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 .
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 1-10 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.
Regarding claim 1, applicant should clarify the structure and/or arrangement [configuration] of the primary-side and secondary-side traces intended by “the primary-side traces and the secondary-side traces are configured in a specific stacked structure to maintain the first direction magnetic flux and the second direction magnetic flux within a specific range formed by a magnetic flux origin and a first predetermined offset and a second predetermined offset, so that a magnetomotive force of the planar transformer remains balanced.” The phrase “specific range formed by a magnetic flux origin and a first predetermined offset and a second predetermined offset” is unclear to what applicant is trying to 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-8, as best understood in view of the rejection under 35 USC 112 second paragraph, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wu et al. [US 2020/0211756 A1] or Zhu et al. [Research on a Hight-Efficiency Half-Turn Matrix Planar Transformer Structure of LLC Resonant Converter] or Yan et al. [Optimized Design of Integrated Planar Matrix Transformer for LLC Convert in Consumer Electronics].
Regarding claim 1, as best understood in view of the rejection under 35 USC 112 second paragraph, Wu et al. discloses a planar transformer [figures 1-5B] arranged on a circuit board of a resonant converter, the resonant converter comprising a primary-side circuit and a secondary-side circuit, the planar transformer comprising:
a plurality of primary-side traces respectively formed on a plurality of primary-side layers on the circuit board; the primary-side traces serve as a primary-side coil coupled to the primary-side circuit, so that when the primary-side circuit operates, the primary-side traces respectively generate a first direction magnetic flux [figure 5B, para 61, R1 is a primary side coil with L1 and L2 layers],
a plurality of secondary-side traces respectively formed on a plurality of secondary-side layers on the circuit board; the secondary-side traces serve as a secondary-side coil coupled to the secondary-side circuit, so that when the secondary-side circuit operates, the secondary-side traces respectively generate a second direction magnetic flux [figure 5B, para 61, R2 is a secondary side coil with four layers], and
an iron core comprising a first core pillar and a second core pillar [figures 1A-1B and 4], the first core pillar and the second core pillar respectively penetrating a first through hole and a second through hole of the circuit board, and the primary-side traces and the secondary-side traces surrounding the first core pillar and the second core pillar [figures 1A-5B], wherein the primary-side traces and the secondary-side traces are configured in a specific stacked structure [figures 5A-5B] to maintain the first direction magnetic flux and the second direction magnetic flux within a specific range formed by a magnetic flux origin and a first predetermined offset and a second predetermined offset, so that a magnetomotive force of the planar transformer remains balanced.
Regarding claim 2, Wu et al. discloses when one of the primary-side traces generates the first direction magnetic flux from the magnetic flux origin to the first predetermined offset or the second predetermined offset, the second direction magnetic flux is generated by the operation of the secondary-side trace adjacent to the primary-side trace to adjust the magnetomotive force to the magnetic flux origin [figure 5B].
Regarding claim 3, Wu et al. discloses when one of the secondary-side traces generates the second direction magnetic flux from the magnetic flux origin to the first predetermined offset or the second predetermined offset, the first direction magnetic flux is generated by the operation of the primary-side trace adjacent to the secondary-side trace to adjust the magnetomotive force to the magnetic flux origin [figure 5B].
Regarding claim 4, Wu et al. discloses the number of times the magnetomotive force reaches the first predetermined offset is equal to the number of times the magnetomotive force reaches the second predetermined offset [figure 5B].
Regarding claim 5, Wu et al. discloses the number of first waveforms formed by the magnetomotive force between the magnetic flux origin and the first predetermined offset is equal to the number of second waveforms formed by the magnetomotive force between the magnetic flux origin and the second predetermined offset [figures 1-5B].
Regarding claim 1, as best understood in view of the rejection under 35 USC 112 second paragraph, Zhu et al. discloses a planar transformer [figure 5] arranged on a circuit board of a resonant converter [figure 1], the resonant converter comprising a primary-side circuit and a secondary-side circuit, the planar transformer comprising:
a plurality of primary-side traces respectively formed on a plurality of primary-side layers on the circuit board; the primary-side traces serve as a primary-side coil coupled to the primary-side circuit, so that when the primary-side circuit operates, the primary-side traces respectively generate a first direction magnetic flux [figure 5, 2 layers for primary-side coil]
a plurality of secondary-side traces respectively formed on a plurality of secondary-side layers on the circuit board; the secondary-side traces serve as a secondary-side coil coupled to the secondary-side circuit, so that when the secondary-side circuit operates, the secondary-side traces respectively generate a second direction magnetic flux [figure 5, a secondary side coil with 2 layers], and
an iron core comprising a first core pillar and a second core pillar [figure 5] the first core pillar and the second core pillar respectively penetrating a first through hole and a second through hole of the circuit board, and the primary-side traces and the secondary-side traces surrounding the first core pillar and the second core pillar [figure 5], wherein the primary-side traces and the secondary-side traces are configured in a specific stacked structure [figure 5] to maintain the first direction magnetic flux and the second direction magnetic flux within a specific range formed by a magnetic flux origin and a first predetermined offset and a second predetermined offset, so that a magnetomotive force of the planar transformer remains balanced [figure 5c, page 3, left column].
Regarding claim 2, Zhu et al. discloses when one of the primary-side traces generates the first direction magnetic flux from the magnetic flux origin to the first predetermined offset or the second predetermined offset, the second direction magnetic flux is generated by the operation of the secondary-side trace adjacent to the primary-side trace to adjust the magnetomotive force to the magnetic flux origin [figure 6].
Regarding claim 3, Zhu et al. discloses when one of the secondary-side traces generates the second direction magnetic flux from the magnetic flux origin to the first predetermined offset or the second predetermined offset, the first direction magnetic flux is generated by the operation of the primary-side trace adjacent to the secondary-side trace to adjust the magnetomotive force to the magnetic flux origin [figure 6].
Regarding claim 4, Zhu et al. discloses the number of times the magnetomotive force reaches the first predetermined offset is equal to the number of times the magnetomotive force reaches the second predetermined offset [figure 5c].
Regarding claim 5, Zhu et al. discloses the number of first waveforms formed by the magnetomotive force between the magnetic flux origin and the first predetermined offset is equal to the number of second waveforms formed by the magnetomotive force between the magnetic flux origin and the second predetermined offset [figure 5].
Regarding claim 1, as best understood in view of the rejection under 35 USC 112 second paragraph, Yan et al. discloses a planar transformer [figures 5-6] arranged on a circuit board of a resonant converter [figure 2], the resonant converter comprising a primary-side circuit and a secondary-side circuit, the planar transformer comprising:
a plurality of primary-side traces respectively formed on a plurality of primary-side layers on the circuit board; the primary-side traces serve as a primary-side coil coupled to the primary-side circuit, so that when the primary-side circuit operates, the primary-side traces respectively generate a first direction magnetic flux [figure 6]
a plurality of secondary-side traces respectively formed on a plurality of secondary-side layers on the circuit board; the secondary-side traces serve as a secondary-side coil coupled to the secondary-side circuit, so that when the secondary-side circuit operates, the secondary-side traces respectively generate a second direction magnetic flux [figure 5], and
an iron core comprising a first core pillar and a second core pillar, the first core pillar and the second core pillar respectively penetrating a first through hole and a second through hole of the circuit board [figure 4], and the primary-side traces and the secondary-side traces surrounding the first core pillar and the second core pillar [figures 5-6], wherein the primary-side traces and the secondary-side traces are configured in a specific stacked structure [figures 5A-5B] to maintain the first direction magnetic flux and the second direction magnetic flux within a specific range formed by a magnetic flux origin and a first predetermined offset and a second predetermined offset, so that a magnetomotive force of the planar transformer remains balanced [figure 6].
Regarding claim 2, Yan et al. discloses when one of the primary-side traces generates the first direction magnetic flux from the magnetic flux origin to the first predetermined offset or the second predetermined offset, the second direction magnetic flux is generated by the operation of the secondary-side trace adjacent to the primary-side trace to adjust the magnetomotive force to the magnetic flux origin [figure 6].
Regarding claim 3, Yan et al. discloses when one of the secondary-side traces generates the second direction magnetic flux from the magnetic flux origin to the first predetermined offset or the second predetermined offset, the first direction magnetic flux is generated by the operation of the primary-side trace adjacent to the secondary-side trace to adjust the magnetomotive force to the magnetic flux origin [figure 6].
Regarding claim 4, Yan et al. discloses the number of times the magnetomotive force reaches the first predetermined offset is equal to the number of times the magnetomotive force reaches the second predetermined offset [figure 6].
Regarding claim 5, Yan et al. discloses the number of first waveforms formed by the magnetomotive force between the magnetic flux origin and the first predetermined offset is equal to the number of second waveforms formed by the magnetomotive force between the magnetic flux origin and the second predetermined offset [figure 6].
Regarding claim 6, both Zhu et al. [figure 1] and Yan et al. [figure 2] discloses a secondary with a center-tapped coil, when energized, the coils will form a first and second magnetomotive force curve. The coil structure and the magnetomotive force curve would exhibit the functional, as claimed.
Regarding claims 7-8, both Zhu et al. and Yan et al. discloses when one first half second coil is energized [in the positive current cycle], the second other half is not energized and thus does not generate a MMF. On the contrary, during the negative current cycle, the first half is not energized and the second half generates a MMF. This is explicit to be seen of figure 5a of Zhu et al. Both Zhu et al. and Yan et al. discloses LLC converter that would exhibit the functional, as claimed.
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) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu et al. or Yan et al. in view of Ahmed et al. [US 2020/0395164 A1].
Regarding claims 9-10, Zhu et al. or Yan et al. disclose the instant claimed invention except for the specific arrangement of the stacked structure.
Ahmed et al. discloses an LLC resonant converter with center-tapped second coils with both primary and secondary coils formed/arranged on 12 layers [figures 1-18E] in a symmetric manner so that MMF is balanced, wherein the coils arranged in sequentially.
It would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the coils sequentially arrangement of Ahmed et al. in Zhu et al. or Yan et al. for the purpose of facilitating manufacturing/connecting and/or assembling.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1-10 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-14 of copending Application No. 18/507,694 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are both claiming the same subject matter of a planar transformer having a primary-side trace and a secondary-side trace.
The specific width of the traces would have been an obvious design consideration for the purpose of facilitating different desired inductances.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUYEN T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1996. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30-5:30.
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.
/TUYEN T NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights