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 amendments filed November 24, 2025 have been entered. Accordingly, claims X are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al. (US 20120272666 A1) in view of Saito (US 20080078184 A1).
In re Claim 1, Watanabe discloses a magnetic refrigerator (Fig. 1) comprising:
a magnetic working substance (26); and
a magnetic field application unit (21-23) configured to
cause a relative movement with respect to the magnetic working substance (26) in a first direction (circumferential direction), and
apply a magnetic field ([0073]: the magnetic field which has been applied to 26) to the magnetic working substance (26),
the magnetic field application unit (21-23) including
magnetic poles (two opposing sides poles of 23) arranged on one side (radially inward) of the magnetic working substance (26), and
spaced from each other (space between 26 and 25A and 25B from the wall thickness of the containers 25A-B) in a third direction (axial direction) orthogonal to the first (circumferential direction) of the magnetic working substance (26).
However, Watanabe does not explicitly teach, magnetic poles arranged on one side, in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction and to apply a magnetic field to the magnetic working substance so that the magnetic flux flows through the magnetic working substance in the third direction.
On the other hand, Saito teaches magnetic poles arranged on one side, in a second direction (8) orthogonal to the first direction (7) and magnetic poles arranged on one side (16), and to apply a magnetic field ([0029]: application of magnetic field) to the magnetic working substance (B) so that the magnetic flux flows through the magnetic working substance in the third direction ([0032]: applying direction of a magnetic field to the magnetic refrigerant is perpendicular to the direction of the heat flow).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have taken the teachings of Watanabe and to have modified them by having a second direction orthogonal to the first direction of Watanabe as taught by Saito and magnetic poles arranged on one side, in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction and to apply a magnetic field to the magnetic working substance so that the magnetic flux flows through the magnetic working substance in the third direction, in order to o generate, in the bore space, a magnetic field with low intensity to be applied to the magnetic refrigerating unit (See Saito [0082]), without yielding unpredictable results.
In re Claim 2, Modified Watanabe teaches wherein the relative movement is
a relative rotational movement (See Fig. 5c and [0061]: rotation around rotational shaft 21) about a predetermined axis ([0084]: VC axis),
the first direction is a circumferential direction (circumferential direction),
the second direction is a radial direction (radial direction inward), and
the third direction is an axial direction (axial direction),
the magnetic working substance (26) and the magnetic poles (two opposing sides poles of 23) of the magnetic field application unit (21-23)
are spaced from each other (See Fig. 5c where 26 and 21-23 are spaced apart radially) in the radial direction (radial direction inward), and
the magnetic poles (two opposing sides poles of 23) of the magnetic field application unit (21-23) are spaced from each other in the axial direction (See Fig. 5c 21-23 are spaced apart in the axial direction).
In re Claim 3, Modified Watanabe teaches the magnetic refrigerator of claim 1 ,
a relative rotational movement (See Fig. 5c and [0061]: rotation around rotational shaft 21) about a predetermined axis ([0084]: VC axis),
the first direction is a circumferential direction (circumferential direction),
the second direction is a radial direction (radial direction inward), and
the third direction is an axial direction (axial direction),
the magnetic working substance (26) and the magnetic poles (two opposing sides poles of 23) of the magnetic field application unit (21-23)
are spaced from each other in the axial direction (See Fig. 5b where 26 and 21-23 are spaced apart in axial direction), and
the magnetic poles (two opposing sides poles of 23) of the magnetic field application unit (21-23) are spaced from each other in the axial direction (See Fig. 5b 21-23 are spaced apart in the axial direction).
In re Claim 4, Watanabe teaches
wherein the relative movement is a relative linear movement (see Fig. 5A-5C tangential motion) in the first direction (circumferential direction),
the magnetic working substance (26) and the magnetic poles (two opposing sides poles of 23) of the magnetic field application unit (21-23)
are spaced from each other in the second direction (radial direction inward), and
the magnetic poles (two opposing sides poles of 23) of the magnetic field application unit (21-23) are spaced from each other in the third direction (axial direction).
In re Claim 5, Modified Watanabe teaches wherein the magnetic working substance (26) is provided with yokes (wall of containers 25A-B, frame 53 and cylindrical yoke section of 25) having a higher magnetic permeability (necessarily has higher magnetic permeability) than the magnetic working substance (26) at both ends in the third direction (in the axial direction, where the cylindrical yoke section of 25 extends pass containers 25A-B containing 26).
In re Claim 6, Modified Watanabe teaches wherein
a length in the first direction (length of circumferential direction) of a surface of each magnetic pole (surface of two opposing poles of 23) of the magnetic field application unit (21-23) facing the magnetic working substance (26)
is greater than (See Fig. 5c)
a length in the first direction of a surface of the magnetic working substance (surface of 26) facing the magnetic poles of the magnetic field application unit (See Fig. 5c).
In re Claim 7, Modified Watanabe teaches the refrigeration apparatus (10) further comprising: a heating medium circuit (See Fig. 1:16 and [0054-0055]: defining the heating medium circuit) configured to exchange heat ([0075]: heat exchange is effectively done ) with the magnetic refrigerator (10).
Response to Arguments
The Remarks of November 24, 2025, have been fully considered but are not persuasive for the reasons below.
Applicant argues
Applicant' s arguments, see Remarks Page 6, filed November 24, 2025, with respect to Claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive.
Applicant's amendments have changed the scope of the claimed invention, thereby necessitating a new grounds of rejection. Namely, claim 1 now requires a second direction orthogonal to the first direction and to apply a magnetic field to the magnetic working substance so that the magnetic flux flows through the magnetic working substance in the third direction. In light of the above, the claim has been reconsidered, and the new grounds of rejection now incorporates teachings from Saito to arrive at the claimed invention.
Conclusion
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 IBRAHIM M ADENIJI whose telephone number is (571)272-5939. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00 PM.
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, Jianying Atkisson can be reached at 571-270-7740. 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.
/IBRAHIM A. MICHAEL ADENIJI/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JOEL M ATTEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763