DETAILED ACTION
Pending Claims
Claims 1-5 are pending.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 .
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
(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.
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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Aramaki et al. (US 2010/0099365 A1).
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Aramaki et al. (US 2010/0099365 A1).
Regarding claims 1-5, Aramaki et al. disclose: (1) a magnetic sheet (Abstract; paragraphs 0069-0086) comprising: a first principal surface (paragraphs 0088-0092; Figure 1A); and a second principal surface, the first principal surface and second principal surface facing each other in a thickness direction (paragraphs 0088-0092; Figure 1A), the magnetic sheet containing magnetic particles (paragraphs 0070-0072) and resin (0073-0077); and (5) an inductor comprising: a wire; and the magnetic sheet and covering the wire (paragraph 0109; Figures 2A, 2B & 3). Aramaki et al. fail to explicitly disclose the following properties of the instantly claimed invention:
(1) wherein a ratio of a total amount of carbon and oxygen on the first principal surface or second principal surface is 10 mass% or more and 60 mass% or less;
(2) wherein the ratio of the total amount on each of the first principal surface and second principal surface is 10 mass% or more and 50 mass% or less;
(3) wherein: [1] the ratio of the total amount on the first principal surface equals the ratio of the total amount on the second principal surface; or [2] the ratio of the total amount on one surface of the first principal surface and second principal surface is lower than the ratio of the total amount on the other surface, and the ratio of the total amount on the one surface to the ratio of the total amount on the other surface is 0.3 or more and less than 1.0; and
(4) wherein: [3] the ratio of the total amount on one surface of the first principal surface and second principal surface equals the ratio of the total amount at a central part in the thickness direction; or [4] the ratio of the total amount on the one surface is lower than the ratio of the total amount at the central part, and the ratio of the total amount on the one surface to the ratio of the total amount at the central part is 0.3 or more and less than 1.
The exemplary embodiments of the instant invention associate these properties with the production method of the sheet. Specifically, Example 1 if the instant invention satisfies this set of properties, while Comparative Example 1 does not (see Table 2). Both involve applying a solvent-based varnish to a release sheet, where the varnish contains the magnetic particles and resin (see paragraphs 0095-0096 & 0107 of the specification; see also 0091-0092 & 0103 of the pre-publication). Example 1 is allowed to rest at ambient conditions prior to hot-air drying (see paragraphs 0052 & 0097-0098 of the specification; see also paragraphs 0052 & 0093-0094 of the pre-publication), while Comparative Example 1 is not allowed to rest at ambient conditions prior to hot-air drying (see paragraph 0107 of the specification; see also paragraph 0103 of the pre-publication).
In light of this, the production method of Aramaki et al. similarly involves applying a solvent-based varnish to a release sheet, where the varnish contains the magnetic particles and resin (see paragraphs 0076-0077). Aramaki et al. also allow their sheet to rest at ambient conditions prior to hot-air drying (see paragraph 0091). Accordingly, the skilled artisan would have expected the magnetic sheet of Aramaki et al. to satisfy the instantly claimed set of properties because the magnetic sheet of Aramaki et al. satisfies all of the material/chemical limitations of the instantly claimed magnetic sheet, wherein the sheet is formed from a solvent-based varnish that is allowed to rest at ambient conditions prior to hot-air drying. At the very least, the skilled artisan would have expected the teachings of Aramaki et al. to obviously embrace embodiments capable of satisfying the instantly claimed set of properties because the magnetic sheet of Aramaki et al. satisfies all of the material/chemical limitations of the instantly claimed magnetic sheet, wherein the sheet is formed from a solvent-based varnish that is allowed to rest at ambient conditions prior to hot-air drying.
Therefore if not anticipated by Aramaki et al., the skilled artisan would have expected the teachings of Aramaki et al. to obviously embrace embodiments capable of satisfying the instantly claimed set of properties because: (a) Applicant establishes that the instantly claimed set of properties is achieved by applying a solvent-based varnish (containing magnetic particles and resin) to a release sheet, where this material is allowed to rest at ambient conditions prior to hot-air drying; (b) the magnetic sheet of Aramaki et al. satisfies all of the material/chemical limitations of the instantly claimed magnetic sheet; and (c) Aramaki et al. form their magnetic sheet by applying a solvent-based varnish (containing magnetic particles and resin) to a release sheet, where this material is allowed to rest at ambient conditions prior to hot-air drying.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Satoru et al. (JP 2008-301295 A) disclose a magnetic sheet similar to the one disclosed by Aramaki et al.
Communication
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J FEELY whose telephone number is (571)272-1086. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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, Randy Gulakowski can be reached at (571)272-1302. 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.
/MICHAEL J FEELY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766
March 18, 2026