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
Claims 21-34 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 4/23/2026.
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 12-14 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. The limitation “at one fractional coil structure” as recited in claim 12 is unclear whether it is related to “a pair of fraction coil structures” as recited in claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7, 9-13, and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tang et al., US 2022/0028593.
Regarding claim 1, Tang discloses (figs. 23 and related text) a transformer-based integrated circuit (IC) package (2300) comprising: a substrate (2307) having a first plurality of conductive traces(T1/T2, fig. 23B); a core (2314/2321) disposed on the substrate, wherein the core includes a soft ferromagnetic material [0052]; and a pair of fractional coil structures (2309/2311), each having a second plurality of conductive traces [0050] and configured to extend around a portion of the core [0050], wherein the pair of fractional coil structures is configured such that primary and secondary coils are formed when the second plurality of conductive traces is brought into contact with the first plurality of conductive traces [0050]; wherein the primary and secondary coils are configured with the core as a transformer [0052].
Regarding claim 2, Tang discloses at least one semiconductor die (2302/2306) disposed on the substrate (2307).
Regarding claim 3, Tang discloses the at least one semiconductor die comprises an integrated circuit (IC) ([0047],[0048]).
Regarding claim 4, Tang discloses the IC is connected to the secondary coil ([0047]).
Regarding claim 7, Tang disclose the substrate comprises a printed circuit board (PCB) [0045].
Regarding claim 9, Tang disclose the core comprises ferrite [0052].
Regarding claim 10, Tang discloses the core comprises iron powder (magnetic materials are made of ceramic ferrite, hence iron powder).
Regarding claim 11, Tang discloses the core comprised a laminated metal core [0052].
Regarding claim 12, as best the examiner is able to ascertain the claimed invention Tang discloses at least one fractional coil structure comprises a semiconductor die (2306/2302) disposed on a substrate (2307), wherein the semiconductor die includes an integrated circuit (IC) [0046].
Regarding claim 13, as best the examiner is able to ascertain the claimed invention Tang discloses the IC (2306/2302) is connected to a subset of the second plurality of conductive traces (T1/T2, fig. 23B).
Regarding claim 15, as best the examiner is able to ascertain the claimed invention Tang discloses at least one fractional coil structure (2309/2311) comprises a leadframe [0046].
Regarding claim 16, Tang discloses the core comprises a plurality of core portions (2314/2321,at least two).
Regarding 17, Tang discloses the plurality of core portions are connected at joints including ferrite-loaded epoxy [0052].
Regarding claim 18, Tang discloses a package body including the substrate [0046].
Regarding claim 19, Tang discloses the package body (2300) includes a molding material (2320 [0051].
Regarding claim 20, Tang discloses the package body includes a potting material ([0051], plastics are potting material).
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) 5-6, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang in view of Anderson et al., US 5373281.
Regarding claim 5, Tang does not explicitly disclose the transformer is configured as a step-up transformer.
Anderson discloses the use of a transformer configured as a step-up transformer (184) along with a piezo electric device (150) in order to convert electric signals into mechanical vibration for providing audible sound (column 4, lines 28-40).
Tang and Anderson are analogous art because they both are directed to circuits involving transformer and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Tang with the specified features of Anderson because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, on the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Tang to include the step-up transformer as claimed as taught by Anderson in order to convert electric signals into mechanical vibration for providing audible sound (column 4, lines 28-40).
Regarding claim 6, Tang as modified by Anderson discloses the IC comprises a gate driver (transistor 182, Anderson, fig. 3).
Regarding claim 14, as best the examiner is able to ascertain the claimed invention Tang does not explicitly disclose the IC comprises a gate driver. However, Tang discloses the second plurality of conductive traces (T2/T1) is connected to the secondary coil (2309/2311).
Anderson discloses the use of a transistor/gate driver (182, fig. 3) with a piezo electric device (150) in order to convert electric signals into mechanical vibration for providing audible sound (column 4, lines 28-40).
Tang and Anderson are analogous art because they both are directed to circuits involving transformer and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Tang with the specified features of Anderson because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, on the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Tang to include the gate driver as claimed as taught by Anderson in order to convert electric signals into mechanical vibration for providing audible sound (column 4, lines 28-40).
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang in view of Duffy, WO 02/32198.
Regarding claim 8, Tang does not disclose the PCB comprises FR4.
Duffy discloses the use of PCB comprising FR4 in order manufacture a fire-retardant PCB (page 6, lines 6-12).
Tang and Duffy are analogous art because they both are directed to circuits involving printed circuit board and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Tang with the specified features of Anderson because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, on the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Tang to include the FR4 as claimed as taught by Duffy in order manufacture a fire-retardant PCB (page 6, lines 6-12).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL A GEBREMARIAM whose telephone number is (571)272-1653. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-4PM.
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, Lynne Gurley can be reached at 571-272-1670. 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.
/SAMUEL A GEBREMARIAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2811
Prosecution Insights