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 without traverse of group I in the reply filed on 07/22/26 is acknowledged.
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.
(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 1-3, 5, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Kubik (US 20160005530).
Regarding claim 1, Kubik (figure 7 and para 0053-0056) discloses an inductor including a plurality of windings about a magnetic core (2), each winding having a first segment within a first wiring layer coupled to a second segment within a second wiring layer (see para 0053), wherein the plurality of windings includes: a first winding (80/82/84) having a first width along a same direction as a length of the magnetic core (see figure 7), and a second winding (90/92/94) having a second width along the same direction as the length of the magnetic core (see figure 7), wherein the second width is larger than the first width (see figure 7).
Regarding claim 2, Kubik (figure 7) discloses wherein the second winding is closer to a center of the magnetic core than the first winding
Regarding claim 3, Kubik (figure 7) discloses wherein the plurality of windings further includes a third winding (120/122/124) having the first width along the same direction as the length of the magnetic core (see figure 7) wherein the second winding is between the first winding and the third winding(see figure 7).
Regarding claim 5, Kubik (para 0054) discloses wherein each pair of adjacent windings within the inductor has a substantially uniform gap along the length of the magnetic core.
Regarding claim 7, Kubik (para 0027-0028) discloses wherein a single vertical interconnect couples the first segment to the second segment in the first winding, and a plurality of vertical interconnects couple the first segment to the second segment in the second winding.
2 Claims 1 and 3-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Brennan et al. (US 20060128036).
Regarding claim 1, Brennan et al (figures 1-8 and para 0012-0027) discloses an inductor including a plurality of windings about a magnetic core (20), each winding having a first segment within a first wiring layer coupled to a second segment within a second wiring layer (see figure 2/figure 8), wherein the plurality of windings includes: a first winding (see figure 1/drawing below) having a first width along a same direction as a length of the magnetic core (see figure 1), and a second winding (see figure 1/drawing below) having a second width along the same direction as the length of the magnetic core (see figure 1/drawing below), wherein the second width is larger than the first width (see figure 1/drawing below).
PNG
media_image1.png
560
658
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Brennan et al (figure 7) discloses wherein the plurality of windings further includes a third winding (see figure 1/drawing above) having the first width along the same direction as the length of the magnetic core (see figure 1/drawing above) wherein the second winding is between the first winding and the third winding (see figure 1/drawing above).
Regarding claim 4, Brennan et al (see figure 1/drawing above) discloses wherein the plurality of windings further includes a transition winding between the first winding and the second winding, wherein the transition winding has a non-uniform width.
Regarding claim 5, Brennan et al (see figure 1) discloses wherein each pair of adjacent windings within the inductor has a substantially uniform gap along the length of the magnetic core.
Regarding claim 6, Brennan et al (para 0026) discloses wherein the plurality of windings includes copper (Cu).
Regarding claim 7, Brennan et al (see figures 2/8) discloses wherein a single vertical interconnect couples the first segment to the second segment in the first winding, and a plurality of vertical interconnects couple the first segment to the second segment in the second winding.
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 8-10, 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moyer (US 3,290,758) in view of Kubik (US 20160005530).
Regarding claim 8, Moyer (figures 1-6 and Col 2, lines 10-70-Col 3,lines 1-70) discloses a magnetic core (15) extending a length over a substrate (10) and within a pair of wiring layers of a device (see figure 2); and an inductor over the substrate and including a plurality of windings coupled together in series about the magnetic core (see figure 5), each winding having a first segment within a first wiring layer coupled to a second segment within a second wiring layer(see figures 5-6), the first segment and second segment defining a substantial V-shape (see figure 5), wherein the plurality of windings includes: a first winding having a first width along a same direction as the length of the magnetic core (see figure 5), and a second winding having a second width along the same direction as the length of the magnetic core(see figure 5), wherein the second width is larger than the first width.
Moyer does not expressly disclose wherein the second width is larger than the first width.
Kubik (para 0053-0056 and figure 7) discloses a teaching wherein the second width is larger than the first width.
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 second width is larger than the first width as taught by Kubik to the inductive device of Moyer so as to optimize performance, manage heat, and reduce costs.
Regarding claim 9, Kubik (figure 7) discloses wherein the second winding is closer to a center of the magnetic core than the first winding
Regarding claim 10, Kubik (figure 7) discloses wherein the plurality of windings further includes a third winding (120/122/124) having the first width along the same direction as the length of the magnetic core (see figure 7) wherein the second winding is between the first winding and the third winding(see figure 7).
Regarding claim 12, Kubik (para 0054) discloses wherein each pair of adjacent windings within the inductor has a substantially uniform gap along the length of the magnetic core.
Regarding claim 14, Kubik (para 0027-0028) discloses wherein a single vertical interconnect couples the first segment to the second segment in the first winding, and a plurality of vertical interconnects couple the first segment to the second segment in the second winding.
3 Claims 11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moyer (US 3,290,758) in view of Kubik (US 20160005530) and Brennan et al. (US 20060128036).
Regarding claim 11, Moyer (figures 1-6 and Col 2, lines 10-70-Col 3,lines 1-70) discloses all the limitations as noted above but does not expressly discloses wherein the plurality of windings further includes a transition winding between the first winding and the second winding, wherein the transition winding has a non-uniform width.
Brennan et al (see figure 1/drawing below) discloses wherein the plurality of windings further includes a transition winding between the first winding and the second winding, wherein the transition winding has a non-uniform width.
PNG
media_image1.png
560
658
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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 plurality of windings further includes a transition winding between the first winding and the second winding, wherein the transition winding has a non-uniform width as taught by Brennan et al. to the inductive device of Moyer so as to help smooth out the magnetic flux transitions between different winding layers; thereby minimizing eddy current losses.
Regarding claim 13, Moyer (figures 1-6 and Col 2, lines 10-70-Col 3,lines 1-70) discloses all the limitations as noted above but does not expressly discloses wherein the plurality of windings includes copper (Cu).
Brennan et al (para 0026) discloses wherein the plurality of windings includes copper (Cu).
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 plurality of windings includes copper (Cu) as taught by Brennan et al. to the inductive device of Moyer so as to allow for the inductive device have characteristic such has high thermal and tensile strength.
4 Claims 8 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shield et al. (US 3,614,554) in view of Lin et al. (US 20190057809).
Regarding claim 8, Moyer (figures 1-8 and Col 2, lines 55-75) discloses a magnetic core (18) extending a length over a substrate (10) and within a pair of wiring layers of a device (see figure 7); and an inductor over the substrate and including a plurality of windings coupled together in series about the magnetic core (see figure 7), each winding having a first segment within a first wiring layer coupled to a second segment within a second wiring layer(see figures 5-7), the first segment and second segment defining a substantial V-shape (see figure 7), wherein the plurality of windings includes: a first winding having a first width along a same direction as the length of the magnetic core (see figure 7), and a second winding having a second width along the same direction as the length of the magnetic core(see figure 7), wherein the second width is larger than the first width.
Shield et al. does not expressly disclose wherein the second width is larger than the first width.
Lin et al (para 0025-0025 and figure 4) discloses a teaching wherein the second width is larger than the first width.
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 second width is larger than the first width as taught by Lin et al to the inductive device of Shield et al. so as to optimize performance, manage heat, and reduce costs.
Regarding claim 13, Lin et al (para 0031) discloses wherein the plurality of windings includes copper (Cu).
Regarding claim 14, Shield et al. (figures 1-6) discloses wherein a single vertical interconnect couples the first segment to the second segment in the first winding, and a plurality of vertical interconnects couple the first segment to the second segment in the second winding.
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