DETAILED ACTION The Information Disclosure Statement filed on October 25, 2023 has been reviewed and considered by the Examiner. 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. Claim Objections Claims 8 and 9 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 8 and 9 are written as method claims that are dependent from the apparatus of claim 7. Method claims should be written as their own set of claims, separate from the apparatus. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Claims 5 and 7-9 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. Claim 5 recites the limitation "the two connecting structures" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 7 recites the limitation "the connecting structures" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 8 recites the limitation "the connecting structures" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 9 recites the limitation "the connecting protrusion" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 9 recites the limitation "the connecting cavity" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 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 , 3 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhu (CN 108114808 A) . Zhu discloses a magnetic track module comprised of a plurality of layers of magnetic units 1, 2 that are staggered in a first , transverse direction and stacked in a second , vertical direction with the same magnetization, as described in the abstract. A bottom ferromagnetic plate 5 covers a lower surface of the bottom magnetic unit, with an attractive magnetic force between the bottom ferromagnetic plate and the adjacent magnetic unit . U nder the attractive magnetic forces between two adjacent magnetic units and between the bottom ferromagnetic plate and the adjacent magnetic unit, static frictional forces are generated between two adjacent magnetic units and between the bottom ferromagnetic plate and the adjacent magnetic unit and are able to balance out all or part of the repulsive magnetic forces between two adjacent permanent magnets in the same magnetic unit . As stated in the description, “t he invention of interlaced magnetic plate assembly using extrusion magnetic field mode, increases the strength of the magnetic field, changing the magnetic field gradient, according to the grouping method can be used on the plane or curved surface and can be infinitely extended to apply to different magnetic separation device ”. This increasing of the strength and changing the field is interpreted as a way of balancing the forces of the permanent magnets and the plate. The description further explains that “ each magnet block through industrial glue water for bonding, for example, polyvinyl alcohol adhesive, polyvinyl formal glue and so on; after the bonding, as protective treatment on the surface ”. This treatment is interpreted as a protective sleeve made of a non-ferromagnetic material, and the protective sleeve has an accommodating space fitting the magnetic units and the bottom ferromagnetic plate and two openings at the two ends in connection with the accommodating space and the magnetic units and the bottom ferromagnetic plate are partially wrapped in the protective sleeve, so that the magnetic units maintain the staggered and stacked layout and form two connecting structures at the two ends of the protective sleeve. 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) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu (CN 108114808 A) . Zhu discloses the magnetic assembly as described above. However , Zhu does not specifically state that the plate is made of a soft ma gnetic material with a high magnetic permeability. It is well known in the art that magnetic materials may vary based on the type of application where they will be used. It would have been an obvious design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to have applied a soft magnetic material with a high permeability with the expected result of optimizing the magnetic forces to be applied. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 2 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. Claims 5 and 7-9 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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 FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT Robert J McCarry Jr. whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-6683 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday-Friday 7:00-3:00 . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT S. Joseph Morano can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-6684 . 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. /Robert J McCarry Jr/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615 RJM March 12, 2026