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 without traverse of Group I, claims 1-5, 7-15 and 21-24 in the reply filed on 3/30/2026 is acknowledged.
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 7, 15, 18 and 21 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 7, applicant should clarify the structure and/or arrangement of the windings intended by “each winding has a first end and a second end which is located closer to the first magnetic base than the first end.”
Regarding claim 15, there is no antecedent basis for “the high saturation magnetic material.” Claim 18 inherit the defect of the parent claim.
Regarding claim 21, applicant should clarify the structure and/or arrangement of the windings intended by “each winding has a first end which is located closer to the first magnetic base than the first end.”
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.
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) 1-2, 7-13 and 21-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mehrotra et al. [US 2006/0038649 A1].
Regarding claim 1, Mehrotra et al. discloses an integrated magnetic IM) device [10, figure 1], comprising:
a common magnetic core portion comprising a first magnetic base [14] and a second
magnetic base [bottom part of core 12] that is spaced in a first direction from the first magnetic base [figure 1];
a first magnetic core column and a second magnetic core column [side parts of core 12], which extend between the first and second magnetic bases and spaced with each other along a
second direction perpendicular to the first direction, the first magnetic core column and
the second magnetic core column and the first and second magnetic bases together
forming a closed magnetic path [figure 1], and the first magnetic core column and the second
magnetic core column having windings [16, 18, 20, 22] wound thereon;
a middle magnetic core portion [center part of core 12, figure 1] extending between the first and second magnetic bases and located between the first magnetic core column and the second magnetic core column along the second direction, with an air gap [figure 1] being provided in an extension direction of the middle magnetic core portion which is made of high saturation magnetic material, and the middle magnetic core portion comprising a winding wound thereon so as to form an inductor [24].
Mehrotra et al. disclose the instant claimed invention except for the specific use of the windings on the magnetic column and the inductor.
The specific use of the windings [for choke] and/or for decoupling inductor would have been an obvious design consideration based on the intended use of the device in different environments and/or applications.
Regarding claim 2, Mehrotra et al. discloses the middle magnetic core portion is in the form of a single column, with the air gap being formed between an end of the single column and an inner side of a magnetic base which the single column extends towards [figure 1].
Regarding claims 7 and 21, as best understood in view of the rejection under 35 USC 112 second paragraph, a first winding [16] and a third winding [20] are provided on the first magnetic core column and arranged next to each other along the first direction, with the first winding being placed adjacent to the first magnetic base;
a second winding [18] and a fourth winding [22] are provided on the second magnetic core column and arranged next to each other along the first direction, with the second
winding being placed adjacent to the first magnetic base; and
a fifth winding [24] is provided on the middle magnetic core portion.
The specific arrangement of the winding ends would have been an obvious design consideration for the purpose of facilitating internal and/or external connections.
Regarding claims 8-13 and 22-24, the specific connections between the first, second, third and fourth windings and winding direction(s) of the windings would have been an obvious design consideration based on the intended applications and/or environments uses [note Mehrotra et al. discloses connection between the windings in figure 1] and for the purpose of facilitating the desired magnetic flux/field/inductances. The specific arrangement of the winding ends would have been an obvious design consideration for the purpose of facilitating internal and/or external connections.
Claim(s) 3-5 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mehrotra et al. in view of Masahiko et al. [JP 2004-196632 A].
Regarding claims 3-4, Mehrotra et al. further discloses the first magnetic core column and the second magnetic core column and the common magnetic core portion are made of the same magnetic material [figure 1], wherein one or both of the first magnetic core column and the second magnetic core column are integrally formed with one or both of the first magnetic base and the second magnetic base of the common magnetic core portion [figure 1].
Mehrotra et al. disclose the instant claimed invention except for the specific magnetic material with high permeability.
Masahiko discloses the use of magnetic material with high permeability [abstract] for a magnetic core of a magnetic device.
It would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the high permeability magnetic material for the magnet core of Mehrotra et al., as suggested by Masahiko et al., for the purpose of providing excellent in DC superimpose properties [abstract].
Regarding claim 5, the specific integrally formed of the core columns and core bases would have been an obvious design consideration since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893).
Regarding claim 14, Masahiko et al. discloses the magnetic material with high permeability comprises Mn-Zn soft ferrite material [abstract].
Claim(s) 15 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mehrotra et al. in view of Du [CN 211427963].
Regarding claim 15, Mehrotra et al. discloses the use of magnetic powder material for the core.
Mehrotra et al. disclose the instant claimed invention except for a support plate.
Du discloses a magnetic device having a magnetic core structure being support be a support plate [1] arranged to cover plates [6] of the magnetic core structure.
It would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include a support plate in Mehrotra et al., as suggested by Du, for the purpose of providing support.
Epoxy is a known insulating material use in magnetic device.
The specific arrangement of the support plate would have been an obvious design consideration for the purpose of providing support.
Regarding claim 18, Du further discloses a support frame [7] arranged at a side opposite to the side where the side support plate is located, the support frame being configured with pins [8] for winding ends to be connected, wherein the support frame is made of phenolic plastics.
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
Prosecution Insights