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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS filed 2/7/23 has been considered and placed of record. The initialed copy is attached herewith.
Specification
The disclosure should be carefully reviewed to ensure that any and all grammatical, idiomatic, and spelling or other minor errors are corrected.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the drawings are blurry especially for figures 8-10. 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.
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.
Claims 1-20 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.
Re claim 1, the limitation “the sidewall” on line 3 should have been written as “the annular sidewall” for claim consistency with other limitations.
Re claims 2-20, they are indefinite for depending directly or indirectly to other claims.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chinese document CN211809109U (see machine translation).
Re claim 1, the document discloses a shielding module for wireless charging, having, inter alia, a tray 1 having a bottom wall and an annular sidewall connected to an edge of the bottom wall (fig 1), the sidewall and the bottom wall form an accommodation groove 31 therebetween; a plurality of ferrites 4, being arranged in the accommodation groove and completely accommodated in the accommodation groove (translation section: The insulating plate 3 and ferrite 4… and ferrite 4 is placed in the fitting groove defined by the division bar 31); and a colloid 5, being filled in the accommodation groove in a potting manner and filled between the ferrites and the bottom wall, and the tray and the ferrites are integrally formed through the colloid (translation section: In order to make the wireless charging device… the colloid 5 filled in the cavity 11 can seal the opening of the cavity 11 and the gap between the lower tray 1, the excitation wire 2, the insulating plate 3 and the ferrite 4). See figure 1.
Re claim 2, the document further discloses the bottom wall is provided with a plurality of support blocks on a surface of the bottom wall facing the accommodation groove, the ferrites are supported on the support blocks (translation section: In one embodiment, in order to mount and fix the ferrite 4, a plurality of spacers 31 perpendicular to each other are disposed on the insulating plate 3), and the colloid is arranged to avoid the support blocks (e.g. the ferrite 4 is positioned on the insulating plate… and the colloid 5 is filled the gap between the insulating plate and the tray 1).
Re claim 3, the document further discloses the support blocks are provided, and each of the ferrites is supported on at least one of the support blocks (e.g. plural ferrite 4 are laid the insulation plate 2 and is placed in the fitting defined by the spacers 31).
Re claims 6, 13 and 14, the document further discloses the colloid is filled between the ferrite and the sidewall (e.g. the colloid is adopted as the pouring sealant and the fluidity of the colloid filled in the cavity (of the tray)).
Re claims 8 and 19, the document further discloses the colloid is thermally conductive colloid and the tray is a thermally conductive plastic (e.g. the tray is a thermally conductive plastic with conductivity of 0.3-2W/MK; and the colloid has better heat dissipation effect than the control group).
Re claim 9, the document further discloses the colloid covers top surfaces of the ferrites, and a top surface of the colloid is flush with a top surface of the tray (e.g. fig 1 shows flush-fit among the components).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
Claims 4, 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chinese document CN211809109U.
Re claim 4, the document discloses a plurality of spacers 31 (and inherently can be divided into first or second plurality of spacers). However, it is silent on the specific placement of the support blocks (e.g. first set arranged in the middle portion and the second set is arranged uniformly around the edge of the tray). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have placed the support blocks in the claimed arrangement, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art.
Re claim 15 (depends on claim 4), the document further discloses the colloid is filled between the ferrite and the sidewall (e.g. the colloid is adopted as the pouring sealant and the fluidity of the colloid filled in the cavity (of the tray)).
Re claim 20, the document further discloses e.g. lower tray 1 made of heat conductive plastic) arranged on the coil assembly 2, fig 1 shows the heat dissipating housing 1 is facing the coils).
The document is silent on having an upper cover made of metal and a plastic housing for housing the entire shield module including the heat dissipating housing, a tray, ferrite, colloid. It is an inherent feature to place the components including the coils, the heat dissipating housing for the colloid and ferrite in a housing or an enclosed compartment. However, official notice is taken that having the housing/compartment made of plastic is a cost saving and a weight reduction proposition. In addition, official notice is taken of the fact that having the upper cover on the heat dissipating housing would also allow the heat to conduct to the metal cover and dissipate quicker. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have made the main housing from plastic and the upper cover from metal, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 7, 10-12 and 16-18 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 AND satisfying 112 requirements.
Art of record also fails to disclose or suggest an adhesive film bonds to the components as claimed.
Art of record fails to disclose or suggest a boss arranged in the middle of the tray with the claimed features.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Foreign art teaches wireless charger having insulated shielding with ferrites and colloid.
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to the Examiner at the below-listed number. The Examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thu from 7:00am-5:00pm.
The Examiner’s SPE is Drew Dunn and he can be reached at 571.272.2312. The fax number for the organization where this application 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.
/EDWARD TSO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859 571.272.2087