DETAILED ACTION
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) 1-11 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Masahiro [JP 2001-230134 A] in view of Yeom et al. [EP 3032549 A1].
Regarding claims 1-3 and 6-7, Masahiro discloses a magnetic device [figure 4] comprising;
- a frame portion [figure 4];
- a first winding set having a first winding wire and a first magnetic core of the frame portion [figure 4]
- a second winding set having a second winding wire and a second magnetic core of the frame portion, wherein winding numbers of the two winding sets are identical or different and winding directions of the two winding sets are identical or different;
- a first metal piece [one of the I-shaped cores], wherein the first winding set, the second winding set and the first metal piece are disposed in the frame portion, the first metal piece substantially connects the first winding set, the second winding set and the frame portion;
- a third winding set and a second metal piece [one of the I-shaped cores], wherein the third winding set and the second metal piece are disposed in the frame portion, the first metal piece and the second metal piece respectively connect adjacent two of the first, second and third winding sets and the frame portion [figure 4].
Masahiro discloses a three-phase AC reactor device which uses AC for the winding sets.
Masahiro disclose the instant claimed invention except for a material of the two winding sets is different from a material of the first metal piece.
Yeom et al. discloses a magnetic device [figure 1] comprising:
- a first core [11];
- a first coil [12] wound about the first core;
- a second core [21];
- a second coil [22] wound about the second core; and
- a third core [30] arranged between the first and second coils, wherein a material of the third core different from material of the first and second cores [figure 1].
It would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the material different between the core and the metal piece of Yeom et al., in Masahiro for the purpose of facilitating different desired magnetic flux/field characteristic and reducing/minimizing core losses [abstract].
The specific “different” phases between the coils would have been an obvious design consideration based on the intended applications and/or environments uses.
Regarding claims 4 and 10, Yeom et al. discloses the use of different materials for the magnetic cores and different examples of magnetic core structure and/or materials [Table 1].
The specific low and/or high permeability material uses for the first and second metal pieces would have been an obvious design consideration for the purpose of facilitating different desired magnetic field/flux characteristics.
Regarding claim 5, both Masahiro and Yeom et al. disclose the magnetic cores are tightly engaged with contact surfaces of the first metal piece [first, second, third cores].
Regarding claims 8-9, Masahiro discloses the winding numbers of adjacent two of the three winding sets are identical or different and winding directions of adjacent two of the three winding sets are identical or different [figure 4].
Regarding claim 11, Masahiro discloses adjacent two of the three winding sets respectively are tightly engaged with two contact surfaces of the first and the second metal pieces [figure 4].
Regarding claim 13, Masahiro discloses the frame portion comprises a first frame portion, a second frame portion, and a third frame portion, wherein the first and third frame portions, respectively stacked on top and bottom of the first metal piece, are tightly engaged with two opposite sides of the first metal piece, wherein the third and second frame portions, respectively stacked on top and bottom of the second metal piece, are tightly engaged with two opposite sides of the second metal piece [figure 4 shows 3 different core/winding assemblies stacked and separated by metal pieces I-shaped cores].
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-11 and 13 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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