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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species 1, Figures 1-6 in the reply filed on 3/2/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that searching and/or examining all Species together could be made without serious burden on the Examiner and claims 1-9 read on the elected Species of Figures 1-6. This is not found persuasive because searching other Species require additional search and/or consideration in other areas, class/subclass. Claims 1-9 will be examined herewith.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 1-9 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.
Regarding claim 1, applicant should clarify the structure of the first and second coils intended by “wherein the second coil is located in a region surrounded by the first coil when viewed in the second direction, and overlaps the first coil when viewed in the first direction, and protrudes from the first coil to only one side in the second direction.” The specific “protrudes” and “overlap” is/are unclear. Applicant should clarify. Claims 2-9 inherit the defects of the parent claim.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, as best understood in view of the rejection under 35 USC 112 second paragraph, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Frederick, Jr. [US 11,069,475 B2].
Regarding claims 1-2, Frederick, Jr. discloses an electronic component [figures 3A-3C] comprising:
- an element body [figure 3A] including a plurality of insulator layers that are stacked in a first direction;
- a first coil [Lyz] disposed inside the element body, and forming a coil axis along a second direction orthogonal to the first direction, wherein the first coil includes a conductor layer [Lyz1] extending along the insulator layers, and a connection conductor [Lyz2z1] connected to the conductor layer and extending in the first direction [figure 3A]; and
- a second coil [Lxy] disposed inside the element body, and forming a coil axis along the first direction, wherein the second coil is located in a region surrounded by the first coil when viewed in the second direction, and overlaps the first coil when viewed in the first direction, and protrudes from the first coil to only one side in the second direction [figure 3A and 3C].
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) 3-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frederick, Jr.
Regarding claim 3-4, Frederick, Jr. further discloses first and/or second coils including straight or curved/curvature segments [column 12, lines 55-56].
The specific arrangement of the segment relative to the connection conductor would have been an obvious design consideration for the purpose of facilitating manufacturing and/or assembling.
Regarding claims 5-6, Frederick, Jr., in other embodiments, further discloses the first and second coils having segments crossed/intersected/overlapped to each other when view at some directions [see figures 3A-3C, 5A-5D.
The specific crossing/intersecting/overlapping arrangement of the coil segments would have been an obvious design consideration for the purpose of enhancing spatial field control and/or improving energy/power efficiency.
Regarding claim 7, Frederick, Jr. further discloses the second coil includes a conductor layer [Lxy1, Lxy2] extending along the insulator layers in a circumferential direction of the coil axis of the second coil [figure 3A].
The specific width of the region in the first direction the conductor layer of the second coil is located within a range of ±30 in the first direction from the coil axis of the first coil in the region.
Regarding claim 8, Frederick, Jr. discloses the first and second coils arranged in coupling to each other.
The specific AC use to power the coil would have been an obvious design consideration based on the intended applications and/or environments.
Regarding claims 9-10, Frederick, in other embodiment, discloses a third coil [Lxz] disposed inside the element body so as to be spaced apart from the first coil, and forming a coil axis along a third direction orthogonal to the first direction, wherein the second coil is located in a region surrounded by the third coil when viewed in the third direction, and overlaps the third coil when viewed in the first direction.
The specific arrangement of the first, second and third coils would have been an obvious design consideration for the purpose providing the desire mutual and/or coupling inductance.
Conclusion
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