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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/11/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments/amendments filed 02/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Suzuki fails to discloses first and second coil segments “wounds in a superimposed manner in a same position or region” because Suzuki forms unit coils in separate coil forming spaces partitioned by walls.
Examiner respectfully disagrees, Suzuki discloses a plurality of unit coils arranged adjacently along a central axis and separated by partitioned walls [0020], Suzuki further teaches that a unit coil maybe configured as a double pancake coil including two adjacent unit coils whose inner ends are continuous [0021-22]. The claims do not exclude partition walls, do not required radial overlap, and do not require identical axial coordinates. Under broadest reasonable interpretation, adjacent winding forming a double pancake configuration reasonably meet “wound in a superimposed manner in a same position or region”. Applicants’ specification does not define “superimposed” as requiring radial overlap or identical axial positioning [0067] describes non inductive winding of intermediate wiring but does not provide a lexicographic definition limiting “superimposed”. Paragraph [0069] conforms that coil segments and intermediate wiring maybe formed from one continues super conducting wire.
Applicant further argues, Suzuki uses connection ends and connection members, presupposing separately formed coils and failing to discloses intermediate wiring formed of the same superconducting wire connecting segments without disconnection. However, Suzuki expressly discloses that in a double pancake coil. The inner ends of two adjacent unit coils are continues [0022], a continuous inner end inherently constitutes wiring formed of the superconducting wire that connects adjacent coil portions without disconnection. In such a configuration, current direction reverses between adjacent windings. Suzuki further teaches connecting adjacent unit coils to form a single superconducting coil [0037]. The discussion of reducing connection points does not exclude embodiments in which adjacent windings are continuous. Anticipation does not require that all embodiments use joints. Applicants’ own specification [0069] confirms that forming coil segments and intermediate wiring from one continuous superconducting wire satisfies the claimed structure. Suzuki’s double pancake disclosure is consistent with this structure. Accordingly, Suzuki teaches or inherently discloses the recited intermediate wiring limitation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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 1-9 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Suzuki (JP-2017176818-A).
Regarding claim 1, Suzuki discloses a superconducting magnet (fig. 2 coil of a super conducting magnet “a superconducting magnet” [0001]) comprising:
at least one set of coil segment (fig. 2 (20)) including
a first coil segment formed of a superconducting wire through which an electric current flow in a forward direction (fig. 2 (22) lower coil 20, current from lower 20 to upper 20, “an electric current is applied to the superconducting magnet 2 to generate a strong magnetic field” [0018-0019]), and
a second coil segment formed of the superconducting wire through which an electric current flow in a direction opposite to the forward direction (fig. 2 (22) upper coil 20, current from upper 20 to lower 20 flow in opposite direction, “an electric current is applied to the superconducting magnet 2 to generate a strong magnetic field” [0018-0019]) wherein the first coil segment and the second coil segment are wound in a superimposed manner in a same position or region (a plurality of unit coils arranged adjacently along a central axis and separated by partitioned walls [0020], Suzuki further teaches that a unit coil maybe configured as a double pancake coil including two adjacent unit coils whose inner ends are continuous [0021-22]. The claims do not exclude partition walls, do not required radial overlap, and do not require identical axial coordinates. Under broadest reasonable interpretation, adjacent winding forming a double pancake configuration reasonably meet “wound in a superimposed manner in a same position or region”. Applicants’ specification does not define “superimposed” as requiring radial overlap or identical axial positioning [0067] describes non inductive winding of intermediate wiring but does not provide a lexicographic definition limiting “superimposed”. Paragraph [0069] conforms that coil segments and intermediate wiring maybe formed from one continues super conducting wire); and
at least one intermediate wiring formed of the superconducting wire, provided between the first coil segment and the second coil segment (fig. 2 (middle wire connecting upper and lower coils 20, “superconducting wires 22” [0019], The inner ends of two adjacent unit coils are continues [0022], a continuous inner end inherently constitutes wiring formed of the superconducting wire that connects adjacent coil portions without disconnection. In such a configuration, current direction reverses between adjacent windings. Suzuki further teaches connecting adjacent unit coils to form a single superconducting coil [0037])) and configured to connect the first coil segment and the second coil segment without disconnection (fig. 2 (middle wire connecting upper and lower coils 20)) and
change directions of electric currents such that that the electric current flows through the first coil segment in the forward direction and the electric current flows through the second coil segment in a direction opposite to the forward direction (fig. 2 (22) upper coil 20, current from upper 20 to lower 20 flow in opposite direction, “an electric current is applied to the superconducting magnet 2 to generate a strong magnetic field” [0018-0019]).
PNG
media_image1.png
238
229
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Suzuki further discloses wherein the first coil segment, the second coil segment, and the intermediate wiring are formed of one continuous superconducting wire without using a superconducting joint, in which separate superconducting wires are connected by using a predetermined joint means (fig. 2 (middle wire 22 connecting upper and lower coils 20, “superconducting wires 22” [0019])).
Regarding claim 3, Suzuki further discloses the second coil segment is wound adjacent to the first coil segment (fig. 2 (lower coil 20 with respect to upper)); and part or all of a winding portion of the second coil segment is substantially a non-inductive winding (“The material constituting the bobbin 10 is not particularly limited, but is preferably a structural material that has sufficient strength to hold each unit coil 20 and is non-magnetic,” [0020]).
Regarding claim 4, Suzuki further discloses wherein the intermediate wiring is configured such that a direction of the electric current flowing through the first coil segment is opposite to a direction of the electric current flowing through the second coil segment (fig. 2 (22) upper coil 20, current from upper 20 to lower 20 flow in opposite direction, “an electric current is applied to the superconducting magnet 2 to generate a strong magnetic field” [0018-0019]), and further configured to be non-inductively wound such that strength of a magnetic field generated by the intermediate wiring becomes substantially zero (“The material constituting the bobbin 10 is not particularly limited, but is preferably a structural material that has sufficient strength to hold each unit coil 20 and is non-magnetic,” field at area 22 where current flows in opposite direction [0020]).
Regarding claim 5, Suzuki further discloses a winding frame that winds around the superconducting wire, wherein each of the first coil segment, the second coil segment, and the intermediate wiring is formed by winding the one superconducting wire at a different position on the winding frame (fig. 5 (20 on 40)).
Regarding claim 6, Suzuki further discloses a winding frame that winds around the superconducting wire, wherein: the first coil segment is composed of one or more first sub-coil segments that are formed of the one superconducting wire without using the superconducting joint (fig. 4 (20 on 40)); the second coil segment is composed of one or more second sub-coil segments that are formed of the one superconducting wire without using the superconducting joint (fig. 4 (20 on 40 with 22 as non-joint)); and a guide structure for defining respective winding positions of the one or more first sub-coil segments (fig. 4 30 and 40), the one or more second sub-coil segments, and the intermediate wiring is formed on the winding frame (fig. 2 (20, 22)).
Regarding claim 7, Suzuki further discloses wherein respective winding positions of the one or more first sub-coil segments and the one or more second sub-coil segments are determined based on predetermined static magnetic field distribution (inherently desired static magnetic field distribution is obtained by arranging a plurality of superconducting coils with different diameters and/or different number of turns at different positions as disclosed in applicants’ own disclosure [0005]).
Regarding claim 8, Suzuki further discloses wherein the guide structure includes at least one of a step, a groove, a hole, and a rail that are formed along a circumferential direction of the winding frame (fig. 4 (40, 30, 44 “Formation of Restraint Portion The restraint portion 30 is disposed in the region between the pair of flange portions 44 of each unit winding frame 40 and on the outer side in the radial direction of the unit coil 20” [0035])).
Regarding claim 9, Suzuki further discloses wherein the winding frame includes a fixing means configured to fix at least one of the one or more first sub-coil segments, the one or more second sub-coil segments, and the intermediate wiring, which are all positioned by the guide structure (fig. 4 (40, 30, 44 “Formation of Restraint Portion The restraint portion 30 is disposed in the region between the pair of flange portions 44 of each unit winding frame 40 and on the outer side in the radial direction of the unit coil 20” to securely hold them withing 40 [0032, 35])).
Regarding claim 14 Suzuki further discloses an MRI apparatus comprising the superconducting magnet ([0002]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki (JP-2017176818-A) in view of Watanabe (U.S. Publication 20150234018).
Suzuki discloses the claimed invention above except:
Regarding claim 10, Suzuki does not explicitly teach the winding frame is configured by forming a plurality of steps on an outer periphery of a cylindrical member in such a manner that the winding frame has a plurality of different outer diameters along an axial direction of the cylindrical member (fig. 7 (coil within the shape of coil on frame 40 defining different diameters)); and the cylindrical member is formed to have a hollow region corresponding to an imaging space in which an object is placed during imaging (the magnet is for MRI the open space above coils 20 in fig 7 represent facing the object [0039]).
However Watanabe in a relevant art teaching a superconducting magnet device teaches the winding frame (fig. 6 (26, 66, 5)) is configured by forming a plurality of steps on an outer periphery of a cylindrical member in such a manner that the winding frame has a plurality of different outer diameters along an axial direction of the cylindrical member (fig. 6 (coil 1a, 1b, within the frame 23, 3, 63 and support 5 as steps, showing different diameters along the length))
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the frame configuration of Watanabe in Suzuki to gain the advantage of a structure that prevents a coil bobbin deformation and improves quench-proof property of a superconducting magnet [Watanabe [0022]].
Suzuki discloses the claimed invention above except:
Regarding claim 11, Suzuki does not explicitly teach wherein the hollow region of the cylindrical member is formed to have a plurality of different inner diameters corresponding to the plurality of different outer diameters.
However, Watanabe in a relevant art teaching a superconducting magnet device teaches wherein the hollow region of the cylindrical member is formed to have a plurality of different inner diameters corresponding to the plurality of different outer diameters (fig. 6 (coil 1a, 1b, within the frame 23, 3, 63 and support 5 as steps, showing different diameters along the length)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the frame configuration of Watanabe in Suzuki to gain the advantage of a structure that prevents a coil bobbin deformation and improves quench-proof property of a superconducting magnet [Watanabe [0022]].
Suzuki discloses the claimed invention above except:
Regarding claim 12, Suzuki does not explicitly teach of a cylindrical member in such a manner that the winding frame has a plurality of different outer diameters along an axial direction of the cylindrical member wherein the hollow region of the cylindrical member is formed to have a plurality of different inner diameters corresponding to the plurality of different outer diameters; the cylindrical member is formed to be solid; and an imaging space in which an object is placed during imaging is a region in an axial direction of the cylindrical member but outside the winding frame.
However Watanabe in a relevant art teaching a superconducting magnet device teaches the winding frame is configured by forming a plurality of steps on an outer periphery of a cylindrical member in such a manner that the winding frame has a plurality of different outer diameters along an axial direction of the cylindrical member wherein the hollow region of the cylindrical member is formed to have a plurality of different inner diameters corresponding to the plurality of different outer diameters (fig. 6 (coil 1a, 1b, within the frame 23, 3, 63 and support 5 as steps, showing different diameters along the length)). ; the cylindrical member is formed to be solid; and an imaging space in which an object is placed during imaging is a region in an axial direction of the cylindrical member but outside the winding frame (fig. 1 (area 40)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the frame configuration of Watanabe in Suzuki to gain the advantage of a structure that prevents a coil bobbin deformation and improves quench-proof property of a superconducting magnet [Watanabe [0022]].
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki (JP-2017176818-A) in view of Kusunoki (U.S. Publication 20170278608).
Suzuki teach the instant invention above:
Regarding claim 13, Suzuki teaches a plurality of coil segments (“structure in which multiple types of solenoid-shaped superconducting coils are arrange” [0009]) but does not explicitly teach a persistent current switch provided between the coil segment when the persistent current switch is turned on, a magnetic field that cancels all or part of a magnetic field generated.
However, Kusunoki teach use of persistent current switch that is provided with a superconducting coil teaching a persistent current switch (fig. 2 (4)) provided between the coil segment (fig. 2 ( 5, 6)) when the persistent current switch is turned on, a magnetic field that cancels all or part of a magnetic field generated (“when the current flows to the superconducting coil 6 for control and the magnetic field is generated, the superconducting state of the superconducting coil 5 for switch is destroyed, and the superconducting coil 5 for switch is turned into the normal conducting state, and the persistent current switch 4 is turned into the off-state. In addition, when the current flowing to the superconducting coil 6 for control is cut off, and the magnetic field is extinguished, the superconducting state of the superconducting coil 5 for switch is restored, and the persistent current switch 4 is turned into the on-state” [0042]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the switch of Kusunoki in Suzuki to gain the advantage of efficiently controlling the decrease of the critical current or the critical magnetic field and to improve performance [Kusunoki [0096]].
PNG
media_image2.png
627
618
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
5. 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 TAQI R NASIR whose telephone number is (571)270-1425. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST M-F.
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, Lee Rodak can be reached at (571) 270-5628. 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.
/TAQI R NASIR/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/LEE E RODAK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858