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 .
Response to Amendment
The Applicant’s amendment filed on 05/27/2026 has been fully considered and made of record. As such, the objections to the abstract and claims, as outlined in the Office action mailed on 04/23/2026, have been withdrawn. Claims 1-10 are currently presented for examination, of which claims 8-10 were previously withdrawn from consideration.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the straight line section parallel to the lower surface and the upper surface of the rotation jig and parallel to a virtual straight line crossing the winding axis; and wherein the plurality of straight line sections parallel to the lower surface and the upper surface of the rotation jig and parallel to one of virtual straight lines crossing the winding axis must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: WA1, WA2, VSL1, VSL2 and VSL3. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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.
In addition, it appears that WA1 and WA2 are directed to winding axis. However, it is unclear how many winding axis the winding apparatus has to be depicted by two WA1 and WA2 reference numbers.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 1, as originally filed recited the limitation of “configured to guide the metal wire wound by the rotation jig to be wound on the same plane.” The originally filed specification provides support for this limitation on paragraphs [0005] and [0038]. However, claim 1 has been amended to recites “configured to guide the metal wire wound by the rotation jig to be wound on a single plane” which is considered as New Matter with no support in the originally filed disclosure (emphasis added).
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 5 and 7 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.
Claim 5, lines 1-3 recites the limitation “wherein the straight line section is a section which is parallel to the lower surface and the upper surface of the rotation jig and parallel to a virtual straight line crossing the winding axis.” Claim 4, which claim 5 immediately depends from, recites that the cut surface which appears to be on a peripheral side surface of the cylindrical shape jig extends from the upper surface to the lower surface of the shape makes the straight line section. As such, the straight line section is the surface of the cut surface and by definition has to be orthogonal to the lower and upper surfaces. However, claim 5 recites that the straight line section is parallel to the lower and upper surfaces which is contradictory to what claim 4 recites. Therefore, it is unclear what exactly the straight line section is and how could it be both orthogonal and parallel to the lower and upper surfaces at the same time.
Claim 7 poses similar issues that need to be further clarified.
PNG
media_image1.png
286
280
media_image1.png
Greyscale
For examination purposes, the shaded rectangular surface depicted above is both the cut surface and straight line section which is orthogonal to the lower and upper surfaces of the cylindrical shape rotation jig.
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.
(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) 1-7, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(a) as being Hashimoto et al. (JP2014209834A, hereinafter “Hashimoto”).
As applied to claim 1, Hashimoto teaches a winding apparatus comprising a jig driven rotatably (50) and configured to wind a metal wire (intended use limitation but see wires metal such as copper and aluminum wire 22, Fig. 6), wherein the jig includes a rotation jig formed in a cylindrical shape (54, see Fig. 6) having a lower surface (bottom surface, Fig. 6), an upper surface (top surface, Fig. 6), and a side surface formed with a cut surface (peripheral surface of 54 with a flat cut on the sides, Fig. 6) and configured to rotate about a winding axis orthogonal to the lower surface and the upper surface to wind the metal wire (intended use limitation but the winding axis extended left to right in Fig. 7); and a support plate (52, Fig. 6) disposed in contact with the lower surface of the rotation jig (Annotated Figure 6 below) and configured to guide the metal wire wound by the rotation jig to be wound on a single plane (intended use limitation, Annotated Figure 6 below, English Machine Translation, abstract, Figs. 1-6).
The above claim limitations in bold text are considered as intended use limitations. Although the recitations have been fully considered, it carries limited patentable weight. The applicant is reminded that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the structural limitations of the claim, as is the case here; refer to MPEP 2114-II. In the instant case, the apparatus of Hashimoto meets all of the structural limitations, as claimed, and is capable of performing the limitations above.
PNG
media_image2.png
336
313
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As applied to claim 2, Hashimoto teaches the invention cited including wherein the metal wire is wound around the side surface of the rotation jig multiple times to form a loop-shaped flat coil having one or more straight line sections (method limitation but Hashimoto’s apparatus is capable of performing the winding step, see a loop-shaped flat coil with one or more straight line sections (see Annotated Figure 6 above).
As applied to claim 3, Hashimoto teaches the invention cited including wherein the cut surface (a surface of slot 312) is orthogonal to the lower surface and the upper surface (see Annotated Figure 6 above).
As applied to claim 4, Hashimoto teaches the invention cited including wherein the rotation jig (54) has a straight line section formed by the cut surface (straight lines shown in Annotated Figure 6 above).
As applied to claim 5, Hashimoto teaches the invention cited including wherein the straight line section is a section that lower and upper edges which parallel to the lower surface and the upper surface of the rotation jig and parallel to a virtual straight line crossing the winding axis (see Annotated Figure 6 above).
As applied to claim 6, Hashimoto teaches the invention cited including wherein the rotation jig is formed with a plurality of cut surfaces to have a plurality of straight line sections (see Annotated Figure 6 above).
As applied to claim 7, Hashimoto teaches the invention cited including wherein the plurality of straight line sections are sections which are parallel to the lower surface and the upper surface of the rotation jig and parallel to one of virtual straight lines passing the winding axis (see Annotated Figure 6 above), and the plurality of straight line sections are parallel to different virtual straight lines (the plurality of sections can be parallel to any imaginary and virtual straight lines that can be selected from an infinite number of virtual straight lines).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-7 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARANG AFZALI whose telephone number is (571)272-8412. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7 am - 4 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 http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas Hong can be reached at 571-272-0993. 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.
/SARANG AFZALI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726 08/16/2026
Prosecution Insights