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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/15/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues that original claims 2, 3 and 5 would reveal that the three claims indeed read on the elected species 1 (figures la-2c) since FIG. 1, in the original claim 2, if the inductive device has a scenario wherein suppose S=4, then (S+1)th turn of the first wire is A5, Sth turn (inner turn) of the first wire is A4, Sth turn (inner turn) of the second wire is B4, thus A5 is stacked on A4 and B4. Suppose T=6, then (T+1)th turn of the second wire is B7, Tth turn of the first wire is A6, Tth turn of the second wire is B6, thus B7 is stacked on A6 and B6; suppose S=4 and T=6; also in the original claim 3, if the inductive device has a scenario wherein A5 and B5 cross each other and A7 and B7 cross each other as shown in S1 of FIG.2C, and (S+1=5) and (T+1=7) are odd numbers and also in the original claim 5, if the inductive device has a scenario wherein suppose S=4 and T=6 as exemplified in the original claim 2, then the absolute difference between T and S is 2, which is equal to an even number. Thus, it is
clear that the original claims 2,3 and 5 reads on the elected species 1. The examiner respectfully disagrees.
In regards to species 1 (figures 1a-2c), para 0026-0042 discloses the workings of this particular embodiment in regards to the matching order that includes a formula (S+1)th turn for the wire w1 or w2 with the formula (N-1). Para 0026-0042 of the first embodiment does not mention the formula (T+1)th turn for the second wire w2. The formula (T+1)th turn for the second wire w2 is introduced in the second embodiment species 2 figures 3a-3c wherein each of the wires w1 and w2 is wound into 24 turns. Since this particular feature (T+1)th turn for the second wire w2 is not taught in the written description of species 1, para 0026-0042, claims 2-5 are withdrawn from consideration. The Applicant is advised to focus on structural features described in species 1, para 0026-0042, that uses the (S+1)th formula with the formula (N-1) and not the formula (T+1)th.
Also since the claim features of a (T+1)th turn of the second wire is stacked on a Tth turn of the first wire and a Tth turn of the second wire, T being a positive integer less than (N-1) and different from S (T+1)th turn for the second wire w2 is not taught in the written description of species 1, para 0026-0042; the limitations of claim 2 that were added to claim 1 is withdrawn from consideration and these limitations are not apart of the rejection of Tomonari and OI. Accordingly, the previous rejection used in the non-final is still considered to read on the claims of record.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1, species 1 (figures 1a-2c), para 0026-0042 does not disclose the features of a (T+1)th turn of the second wire is stacked on a Tth turn of the first wire and a Tth turn of the second wire, T being a positive integer less than (N-1) and different from S. Where in para 0026-0042 of the applicant specification are these g=features disclosed? Claims 8-9 are rejected under the same premise.
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 and 8-9 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.
Regarding claim 1, the limitations “….a (T+1)th turn of the second wire is stacked on a Tth turn of the first wire and a Tth turn of the second wire, T being a positive integer less than (N-1) and different from S….” is vague and indefinite. Where in para 0026-0042 of the applicant specification are these g=features disclosed? Claims 8-9 are rejected under the same premise. For examing purpose the claim will be rejected without these claimed limitations.
Regarding claim 1, the limitations an (S+1)th turn of the first wire is stacked on an Sth turn of the first wire and an inner Sth turn of the second wire, S being a positive integer less than (N-1) …” is vague and indefinite. The examiner is unclear on how is the (S+1)th turn is stacked on an Sth turn of the first wire and an Sth turn of the second wire. The claim appears to recite that Sth turn is stacked on itself and not inner turn.
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.
1. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Tomonari (US 2017/0221626).
Regarding claim 1, Tomonari (figure 16 and para 0157-0182) discloses a magnetic core (11); a first wire (W2) wound around the magnetic core and comprising N turns, N being an integer exceeding 1 (see figure 16); and a second wire (W1) wound around the magnetic core and comprising N turns (see figure 16); wherein an (S+1)th turn of the first wire is stacked on an Sth turn of the first wire and an Sth turn of the second wire, S being a positive integer less than (N-1). (note: see figure 16 section BK2 wherein first wire W2 is stacked on an inner turn of the first wire and an inner turn of the second wire W1 that allows Higeta figure 6 structure to meet the stipulations wherein (S+1)th turn of the first wire and S being a positive integer less than (N-1))
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.
2. Claims 1 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Higeta (US 2006/0196984) in view OI (US 20020021201).
. Regarding claim 1, Higeta (figure 6 and para 0061-0065) discloses a core (2); a first wire (A) wound around the core and comprising N turns, N being an integer exceeding 1 (see figure 6); and a second wire (B) wound around the core and comprising N turns (see figure 6); wherein an (S+1)th turn of the first wire is stacked on an Sth turn of the first wire and an Sth turn of the second wire, S being a positive integer less than (N-1).(note: see figure 6 wherein first wire A is stacked on an inner turn of the first wire and an inner turn of the second wire B that allows Higeta figure 6 structure to meet the stipulations wherein (S+1)th turn of the first wire and S being a positive integer less than (N-1))
Higeta does not expressly discloses wherein the core is made of magnetic material.
OI (figure 1 and para 0027) discloses a teaching wherein the core (12) is made of magnetic 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 core is made of magnetic material as taught by OI to the inductive of Higeta so as can help to channel and contain the magnetic flux, minimizing leakage inductance and maximize the transfer of energy between the coils.
Regarding claim 8, Higeta (figure 6) discloses wherein a quantity of inner turns of the first wire and a quantity of inner turns of the second wire are substantially equal.
Regarding claim 9, Higeta (figure 6) discloses wherein a quantity of outer turns
of the first wire and a quantity of outer turns of the second wire are substantially equal.
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 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