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 06/12/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues the prior art of Cooper does not read on the applicants claimed invention since nothing in paragraph 31 of Cooper describes anything about the core halves being of a high permeability. In addition, nothing in Cooper describes permeability of the magnetic core halves. Thus, stating that the core halves are ferrite is insufficient to claim this to be a high permeability material. The examiner disagrees.
From reviewing the applicant’s entire specifications, there is no detailed description on what core materials the applicant considers to be a high permeability material. Para 0028 of the applicant disclosures only suggest that materials with the high magnetic permeability of the primary magnetic core assembly and the secondary magnetic core assembly include a ferrite. Claim 11 which directly depends on claim 1 discloses that the materials with the high magnetic permeability of the primary magnetic core assembly and the secondary magnetic core assembly comprise a ferrite. From reviewing the applicant disclosure and by claim 11 limitations suggesting that high magnetic permeability cores comprise a ferrite, one of ordinary skills in the art would conclude the applicant considers ferrite cores to be made of a high magnetic permeability. The prior art of Copper was added to show a core structure that is made of ferrite material which is similar to what the applicant specifications and claim 11 discloses in regards to what core material is considered to be a high permeability material. Also, it is well known in the art and an obvious design choice wherein ferrite cores that are used in inductor/transformer devices are comprised of a high permeability since they have characteristics such as concentrating magnetic flux efficiently and reduces the magnetizing current needed for inductor/transformer operations. Accordingly, the rejection will remain in the office action.
The applicant argues that prior art of Arai does not read on the applicants claimed invention since element 33c of Arai is not a divider that is "placed between the primary and secondary magnetic core assemblies" and is "an electrically insulating material." Instead, Arai describes element 33 as a "winding drum section" that "includes a hollow, cylindrical winding drum component 33 a and flanges 33 b, 33 c, and 33 d provided at both ends and a center of the winding drum component 33 a." As can be seen in Figure 4, the cylindrical winding drum section 33 extends through the flanges 33b-d and do not separate a primary core assembly from a secondary core assembly, as recited in Claim 1. "The E-type core 31 a, one of the pair of E-type cores, is inserted into the hollow part of the winding drum component 33 a through the hollow part of the flange 33 b, and the E-type core 31 b, the other of the pair of E-type cores, is inserted into the hollow part of the winding drum component 33 a through the hollow part of the flange 33 d." Arai at col. 5, 11. 18-23. Thus, the assembly depicted in Figures 3 and 4 of Arai is fundamentally different than the recitations of Claim 1 and resin placed around this cylindrical winding drum section 33 does not read on "wherein core an electrically insulating potting material surrounding each of the magnetic core assemblies in a vicinity of the divider." Thus, Otake, Cooper, and Arai do not teach the recitations of Claim 1, which is allowable. The examiner disagrees.
Lines 6-10 of claim 1 recites “ a divider placed between the primary and secondary magnetic core assemblies, the divider comprising an electrically insulating material; and an electrically insulating potting material surrounding each of the magnetic core assemblies in a vicinity of the divider”
A divider element comes in many shapes, forms and sizes. Claim 1 of the applicant invention does not disclose any structural features of the divider element regarding shape, form and size. Claims 1 does not even mention if the core assembles are directly in contact with the divider element. There is no mention in claim 1 that the divider element is physically separating the primary and secondary magnetic core assemblies. For instance, is the divider directly between the core legs blocking the core legs from contacting one another.
Claim 1 only recites that the divider element is placed between the primary and secondary magnetic core assemblies and that divider comprises an electrically insulating material; and an electrically insulating potting material surrounding each of the magnetic core assemblies in a vicinity of the divider.
The prior art of Arai figures 1-5 discloses a teaching wherein a divider 33c is between the magnetic core assemblies 31a/31b and electrically insulating potting material (14) is surrounding each of the magnetic core assemblies in a vicinity of the divider (33c). The divider in the prior art of Arai is clearly between the two core assemblies separating the first core area from the second core area; nowhere in claim 1 of the applicant’s inventions recites that the divider is physically separating a primary core assembly from a secondary core assembly as mentioned by the applicant.
Also, Otake et al para 0091 discloses wherein the divider comprises an electrically insulating material. Also, Otake et al (figures 1-10) discloses a divider is physically separating a primary core assembly from a secondary core assembly but lacks the teaching of an electrically insulating potting material surrounding each of the magnetic core assemblies in a vicinity of the divider. The prior art of Arai was combined to show a teaching of an electrically insulating potting material surrounding each of the magnetic core assemblies in a vicinity of the divider. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Accordingly, the rejection will remain in the office action. The applicant should have more structural features in regard to the divider element and describe how the structural features of the divider interacts with the magnetic core assemblies.
The applicant argues that Cooper strongly teaches away from "a divider placed between the primary and secondary magnetic core assemblies, the divider comprising an electrically insulating material since Cooper's teaching of the core halves being tightly held together along with Arai's teaching of two E-cores inserted together through the cylindrical winding drum component 33 a defeat the fundamental purpose of the divider taught by Otake and destroy utility of the invention of Otake. The examiner disagrees.
Cooper was combined to show a teaching wherein core assemblies are comprised of materials with a high magnetic permeability such as ferrite, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Accordingly, the rejection will remain in the office action.
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 1-5, 10-16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otake et al. (US 20190326826) in view of Cooper et al. (US 20120050999) and Arai (US 7,825,762).
Regarding claim 1, Otake et al. (figures 1-10 and para 0064-0111) discloses a primary winding proximate to a primary magnetic core assembly (110) (see para 0088-0093); a secondary winding proximate to a secondary magnetic core assembly (120) (see para 0088-0093); a divider (130) placed between the primary and secondary magnetic core assemblies(see para 0088-0095), the divider comprising an electrically insulating material (see para 0091); and an electrically insulating potting material surrounding each of the magnetic core assemblies in a vicinity of the divider.
Otake et al. does not expressly discloses the primary magnetic core assembly and the secondary magnetic core assembly comprised of materials with a high magnetic permeability and an electrically insulating potting material surrounding each of the magnetic core assemblies in a vicinity of the divider.
Cooper et al. (para 0031) discloses a teaching wherein core assemblies are comprised of materials with a high magnetic permeability.
Arai (Col 5, lines 1-65 and figures 1-5) discloses a teaching wherein an electrically insulating potting material (14) surrounding each of the magnetic core assemblies in a vicinity of the divider (33c)
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 core assemblies are comprised of materials with a high magnetic permeability as taught by Cooper et al. to the inductive device of Otake et al. so as to significantly reduce eddy current losses, allow for efficient energy transfer and help reduce noise filtering.
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 an electrically insulating potting material surrounding each of the magnetic core assemblies in a vicinity of the divider as taught by Arai to the inductive device of Otake et al. so as to protect the inductive device from outside element enhanced, dissipate heat and significantly increased resistance to vibration and mechanical shock.
Regarding claim 2, Otake et al. (figures 1-10 and para 0064-0111) discloses wherein the primary magnetic core assembly and the secondary magnetic core assembly each comprise a field-spreading plate (122) positioned adjacent to the divider (130), each field-spreading plate comprising an area adjacent to the divider that is greater than an area of a cross section of the magnetic core assembly adjacent to the field-spreading plate (see figure 6).
Regarding claim 3, Otake et al. (figures 6-10) discloses wherein the primary magnetic core assembly and the secondary magnetic core assembly each comprise at least one core section, each core section comprising at least two extension sections positioned in parallel and connected by at least one connection section, wherein each extension section comprises a first end distal to the connection section, wherein the first end of each core section is adjacent to a field-spreading plate in contact with the divider.
Regarding claim 4, Otake et al. (figures 1-10 and para 0064-0111) discloses wherein the at least one core section and field-spreading plates of the primary magnetic core assembly are in electrical connection with each other and the at least one core sections and field-spreading plates of the secondary magnetic core assembly are in electrical connection with each other.
Regarding claim 5, Otake et al. (figures 6-10) discloses wherein the primary winding is wound around the extension sections of the primary magnetic core assembly together in a center section and wherein the secondary winding is wound around the extension sections of the secondary magnetic core assembly together in a center section.
Regarding claim 10, Arai (Col 5, lines 1-65 and figures 1-5) discloses wherein the electrically insulating potting material is substantially free of voids.
Regarding claim 11, (para 0031) discloses wherein the materials with the high magnetic permeability of the primary magnetic core assembly and the secondary magnetic core assembly comprise a ferrite.
Regarding claim 12, Otake et al. (para 0091) discloses wherein a thickness of the divider in a direction between the primary magnetic core assembly and the secondary magnetic core assembly is sized to a breakdown voltage rating.
Regarding claim 13, Otake et al. (figure 3 and para 0077-0090) discloses wherein a connection of a primary circuit is electrically connected to the primary magnetic core assembly, the primary circuit connected to the primary winding wound around the primary magnetic core assembly and wherein a connection of a secondary circuit is electrically connected to the secondary magnetic core assembly, the secondary circuit connected to the secondary winding wound around the secondary magnetic core assembly.
Regarding claim 14, Otake et al. (figures 1-10 and para 0064-0111) discloses a primary circuit comprising a primary winding (see figures 3-5), the primary circuit comprising input terminals (see figures 3-5 and para 0077-0089); a secondary circuit comprising a secondary winding (see figures 3-5 and para 0077-0089); the secondary circuit comprising output terminals (see figures 3-5 and para 0077-0089); and a transformer comprising a primary magnetic core assembly proximate a primary winding (110) (see para 0088-0093); a secondary magnetic core assembly proximate a secondary winding (120) (see para 0088-0093); a divider (130) placed between the primary and secondary magnetic core assemblies(see para 0088-0095), the divider comprising an electrically insulating material (see para 0091); and an electrically insulating potting material surrounding each of the magnetic core assemblies in a vicinity of the divider.
Otake et al. does not expressly discloses the primary magnetic core assembly and the secondary magnetic core assembly comprised of materials with a high magnetic permeability and an electrically insulating potting material surrounding each of the magnetic core assemblies in a vicinity of the divider.
Cooper et al. (para 0031) discloses a teaching wherein core assemblies are comprised of materials with a high magnetic permeability.
Arai (Col 5, lines 1-65 and figures 1-5) discloses a teaching wherein an electrically insulating potting material (14) surrounding each of the magnetic core assemblies in a vicinity of the divider (33c)
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 core assemblies are comprised of materials with a high magnetic permeability as taught by Cooper et al. to the inductive device of Otake et al. so as to significantly reduce eddy current losses, allow for efficient energy transfer and help reduce noise filtering.
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 an electrically insulating potting material surrounding each of the magnetic core assemblies in a vicinity of the divider as taught by Arai to the inductive device of Otake et al. so as to protect the inductive device from outside element enhanced, dissipate heat and significantly increased resistance to vibration and mechanical shock.
Regarding claim 15, Otake et al. (figures 1-10 and para 0064-0111) discloses wherein the primary magnetic core assembly and the secondary magnetic core assembly each comprise a field-spreading plate (122) positioned adjacent to the divider (130), each field-spreading plate comprising an area adjacent to the divider that is greater than an area of a cross section of the magnetic core assembly adjacent to the field-spreading plate (see figure 6).
Regarding claim 16, Otake et al. (figures 6-10) discloses wherein the primary magnetic core assembly and the secondary magnetic core assembly each comprise at least one core section, each core section comprising at least two extension sections positioned in parallel and connected by at least one connection section, wherein each extension section comprises a first end distal to the connection section, wherein the first end of each core section is adjacent to a field-spreading plate in contact with the divider.
Regarding claim 19, Otake et al. (figures 1-10 and para 0064-0111) discloses aprimary winding proximate to a primary magnetic core assembly (110) (see para 0088-0093); a secondary winding proximate to a secondary magnetic core assembly (120) (see para 0088-0093); a divider (130) placed between the primary and secondary magnetic core assemblies(see para 0088-0095), the divider comprising an electrically insulating material (see para 0091); and an electrically insulating potting material surrounding each of the magnetic core assemblies in a vicinity of the divider; wherein the primary magnetic core assembly and the secondary magnetic core assembly each comprise a field-spreading plate (122) positioned adjacent to the divider (130), each field-spreading plate comprising an area adjacent to the divider that is greater than an area of a cross section of the magnetic core assembly adjacent to the field-spreading plate (see figure 6); wherein the primary magnetic core assembly and the secondary magnetic core assembly each comprise at least one core section (see figure 6);each core section comprising at least two extension sections positioned in parallel and connected by at least one connection section(see figure 6), wherein each extension section comprises a first end distal to the connection section(see figure 6), wherein the first end of each core section is adjacent to a field-spreading plate in contact with the divider(see figure 6), and wherein the at least one core section and field-spreading plates of the primary magnetic core assembly are in electrical connection with each other and the at least one core sections and field-spreading plates of the secondary magnetic core assembly are in electrical contact with each other(see figure 6).
Otake et al. does not expressly discloses the primary magnetic core assembly and the secondary magnetic core assembly comprised of materials with a high magnetic permeability and an electrically insulating potting material surrounding each of the magnetic core assemblies in a vicinity of the divider.
Cooper et al. (para 0031) discloses a teaching wherein core assemblies are comprised of materials with a high magnetic permeability.
Arai (Col 5, lines 1-65 and figures 1-5) discloses a teaching wherein an electrically insulating potting material (14) surrounding each of the magnetic core assemblies in a vicinity of the divider (33c)
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 core assemblies are comprised of materials with a high magnetic permeability as taught by Cooper et al. to the inductive device of Otake et al. so as to significantly reduce eddy current losses, allow for efficient energy transfer and help reduce noise filtering.
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 an electrically insulating potting material surrounding each of the magnetic core assemblies in a vicinity of the divider as taught by Arai to the inductive device of Otake et al. so as to protect the inductive device from outside element enhanced, dissipate heat and significantly increased resistance to vibration and mechanical shock.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-9, 17-18 and 20 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
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
Prosecution Insights