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 Species 1, Figures 1-7, Claims 1-5 and 7-9 in the reply filed on 4/9/2026 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 1-5 and 7-9 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 and/or arrangement of the insulating layer intended by “an insulating layer provided in a portion of the transformer accommodating portion that faces the coil in a direction in which the substrate and the housing face each other.” The insulating layer location and/or arrangement relative to the coil, substrate and/or housing is unclear. Applicant should clarify. Claims 2-5 and 7-9 inherit the defect of the parent claim.
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) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto [US 6,392,364 B1] in view of Okubo et al. [US 2013/0100634 A1].
Regarding claim 1, Yamamoto discloses a device [figures 2 and 11] comprising:
a transformer [41] including a core and a coil wound around the core [figures 2 and 11];
a support [figure 11], on which the transformer is mounted;
a housing [20] made of metal, arranged on a side of the transformer and including a recessed transformer accommodating portion to accommodate the transformer;
and
an insulating layer [41d, figure 4A] provided in a portion of the transformer accommodating portion that faces the coil in a direction in which the substrate and the housing face each other.
Yamamoto disclose the instant claimed invention except for the specific of the support.
Okubo et al. discloses a power supply [figure 1] comprising:
- a substrate [15] supporting a magnetic device [L15] having a core and a coil wound about the core;
- a housing [11b] having recess or slot for supporting the magnetic device [figure 1] and
- a cover [11a].
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 substrate arrangement of Okubo et al. in Yamamoto for the purpose of providing support for the transformer.
The specific arrangement of the substrate/support would have been an obvious design consideration for the purpose of improving mounting and/or assembling.
Claim(s) 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto in view of Okubo et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of McNutt et al. [US 4,231,074].
Regarding claim 7, Yamamoto further discloses upper and lower covers [21, 22, figure 11] to cover the housing of the device.
Yamamoto disclose the instant claimed invention except for a shielding member.
McNutt et al. discloses a transformer device [figure 3] comprising:
- a housing [11];
- a transformer having a coil [12] and a core [13] arranged in the housing; and
- a plate-shape conductive shielding member [20] arranged between the transformer and the housing.
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 plate-shape conductive shielding member in Yamamoto, as suggested by McNutt et al. for the purpose of providing shielding.
Regarding claims 8-9 the specific material and size of the shielding member would have been an obvious design consideration for the purpose of improving shielding.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5 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.
Claims 2-5 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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: The prior art of record do not teach or disclose, in the claimed combination thereof, a housing made of metal including a recessed transformer accommodating portion to accommodate the transformer, wherein the transformer accommodating portion of the housing includes a frame-shaped first portion made of metal, in which the core arrange, and a second portion provided inside the first portion and formed as the insulating layer, in which the coil is arranged and wherein the insulating layer includes an insulating member fitted into a hole provided in the portion of the transformer accommodating portion that faces the coil in the direction in which the substrate and the housing face each other.
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