DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Applicant’s arguments/amendments filed June 22, 2026 have been fully considered but are moot in view of new ground(s) of rejection. Claims 2-5 had been canceled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. 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 of this title, 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.
3. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
4. Claims 16-18, 23 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishikawa et al. (2017/0063155) (Hereinafter “Nishikawa”) in view of Koyanagi et al. (2015/0326056) (“Koyanagi”).
Regarding claim 16, Nishikawa discloses a coil for non-contact power transmission (Fig.6 and 7, please refer to the whole reference for detailed), the coil comprising: a first winding line (14 in Figs.6 and 7) formed by winding a thin film conductor, the first winding line including a plurality of first linear portions (linear portions of 14) each having a linear shape, and a plurality of first right angled portions connecting the first linear portions to each other and each having a right angled shape; and a second winding line (13 in Figs.6 and 7) formed by winding a thin film conductor, the second winding line including a plurality of second linear portions (linear portion of 13) each having a linear shape and a plurality of second right angled portions connecting the second linear portions to each other and each having a right angled shape, the second winding line (13) being laminated on the first winding line (14) with an insulating layer (3 in Fig.6) interposed therebetween, wherein: each of overall shapes in a plan view of the first winding line and the second winding line is a mutually identical polygon shape (Fig.7), a position of at least a part of each of the first linear portions as viewed from a center of the coil coincides with a position of at least a part of each of the second linear portions corresponding to at least a part of each of the first linear portions as viewed from the center in plan view (Fig.7), a respective winding of the first winding line (14 in Figs.6 and 7) is bent at a first bending location (please refer to Nishikawa’s Fig.7 with the Examiner’s notes below) toward an inner circumference side relative to the second winding line (13) only in one of the first linear portions (please refer to Nishikawa’s Fig.7 with the Examiner’s notes below) included in the respective winding of the first winding line (14), a respective winding of the second winding line (13) is bent at a second bending location (please refer to Nishikawa’s Fig.7 with the Examiner’s notes below) toward an outer circumference side relative to the first winding line (14) only in one of the second linear portions (please refer to Nishikawa’s Fig.7 with the Examiner’s notes below) included in respective winding of the second winding line (13), and the first linear portion in which the respective winding of the first winding line is bent at the first bending location and the second linear portion in which the respective winding of the second winding line is bent at the second bending location, are arranged on a same side of the coil as viewed from the center (please refer to Fig.7 below), such that a position of the first linear portion coincides with a position of the second linear portion except at the first and second bending locations (please refer to Fig.7 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
642
718
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Nishikawa doesn’t disclose the first winding line including a plurality of first curved portions connecting the first linear portions to each other and each having a curved shape; and the second winding line including a plurality of second curved portions connecting the second linear portions to each other and each having a curved shape. Note: Basically, Nishikawa doesn’t disclose the underlined portion of the claim limitation.
Koyanagi discloses an example of a winding line including a plurality of curved portions (431a-431d) connecting linear portions to each other and each having a curved shape (Fig.4B) (or) a winding line including a plurality of right angled portions (441a-441d) connecting linear portions to each other and each having a right angled shape (Fig.4C).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nishikawa with the teaching of Koyanagi to provide the first winding line including a plurality of first curved portions connecting the first linear portions to each other and each having a curved shape; and the second winding line including a plurality of second curved portions connecting the second linear portions to each other and each having a curved shape. The suggestion/motivation would have been to use a coil with curved corners instead of right angled corners so that the strength of the conducting wire at the four corners can be improved (as supported by Koyanagi’s ¶ 63).
Regarding claim 17, Nishikawa in view of Koyanagi is used to reject claim 16 above.
Nishikawa discloses a position of each of the first right angled portions as viewed from the center of the coil coincides with a position of each of the second right angled portions corresponding to each of the first right angled portions as viewed from the center in plan view.
Nishikawa doesn’t disclose using curved portions as explained in the claim 16 above.
Koyanagi discloses an example of a winding line including a plurality of curved portions (431a-431d) connecting linear portions to each other and each having a curved shape (Fig.4B) (or) a winding line including a plurality of right angled portions (441a-441d) connecting linear portions to each other and each having a right angled shape (Fig.4C).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nishikawa with the teaching of Koyanagi to provide a position of each of the first curved portions as viewed from the center of the coil coincides with a position of each of the second curved portions corresponding to each of the first curved portions as viewed from the center in plan view. The suggestion/motivation would have been to use a coil with curved corners instead of right angled corners so that the strength of the conducting wire at the four corners can be improved (as supported by Koyanagi’s ¶ 63).
Regarding claim 18, Nishikawa in view of Koyanagi is used to reject claim 16 above.
Nishikawa discloses positions of the other ones of the first linear portions and positions of the other ones of the second linear portions coincide with each other (Fig.7).
Regarding claim 23, Nishikawa in view of Koyanagi is used to reject claim 16 above.
Nishikawa discloses a power transmission device (1 in Figs.1 and 2) included in a power transmission system (1 and 2 Figs.1 and 2) including the power transmission device (1) and a power reception device (2) separated from the power transmission device (1), the power transmission system being configured to transmit power from the power transmission device (1) to the power reception device (2) in a non-contact manner (Figs.1 and 2), the power transmission device comprising: a power transmission coil (13 and 14 in Figs.2, 6 and 7) that is the coil according to claim 16, the power transmission coil being disposed to face the power reception device (2); and an output part (11 and 12 in Fig.1) configured to output power to be transmitted to the power transmission coil (13 and 14).
Regarding claim 24, Nishikawa in view of Koyanagi is used to reject claims 16 and 23 above.
Nishikawa discloses a non-contact power transmission system (Figs.1 and 2) comprising: the power transmission device (1) according to claim 23; and a power reception device (2) separated from the power transmission device (1) and disposed to face the power transmission coil (Fig.2), the power reception device (2) being configured to receive power transmitted from the power transmission device (1).
5. Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishikawa et al. (2017/0063155) (Hereinafter “Nishikawa”) in view of Koyanagi et al. (2015/0326056) (“Koyanagi”) and Long et al. (WO 2018/222669) (“Long”).
Regarding claim 19, Nishikawa in view of Koyanagi is used to reject claim 16 above.
Nishikawa doesn’t disclose the first winding line is constituted of two first parallel winding lines arranged in parallel, and the second winding line is constituted of two second parallel winding lines arranged in parallel.
Long discloses an example of a first winding line (for example the winding line shown in Fig.2A) is constituted of two first parallel winding lines (two of four first parallel winding lines in Fig.2A) arranged in parallel, and a second winding line (for example the winding line shown in Fig.2B) is constituted of two second parallel winding lines (two of four second parallel winding lines in Fig.2B) arranged in parallel.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nishikawa in view of Koyanagi with the teaching of Long to provide the first winding line is constituted of two first parallel winding lines arranged in parallel, and the second winding line is constituted of two second parallel winding lines arranged in parallel. The suggestion/motivation would have been to increase winding ampacity or inductance as taught by Long’s ¶ 22.
Allowable Subject Matter
6. Claims 1 and 6-15 are allowed.
7. Claims 20-22, 25 and 26 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
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD TAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7455. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30am-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, Menatoallah Youssef can be reached on 571-270-3684. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Richard Tan/Primary Examiner 2836
Prosecution Insights