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 § 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) 1 and 3-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kosaka et al. (US 2013/0027163) in view of Thurk (US 2907968), Kazuhiro (DE 112012004154 T5) as evidenced by [NPL: Does Iron conduct heat] and [NPL: Thermally conductive epoxy adhesives]. Examiner noted that NPL references are used only to teach the inherent characteristics of materials, so the publication date of the references can be disregarded.
Regarding claim 1, Kosaka et al. discloses “an electronic component” (abstract, i.e., a reactor. Figs.1-11) comprising:
“an annular heat-generating element” (fig.2, 2);
“an fig.2 the case 5 includes a bottom 51 and a side wall 52) and containing “the heat-generating element” (fig.2, 2. Examiner noted that 2 is within 5);
“a pillar” (figs.1-2, 4, 53 and 11 collectively forms a pillar) extending upward from “the bottom” (fig.2, 51 pointed at the bottom) and passing through “the heat-generating element” (fig.2, 2. [0027], i.e., heat generated at the coil 2); and
“a thermally conductive filler” ([0028], i.e., The core 3 consists of epoxy resin in which iron powder is included. The iron powder is well-known magnetic powder and epoxy resin is insulating one) located within “the case” (5),
wherein “the pillar” (figs.1-2, 4, 53 and 11 collectively forms a pillar) includes “an [0033] The center columnar member 4) and “a bar” ([0030] the pillar 53 is composed of aluminum alloy) located inside “the tube” (4) and having a higher thermal conductivity than the filler” (the bar 53 is made of aluminum alloy and the filler 3 is made of epoxy resin and iron powder. It is inherently and necessarily that the aluminum alloy has a higher thermal conductivity than iron and epoxy. See attached for NPL, thermal conductivity of aluminum is about 237 W/m·K and thermal conductivity of iron is 80 W/m·K and thermal conductivity of epoxy is about 1-2.02 1 W/(m·K). the higher value suggest the higher thermal conductivity).
Kosaka et al. is silent regarding the case is an electrically insulating case; tube is an electrically insulating tube.
Thurk teaches “an electrically insulating case” (col.2 at lines 15-20, i.e., the housing 3 includes two flat, ring shaped end member ring-shaped end members 12, 13 formed of ceramic material). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Kosaka et al. with Thurk, by modifying Kosaka et al.’s case with Thurk’s insulated case, to allow alternating magnetic fields to pass straight through without absorbing energy or generating resistance, prevent coils from short circuits and provide heat, corrosion and chemical resistance.
Kazuhiro teaches “an electrically insulating tube” (abstract, i.e., a resin mold portion 21 made of an insulating resin. Fig.1, B, 21 pointed at the tube). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Kosaka et al. with Kazuhiro, by modifying Kosaka et al.’s tube material according to Kazuhiro’s tube material, to facilitate heat dissipation and dampens mechanical vibration which increase the equipment’s reliability and service life.
Regarding claim 3, modified Kosaka et al. discloses “the pillar extends to a level of an upper end of the case in an up-down direction” (Kosaka et al., figs.1-2, 4, 53 and 11 collectively forms a pillar. At least 53 of the pillar extends to a level of an upper end of the case in an up-down direction).
Regarding claim 4, modified Kosaka et al. discloses “the bar is in contact with the bottom” (Kosaka et al., the pillar 53 is in contact with the bottom 51).
Regarding claim 5, modified Kosaka et al. discloses “the pillar” (Kosaka et al., figs.1-2, 4, 53 and 11 collectively forms a pillar) includes:
“a frustum-shaped lower portion extending from the bottom of the case and having a diameter that gradually decreases upward” (Kosaka et al., figs.1-2, lower portion of 4 extending from the bottom of the case and having a diameter that gradually decreases upward for at least a segment); and
“an upper portion extending from the lower portion and having a diameter that is substantially constant up to an upper end of the upper portion” (Kosaka et al., figs.1-2, at least 4 has an upper portion extending from the lower portion and having a diameter that is substantially constant up to an upper end of the upper portion).
Regarding claim 6, modified Kosaka et al. discloses “the heat-generating element includes a coil” (Kosaka et al., figs.1-2, 2).
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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY CHOU whose telephone number is (571)270-7107. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday.
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, Edward Landrum can be reached at (571) 272-5567. 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.
/JIMMY CHOU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights