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 § 102 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. Claims 1-2 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wu ( US 20130293330 A1 ). Regarding Claim 1: Wu teaches that an inductor, comprising: a magnetic core (upper/lower core 44 and center core 440 formed the magnetic core in Fig. 4; para 0038-0044) , comprising: a first base ( not labeled; i.e. bottom part of the lower core 44 in Fig. 4); a magnetic cover ( not labeled; i.e. top part of the upper core 44 in Fig. 4) ; a first center pillar ( 440 ); and a first side wall ( upper/lower side wall of the core ); wherein the first center pillar and the first side wall extend from the first base towards the magnetic cover ( construed from Fig. 4 ); a first inner coil ( 43 ) surrounding the first center pillar; and a first outer coil ( 42 ) surrounding the first center pillar; wherein the first inner coil is wound between the first outer coil and the first. Regarding Claim 2 : As applied to claim 1, Wu teaches that an inductor, comprising: the first inner coil and the first outer coil are separated by a first outer distance ( i. e. distance between 41 and 42 filled by element 40 in Fig. 4 ) . Regarding Claim 9 : As applied to claim 1, Wu teaches that wherein a first outer filler ( 40 ) is disposed between the first inner coil and the first outer coil. Regarding Claim 10 : As applied to claim 1, Wu teaches that a first inner filler ( 41 ) is disposed between the first center pillar and the first inner coil 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 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Jitaru ( US 20040080978 A1 ). Regarding Claim 3 : As applied to claim 1, Wu teaches the first center pillar and the magnetic cover except the first center pillar and the magnetic cover are separated by a first gap. However, Jitaru the first center pillar and the magnetic cover are ( 2 , Fig. 4A para 0031 ) separated by a first gap ( 16 ) . 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 the first center pillar and the magnetic cover are separated by a first gap to provide a novel and improved method to control the magnetic flux circulation through an E+I core structure used for an inductor or a transformer (see para 0010). Regarding Claim 4 : As applied to claim 3, the modified Wu teaches the first outer distance and the first gap except the first outer distance is longer than the first gap. it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the first outer distance is longer than the first gap , since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art to facilitate good magnetic shielding effect. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. MPEP 2144.05 (II-A). 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 the first outer distance is longer than the first gap as claimed to meet design requirements for certain applications. Regarding Claim 5 : As applied to claim 4, the modified Wu teaches the first center pillar and the first inner coil are separated by a first inner distance (i.e. gap between pillar 410 and coil 43 in Wu’s Fig. 4). Regarding Claim 6 : As applied to claim 5, the modified Wu teaches wherein the first inner distance is longer than the first gap as explained claim 4 analysis in light of MPEP 2144.05 (II-A). Regarding Claim 13 : As applied to claim 1 2 , Wu teaches the first center pillar and first base except the second center pillar and the first base are separated by a second gap. However, Jitaru the first center pillar and the first base are ( 2, Fig. 4A para 0031 ) separated by a first gap (16). The modified Wu teaches the first center pillar and the first base are separated by a first gap except the second center pillar and the first base are separated by a second gap. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the second center pillar and the first base are separated by a second gap , since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. MPEP 2144.04 (VI-B). 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 the second center pillar and the first base are separated by a second gap as claimed to meet design requirement for certain application. Regarding Claim 14 : As applied to claim 1 3 , the modified Wu teaches the second outer distance is longer than the second gap as explained claim 4 analysis in light of MPEP 2144.05 (II-A). Regarding Claim 15 : As applied to claim 14, the modified Wu teaches the second outer distance is longer than the second gap as explained claim 4 analysis in light of MPEP 2144.05 (II-A). Regarding Claim 16 : As applied to claim 14, the modified Wu teaches the second inner distance is longer than the second gap as explained claim 4 analysis in light of MPEP 2144.05 (II-A). Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Miyazaki (US 20180286573 A1). Regarding Claim 8 : As applied to claim 1, Wu teaches the wherein there is a first inner coil distance between every two adjacent turns of the first inner coil except there is a first inner coil distance between every two adjacent turns of the first inner coil. However, Miyazaki teaches there is a first inner coil distance (not labeled; i.e. distanced by element in 92 in Fig. 2; see para 0130) between every two adjacent turns of the first inner coil (10, Fig. 2) . 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 there is a first inner coil distance between every two adjacent turns of the first inner coil to provide a transformer and a method for manufacturing a transformer, which can reduce stray capacity occurring between coils, and can reduce insertion loss.(see para 0036). Regarding Claim 9 : As applied to claim 1, Wu teaches the wherein there is a first inner coil distance between every two adjacent turns of the first inner coil except there is a first outer coil distance between every two adjacent turns of the first outer coil. However, Miyazaki teaches there is a first outer coil distance (not labeled; i.e. distanced by element in 92 in Fig. 2; see para 0130) between every two adjacent turns of the first outer coil (10X, Fig. 2). 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 there is a first outer coil distance between every two adjacent turns of the first outer coil to provide a transformer and a method for manufacturing a transformer, which can reduce stray capacity occurring between coils, and can reduce insertion loss.(see para 0036). Regarding Claim 17 : As applied to claim 11, Wu teaches the wherein there is a first outer coil distance between every two adjacent turns of the first outer coil except there is a second outer coil distance between every two adjacent turns of the second outer coil. However, Miyazaki teaches there is a first outer coil distance (not labeled; i.e. distanced by element in 92 in Fig. 2; see para 0130) between every two adjacent turns of the first outer coil ( 10X, Fig. 2 ). The modified Wu teaches there is a first outer coil distance between every two adjacent turns of the first outer coil except there is a second outer coil distance between every two adjacent turns of the second outer coil. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have there is a second outer coil distance between every two adjacent turns of the second outer coil , since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. MPEP 2144.04 (VI-B). 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 there is a second outer coil distance between every two adjacent turns of the second outer coil as claimed to meet design requirements for certain application. Regarding Claim 18 : As applied to claim 11, Wu teaches there is a second inner coil distance between every two adjacent turns of the second inner coil as explained in claim 17 analysis in light of MPEP 2144.04 (VI-B). Claims 11-12 and 19-20 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over by Wu. Regarding Claim 11 : As applied to claim 1, Wu teaches a first inner coil; and a first outer coil; a first base; a first center pillar; and a first side wall except a second inner coil; and a second outer coil; wherein the magnetic core further comprises: a second base; a second center pillar; and a second side wall; wherein the first base is disposed between the second base and the magnetic cover, the second center pillar and the second side wall extend from the second base towards the first base, the second inner coil surrounds the second center pillar, the second outer coil surrounds the second center pillar, and the second inner coil is wound between the second outer coil and the second center pillar. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have a second inner coil; and a second outer coil; wherein the magnetic core further comprises: a second base; a second center pillar; and a second side wall; wherein the first base is disposed between the second base and the magnetic cover, the second center pillar and the second side wall extend from the second base towards the first base, the second inner coil surrounds the second center pillar, the second outer coil surrounds the second center pillar, and the second inner coil is wound between the second outer coil and the second center pillar , since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. MPEP 2144.04 (VI-B). 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 second inner coil; and a second outer coil; wherein the magnetic core further comprises: a second base; a second center pillar; and a second side wall; wherein the first base is disposed between the second base and the magnetic cover, the second center pillar and the second side wall extend from the second base towards the first base, the second inner coil surrounds the second center pillar, the second outer coil surrounds the second center pillar, and the second inner coil is wound between the second outer coil and the second center pillar as claimed to meet design requirement for certain application. Regarding Claim 12 : As applied to claim 11, Wu teaches the second inner coil and the second outer coil are separated by a second outer distance as explained claim 11 analysis in light of MPEP 2144.04 (VI-B). Regarding Claim 19 : As applied to claim 11, Wu teaches a second outer filler is disposed between the second inner coil and the second outer coil as explained claim 11 analysis in light of MPEP 2144.04 (VI-B). Regarding Claim 20 : As applied to claim 11, Wu teaches wherein the magnetic core further comprises: a third side wall; and a fourth side wall; wherein the third side wall extends from the first base towards the magnetic cover, the first center pillar is disposed between the first side wall and the third side wall, the fourth side wall extends from the second base towards the first base, and the second center pillar is disposed between the second side wall and the fourth side wall as explained claim 11 analysis in light of MPEP 2144.04 (VI-B). 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 /SHAWKI S ISMAIL/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837