DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicants election without traverse of the invention of Group I, Claims 1 through 16, in the reply filed on September 25, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 17 through 20 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, have been cancelled as part of the reply filed on September 25, 2025.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because they do not appear to show any longitudinal joining. From the specification (page 123), the description of the Winding Shape as it relates to Figure 66A appears to be the closest figure that may represent longitudinal joining, but should be clarified to show these features.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the language uses a phrase that can be implied, e.g. “The invention comprises…”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Effective Filing Date
Applicants have numerous parent applications (e.g. Application serial numbers. 17/864,819, 17/833,747, etc.). Upon careful review of all of the parent applications, it was determined that there is no support for the features recited in Claim 1 of longitudinal joining a first electrical turn to a second electrical turn. Therefore, the effective filing date for the claimed invention is July 20, 2022, which is the filing date of the instant application.
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.
Claim 5 is 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.
In Claim 5, it is unclear what is meant by the phrase of “said electrical turn” (first occurrence at line 3, and second occurrence at line 4). Is each phrase referring to a “first electrical turn” (line 3 of Claim 1), or a “second electrical turn” (line 3 of Claim 1)?
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)(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.
Claims 1 through 6, 9 through 11 and 14, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. 2019/0371570 to Pasko et al (hereinafter “Pasko”).
Claim 1: Pasko discloses a method, comprising the steps of:
providing an inductor core (e.g. 4, Figs. 2, 6, ¶¶ [0003], [0062]); and
longitudinally joining a first electrical turn section (e.g. 1, Fig. 6) to a second electrical turn section (e.g. 2) to form at least part of an electrical turn of a winding about said inductor core (e.g. Fig. 2, ¶ [0071]).
The first and second electrical turn sections are joined in a vertical direction (of Fig. 6) along a longitudinal axis [illustrated below] that passes through a centerline of the inductor core (4), i.e. longitudinal joining.
PNG
media_image1.png
344
340
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 2: Pasko discloses the method of Claim 1, further comprising at least one of cutting material to form the first electrical turn section (e.g. ¶ [0009]).
Claim 3: Pasko discloses the method of Claim 2, the step of longitudinally joining comprising at least one of mechanically joining with a fastener (e.g. 5) the first electrical turn section to the second electrical turn section (e.g. Fig. 1, ¶ [0071]).
Claim 4: Pasko discloses the method of Claim 2, further comprising the steps of:
manufacturing the first electrical turn section in a first U shape;
manufacturing the second electrical turn section in a second flat shape, the second shape distinct relative to the first shape (see Figs. 2 or 6).
Claim 5: As best understood, Pasko discloses the method of Claim 4, the step of longitudinally joining further comprising the steps of:
forming a majority of the first electrical turn with the first U shape; and
forming a minority of the second electrical turn with the flat second shape (Fig. 6).
Claim 6: Pasko discloses the method of Claim 4, the step of longitudinally joining further comprising the steps of:
forming a majority of a vertical portion of the electrical turn passing through a central aperture of the inductor core with the second electrical turn section (Fig. 2).
Claim 9: Pasko discloses the method of Claim 2, further comprising at least one of cutting material to form said second electrical turn section (e.g. ¶ [0009]).
Claim 10: Pasko discloses the method of Claim 9, the step of longitudinally joining further comprising the step of:
connecting a tail end of the first electrical turn section to a first end of the second electrical turn section to form a section of the electrical turn [ends of 1 and 2 where fasteners 5 connect, Fig. 2].
Claim 11: Pasko discloses the method of Claim 9, the step of longitudinally joining further comprising the step of:
connecting a tail end of the first electrical turn section to a first end of the second electrical turn section to form a complete turn of the winding [ends of 1 and 2 where fasteners 5 connect, Fig. 2].
Claim 14: Pasko discloses the method of Claim 1, further comprising the steps of:
providing a first set of eight winding parts comprising the first electrical turn section (in Fig. 6);
providing a second set of six winding parts comprising the second electrical turn section repeating, six times, the step of longitudinally joining with successive members of the first set of winding parts and the second set of winding parts to form the winding (Figs. 2 and 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.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pasko in view of U.S. 2017/0025214 to Nishimura et al (hereinafter “Nishimura”).
Pasko discloses the claimed manufacturing method as relied upon above in Claims 1 and 14. Pasko does not mention the material make-up of the inductor includes coated magnetic particles, including a magnetic particle core and a non-magnetic coating about the magnetic particle core.
Nishimura discloses a method of making an inductor that includes an inductor core (1, Fig. 1). The core is made from a magnetic particle core and a plurality of coated magnetic particles, each of a majority of the coated magnetic particles comprising:
a magnetic particle core (e.g. Fe based grains, ¶ [0037]); and
a non-magnetic coating (e.g. aluminum oxide, ¶ [0062]) about the magnetic particle core, wherein the non-magnetic coating comprises at least one of:
a form of carbon (e.g. ¶ [0050]).
The benefits of forming the inductor and core with this composition of Nishimura allow the inductor to have excellent resistance and strength (e.g. ¶ [0020]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the magnetic core of Pasko by utilizing the compositions taught by Nishimura, to form an inductor with excellent resistance and strength.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
With respect to Claims 7 and 12, Pasko does not teach an inductor core with gap material, or distributed gap material, having layers of magnetic materials and non-magnetic materials.
With respect to Claim 8, Pasko does not teach a magnetic field within at least one of the ranges recited in Claim 8.
With respect to Claim 13, Pasko does not teach an inductor core with a gap material substantially filling a void space between the coated magnetic particles.
With respect to Claim 16, Pasko does not teach forming the electrical turn with a first width and a second width, where the second width is at least ten percent greater than the first width.
To modify Pasko by adding anyone of, or all, of these features would simply destroy the overall structure of the inductor core of Pasko.
Accordingly, Claims 7, 8, 12, 13 and 16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a) Japanese Patent Publication, JP 2018-182227, discloses a method of making a inductor core (30, Fig. 23) that includes joining a first electrical turn section (e.g. 40B, Fig. 6) and a second electrical turn section (e.g. 40B).
b) Non-Patent Literature IEEE Publication to Ding et al., entitled "Additive Manufacturing of Spiral Windings for a Pot-Core Constant-Flux Inductor”, discloses an inductor core with a winding (Fig. 1, see entire document).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to A. DEXTER TUGBANG whose telephone number is (571)272-4570. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.
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, JESSICA HAN can be reached at (571) 272-2078. 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.
/A. DEXTER TUGBANG/ Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2896