterior portion and the interior portion made from a second magnetic material
Chandrasekaran et al. (figure 9b/drawing below, Col 4, lines 35-60 and Col 6, lines 25-60) discloses a teaching wherein the third portion (see drawing below) and the second magnetic core (see drawing below) that has a first magnetic material which has a lower magnetic permeability the exterior portion (see drawing below) and the interior portion (see drawing below) made from a second magnetic material.
(see drawing below disclosing the dark portions of the core 54 being made of low magnetic permeability light portions of the core which correlates to reference 52 being made of high permeability material).
PNG
media_image1.png
398
426
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant claimed invention to design wherein the third portion and the second magnetic core has a first magnetic material that has a lower magnetic permeability the exterior portion and the interior portion made from a second magnetic material as taught by Chandrasekaran et al to the inductive device of Ando et al. so as to prevent core saturation and minimize eddy current losses.
Regarding claim 11, Ando et al. (figure 4) discloses wherein the plurality of primary windings and the plurality of secondary windings are enclosed by the first and second magnetic cores.
Regarding claim 12, Timashov et al. (figure 8 and para 0043-0071) discloses all the limitations as noted above but does not expressly disclose wherein the first magnetic material comprises magnetic powder material and the second magnetic material comprises ferrite material.
Chandrasekaran et al. (Col 5, lines 40-65 and Col 5, lines 1-40) discloses a teaching wherein the first magnetic material comprises magnetic powder material and the second magnetic material comprises ferrite material.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant claimed invention to design wherein the first magnetic material comprises magnetic powder material and the second magnetic material comprises ferrite material as taught by Chandrasekaran et al. to the modified inductive device of Ando et al. so as allow the inductive device to have improved power density, stability, and minimized EMI.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RONALD HINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7915. The examiner can normally be reached M to F; 8 -5.
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.
/RONALD HINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights