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 .
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 04/02/2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of copending Application No. 18/358,191, copending Application No. 18/358,433, or claims 1-5 of copending Application No. 18/358,513 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
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 factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’380 (US 2020/0135380).
Regarding claim 1, US’380 teaches a magnetic core containing a metal magnetic powder, wherein the metal magnetic powder has a large size powder (i.e., the first particles) with a D50 of 10-60 µm, an intermediate size powder with D50 of 2-10 µm, and a small size powder with D50 of 0.1-2 µm (Abstract). US’380 discloses an example wherein the large size powder has D50 of 24 µm, an intermediate size powder has D50 of 3 µm, and a small size powder has D50 of 0.7-1 µm ([0127] to [0134]). Since intermediate size powder with D50 of 3 µm means 50% of the intermediate size powder has a particle size of less than 3 µm, the intermediate size powder and the small size powder disclosed by US’380 meet the recited second particle limitation recited in claim 1.
US’380 further discloses that a phosphoric acid conversion film containing phosphate is formed on the large size powder and the intermediate size powder, and an insulating film made of glass containing SiO2 is formed on the small-diameter powder ([0130]; [0131]), which meets the limitation that the second particles (i.e. the intermediate size powder and the small size powder of US’380) comprise two or more particles with different compositions of films existing on their particle surface.
US’380 discloses that the magnetic core comprises 95-99wt.% iron-based magnetic powder and 1-5 wt% resin such as epoxy resin ([0093]; [0094]). Assuming the iron-based powder has density of 7.874 g/cm3 and the epoxy resin has a density of 1.2 g/cm3, the volume percent of the magnetic powder is estimated to be 74.3% to 93.8% (calculated by (95/7.874) ÷ ((95/7.874)+5/1.2)=74.3% and (99/7.874) ÷ ((99/7.874)+1/1.2)=93.8%), which overlaps the recite area ratio in claim 1. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP 2144.05 I. Thus, the recited area ratio is obvious over US’380.
Regarding claim 2, US’380 discloses that the area ratio of large size powder with respect to the magnetic powder is preferably 74-86 % ([0082]), which meets the limitation A1>A2 as recited in claim 2.
Regarding claim 3, US’380 discloses that the large size powder, the intermediate size powder, and the small size powder are preferably spherical with sphericity of 0.9 or more ([0101]), which meets the limitation recited in claim 3.
Regarding claim 4, US’380 discloses a magnetic device comprising the magnetic core ([0116]; [0117]), which meets the limitation recited in claim 4.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Xiaowei Su whose telephone number is (571)272-3239. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00.
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, Keith Hendricks can be reached at 5712721401. 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.
/XIAOWEI SU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733
Prosecution Insights