DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jidaisho (US 20090009276 A1) in view of Uematsu (US 20160211067 A1).
Regarding Claim 1:
Jidaisho teaches that a coil device comprising:
a bobbin (102, Fig. 1; para 0019-0028) provided with a coil (104);
a core (108) attached to the bobbin;
a case (114) accommodating the bobbin and the core; and
wherein
the case comprises a case body (120) covering the bobbin with the core from above and from below and having an opening (121) that is opened laterally; and
the bobbin comprises a protrusion (not labeled; extended upper part in Fig. 2) protruding from the case body through the opening.
Jidaisho does not teach that a heat dissipating resin filling the case.
However, Uematsu teaches in para 0043 that the case 30 is filled with a heat-dissipating resin (not shown).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have a heat dissipating resin filling the case to absorbs heat generated from the coils (see para 0043)
Regarding Claim 2:
As applied to claim 1, the modified Jidaisho teaches that the case body covers the bobbin except at the opening; and the protrusion protrudes in one direction from the case body through the opening (construed Jidaisho’s Fig. 2).
Claims 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable).e over Jidaisho in view of Uematsu and further in view of Kyoso (US 6522233 B1).
Regarding Claim 3, 4:
As applied to claim 1 and 2, the modified Jidaisho teaches except the protrusion comprises a guide portion that guides a leadout portion of the coil towards a predetermined direction.
However, Kyoso teaches that a guide portion (GP, See Drawing: 1) that guides a leadout portion (91, Drawing: 1) of the coil towards a predetermined direction (construed from Drawing: 1).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have a heat dissipating resin filling the case to provide a coil apparatus that makes it possible to insulate a one-turn coil from an adjacent member while utilizing a smaller number of members (Col. 2, lines 20-25).
PNG
media_image1.png
525
482
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Drawing: 1, an annotated version of Fig. 3
Regarding Claim 5:
As applied to claim 3, the modified Jidaisho teaches that the guide portion comprises a guide (see Drawing: 1) path extending in the vicinity of the opening and parallel to a bottom surface of the case (see Jidaisho’s Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 6:
As applied to claim 5, the modified Jidaisho teaches that a stopper (50, see Drawing :1) is attached to the guide portion; and the stopper covers at least part of the guide path from a direction substantially orthogonal (construed from Drawing:1) to an extending direction of the leadout portion.
Regarding Claim 7:
As applied to claim 3, the modified Jidaisho teaches that the guide portion made separately from (construed from Drawing:1) the bobbin (7, Drawing: 1) is attached to the protrusion
Regarding Claim 10:
As applied to claim 1, the modified Jidaisho teaches coil, the case body and coil protrudes from the case body through the opening and is fixed to the protrusion except coil comprises a flat coil having a flat wire; and a lead out portion of the flat coil.
However, Kyoso teaches that coil comprises a flat coil (2, Fig. 3) having a flat wire; and a lead out portion (91, Drawing :1) of the flat coil.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have coil comprises a flat coil having a flat wire; and a lead out portion of the flat coil to provide a coil apparatus that makes it possible to insulate a one-turn coil from an adjacent member while utilizing a smaller number of members (Col. 2, lines 20-25).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-9 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 8 and 9 recites, the coil comprises a first coil including a first wire and a second coil including a second wire; the bobbin comprises a first bobbin provided with the first coil and a second bobbin provided with the second coil; the first bobbin comprises a first protrusion protruding from the case body through the opening; and
the second bobbin comprises a second protrusion protruding from the case body
through the opening.
The references of record do not teach or suggest the aforementioned limitations, nor would it be obvious to modify those references to include such limitations.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
,
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. A list of pertinent prior art is attached in form 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kazi Hossain whose telephone number is 571-272-8182. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday from Monday to Thursday 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM (EST).
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 https:/www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Shawki Ismail can be reached on 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.
/KAZI HOSSAIN/
Examiner, Art Unit 2837
/TSZFUNG J CHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837