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 § 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 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Werker et al. (US 20190267890).
Regarding claim 1, Werker et al. (figures 3-8 and para 0053-0079) discloses a heat generator (see figure 6); and a case (22), wherein the heat generator includes a heat-generating element located inside the case (see figures 6-8 and para 0073) and a top plate (11) located at least in part outside the case (see figure 6), and the top plate includes a positioner for fixing a position of the heat generator relative to the electronic device. (see figure 6 and para 0058/0073 showing pins 13 connected to the top plate 11 that’s fixing a position of the heat generator relative to the electronic device 21)
Regarding claim 5, Werker et al. (figure 6) discloses wherein the heat-generating element includes a coil.
2 Claims 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Hampel (US 2869089)
Regarding claim 1, Hampel et al. (figures 1-4 and Col 2, lines 15-70) discloses a heat generator (see figures 1-2); and a case (30), wherein the heat generator includes a heat-generating element located inside the case (see figures 1-2) and a top plate (22) located at least in part outside the case (see figure 2 showing the surface facing the circuit board 36 is at least in part outside the case), and the top plate includes a positioner (26) for fixing a position of the heat generator relative to the electronic device. (see figures 1-2 showing a positioner 26 that’s fixing a position of the heat generator relative to the electronic device 36)
Regarding claim 5, Hampel (figure 1) discloses wherein the heat-generating element includes a coil.
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.
3 Claims 1-3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Suzuki et al. (JP 2010073745)(English translation) in view of Sakaguchi et al. (US 20150213938).
Regarding claim 1, Suzuki et al. (figures 4-6 and pages 4-5) discloses a heat generator (see figure 5); and a case (230), wherein the heat generator includes a heat-generating element located inside the case (see figures 4-6 and page 000) and a top plate (212) located at least in part outside the case (see figure 4-6). Suzuki et al. (figures 4-6) the top plate includes a positioner (212a) for fixing a position of the heat generator but does not expressly discloses showing the positioner connected to a electronic device.
Sakaguchi et al. (para 0002/0064 and figure 22) discloses a teaching wherein a positioner for fixing a position of the heat generator is connected to an electronic device (i.e. circuit board)
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 a positioner for fixing a position of the heat generator is connected to an electronic device as taught by Sakaguchi et al.to the inductive device of Suzuki et al. so as to ensures the heat generator remains at an exact, optimal distance or physical contact point with the device thereby maximizing heat while also preventing movement that could damage or disconnect the electronic component from the electronic device.
Regarding claim 2, Suzuki et al. (figures 4-6 and pages 4-5) discloses the case includes an opening at an upper surface thereof (see figure 6), the top plate (212) includes a lid covering the opening (see figures 4-6) and a protrusion (212b) extending from the lid (see figures 4-6), the protrusion projecting from the case in plan view (see figures 4-6), and the positioner is a hole (212a) located in the protrusion.(see figures 4-6)
Regarding claim 3, Suzuki et al. (figures 4-6 and pages 4-5) discloses wherein the case includes an attachment hole (232a) for fixing the case but does not expressly disclose the case attachment hole is connected to an electronic device.
Sakaguchi et al. (para 0002/0064 and figures16/22) discloses a teaching wherein the case attachment hole is connected to an electronic device (i.e. circuit board)
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 the case attachment hole is connected to an electronic device as taught by Sakaguchi et al.to the inductive device of Suzuki et al. so as to ensures the heat generator remains at an exact, optimal distance or physical contact point with the device thereby maximizing heat while also preventing movement that could damage or disconnect the electronic component from the electronic device.
Regarding claim 5, Suzuki et al. (figure 5) discloses wherein the heat-generating element includes a coil (221).
4 Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Suzuki et al. (JP 2010073745)(English translation) in view of Sakaguchi et al. (US 20150213938) in further view of Saka et al. (US 20070295715).
Regarding claim 4, Suzuki et al. (figures 4-6 and pages 4-5) discloses the heat-generating element (221) is annular and includes a central hole (see figure 5), but does not expressly disclose the case further includes a pillar extending upward from a bottom of the case, and the pillar is inserted into the central hole of the heat-generating element
Saka et al. (figures 9/12a-12b and para 0072-0079/0100-0110) discloses a teaching wherein a pillar extending upward from a bottom of the case, and the pillar (151) is inserted into the central hole of the heat-generating element.
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 a teaching wherein a pillar extending upward from a bottom of the case, and the pillar is inserted into the central hole of the heat-generating element s taught by Saka et al to the inductive device of Suzuki et al so as to limit movement of the heat-generating element thereby preventing movement that could damage the inductive device if dropped or moved suddenly.
5 Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hampel (US 2869089) in view of Sundstrom et al. (US 20110215891).
Regarding claim 4, Hampel et al. (figures 1-4 and Col 2, lines 15-70) discloses heat-generating element (see figure 1) is annular and includes a central hole (see figure 1), but does not expressly disclose the case further includes a pillar extending upward from a bottom of the case, and the pillar is inserted into the central hole of the heat-generating element
Sundstrom et al. (figure 1 and para 0034) discloses a teaching wherein a pillar (36) extending upward from a bottom of the case, and the pillar (36) is inserted into the central hole of the heat-generating element.
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 a teaching wherein a pillar extending upward from a bottom of the case, and the pillar is inserted into the central hole of the heat-generating element s taught by Sundstrom et al.to the inductive device of Hampel so as to limit movement of the heat-generating element thereby preventing movement that could damage the inductive device if dropped or moved suddenly.
6 Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Hampel (US 2869089) in view of Tokota et al (US 20130002384).
Regarding claim 4, Hampel et al. (figures 1-4 and Col 2, lines 15-70) discloses heat-generating element (see figure 1) is annular and includes a central hole (see figure 1), but does not expressly disclose the case further includes a pillar extending upward from a bottom of the case, and the pillar is inserted into the central hole of the heat-generating element.
Tokota et al. (figures 3-7 and para 0068-0107) discloses a teaching wherein a pillar (126) extending upward from a bottom of the case, and the pillar (36) is inserted into the central hole of the heat-generating element.
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 a teaching wherein a pillar extending upward from a bottom of the case, and the pillar is inserted into the central hole of the heat-generating element s taught by Tokota et al. to the inductive device of Hampel so as to limit movement of the heat-generating element thereby preventing movement that could damage the inductive device if dropped or moved suddenly.
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