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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of species 1 (figures 1-5a/6, claims 1-9, 12 and 14) in the reply filed on 08/10/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that search and examination of the entire application could be made without serious burden. This is not found persuasive because as previously mention in the office action sent out on 06/10/26, the species are independent or distinct because the figures to the different species recite mutually exclusive characteristics and are not obvious variants of each other thereby by resulting in a serious burden if a restriction was not implemented.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
Claim 3 is 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.
Regarding claim 3, the limitations “wherein the second portion includes mutually continuous second turn portions, and one of the second turn portions is disposed on the first turn portions next to each other while crossing over the first turn portions..’ is vague and indefinite. Para 0098 of the applicant pgpub discloses wherein the 2nd coil has these limitations. Wherein in the specification/drawings discloses wherein the second portion of the first coil has a second portion including mutually continuous second turn portions, and one of the second turn portions is disposed on the first turn portions next to each other while crossing over the first turn portions. It appears that theses limitations are referring to the second portion of the second coil, but the second portion of the second coil, is not discussed in claims 1 or 2.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
1 Claims 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Sakuma et al. (JP 2022141446)(English translation)
Regarding claim 1, Sakuma et al. (figures 1-6 and pages 2-4) discloses a first coil (20) formed by a first wire wound in a coil shape (see figures 2-3); and a second coil (40) formed by a second wire wound in a coil shape (see figures 2-3); wherein the first coil includes: a first portion (21/20) provided inside the second coil (40) (see figure 3); and a second portion (22/20) next to the first portion and the second coil along a winding axis of the first portion (see figure 3), a layer number of the first portion in its radial direction is one (see figures 3), and a layer number of the second portion in its radial direction is plural. (see figures 3)
Regarding claim 4, Sakuma et al. (figures 1-6 and pages 2-4) discloses wherein the first portion and a first layer of the second portion are continuous to each other.
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.
2 Claims 2-3 5-7, 9, 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakuma et al. (JP 2022141446)(English translation) in view of Suido et al. (JP 2009088312)(English translation)
Regarding claim 2, Sakuma et al. (figures 1-6 and pages 2-4) discloses wherein the first portion (21/20) includes mutually continuous first turn portions but does not expressly discloses the first turn portions next to each other are separated from each other along the winding axis.
Suido et al. (figures 1-4 and pages 1-3) discloses a teaching wherein the first turn portions (12a) next to each other are separated from each other along the winding axis.(see figure 2)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant claimed invention to design wherein the first turn portions next to each other are separated from each other along the winding axis as taught by Suido et al. to the inductive device of Sakuma et al. so as to significantly improved electrical insulation and voltage management.
Regarding claim 3, Suido et al. (figures 1-4 and pages 1-3) discloses wherein the second portion includes mutually continuous second turn portions, and one of the second turn portions is disposed on the first turn portions next to each other while crossing over the first turn portions.
Regarding claim 5, Sakuma et al. (figures 2-3 and pages 2-4) discloses a bobbin for disposing the first coil, wherein the bobbin includes a first region for disposing the first portion but does not expressly discloses protrusion portions protruding in a radial direction of the bobbin are arranged along an axial direction of the bobbin on an outer peripheral surface of the first region.
Suido et al. (figure 2 and pages 1-3) discloses a teaching wherein protrusion portions protruding in a radial direction of the bobbin are arranged along an axial direction of the bobbin on an outer peripheral surface of the first region.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant claimed invention to design wherein protrusion portions protruding in a radial direction of the bobbin are arranged along an axial direction of the bobbin on an outer peripheral surface of the first region as taught by Suido et al. to the inductive device of Sakuma et al. so as to allow the wire turns to perfectly aligned during winding, preventing uneven overlapping or overlapping faults.
Regarding claim 6, Suido et al. (figures 1-4 and pages 1-3) discloses wherein the protrusion portions extend along a circumferential direction of the bobbin, one of the protrusion portions is provided with a notch, and the first wire passes through the notch
Regarding claim 7, Suido et al. (figures 1-4 and pages 1-3) discloses wherein the first portion includes mutually continuous first turn portions, and one of the first turn portions is disposed between the protrusion portions next to each other.
Regarding claim 9, designing wherein a protrusion length of the protrusion portions is equal to a diameter of the first wire would have been an obvious design consideration based on intended application/environment use. Such as to prevent wire damage and maximizing winding density and also making the winding turns tight and uniform.
Regarding claim 12, Suido et al. (figures 1-4 and pages 1-3) discloses wherein the protrusion portions include: a first protrusion portion; and a second protrusion portion having a width along the axial direction of the bobbin different from that of the first protrusion, and the first protrusion
Regarding claim 14, Sakuma et al. (figures 1-6 and pages 2-4) discloses
a bobbin (see figures 2-3); a first coil (20) provided to the bobbin(see figures 2-3); a second coil (40) provided outside the first coil (see figures 2-3), wherein the first coil includes: a first portion (21/20) provided inside the second coil; and a second portion (22/20) next to the first portion and the second coil along a winding axis of the first portion(see figures 2-3), the bobbin includes a first region for disposing the first portion(see figures 2-3).
Sakuma et al. does not expressly discloses protrusion portions protruding in a radial direction of the bobbin are arranged on an outer peripheral surface of the first region along an axial direction of the bobbin.
Sakuma et al. (figure 2 and pages 1-3) discloses protrusion portions protruding in a radial direction of the bobbin are arranged on an outer peripheral surface of the first region along an axial direction of the bobbin.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant claimed invention to design protrusion portions protruding in a radial direction of the bobbin are arranged on an outer peripheral surface of the first region along an axial direction of the bobbin as taught by Suido et al. to the inductive device of Sakuma et al. so as to allow the wire turns to perfectly aligned during winding, preventing uneven overlapping or overlapping faults.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RONALD HINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7915. The examiner can normally be reached M to F; 8 -5.
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, Shawki Ismail can be reached at 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.
/RONALD HINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights