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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 09/02/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-2, 5, 7-11, 15 and 16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cobos Reyes et al. (U.S. PG. Pub. No. 2017/0040106 A1, hereinafter “Reyes”) in view of K. CLARK ET AL (U.S. Patent No. 3,483,497, hereinafter “Clark”).
With Respect to claim 1, Reyes teaches an inductive device 1 (Figs. 1-5) comprising:
a toroidal core 4,
at least one electric conductor (“wire” para. [0045]) wound around the toroidal core and constituting at least one winding 3, portions 3p (annotated Fig. 3) of the electric conductor on an outer perimeter (outer side) of the winding being straight and parallel with an axial direction (annotated z axis direction) of the toroidal core, and
a cooling element 1 constituting a cylindrical cavity 5 containing the toroidal core and the electric conductor so that the axial direction of the toroidal core is parallel with an axial direction (annotated z axis direction) of the cylindrical cavity and distances from a wall 6 of the cylindrical cavity to different ones (outer portions 3 of turns of winding 3) of the portions of the electric conductor are substantially equal,
wherein a shape of the wall of the cylindrical cavity and a cross-sectional shape of the electric conductor are adapted to match each other so that a cross-sectional shape of the cylindrical cavity in a geometric plane (x-y plane) perpendicular to the axial direction of the cylindrical cavity deviates from a circular shape (portions 3p are disposed in channel 2) so as to improve heat transfer from the portions of the electric conductor on the outer perimeter of the winding to the wall of the cylindrical cavity,
wherein the cross-sectional shape of the cylindrical cavity in the geometric plane perpendicular to the axial direction (z) of the cylindrical cavity deviates from the circular shape so that the wall of the cylindrical cavity is provided with axially directed grooves 2 occupied by the portions of the electric conductor on the outer perimeter of the winding, the portions of the electric conductor occupying the grooves are a distance apart from each other, and a distance 1d (annotated Fig. 5) from the wall of the cylindrical cavity of the cooling element to the toroidal core in a radial direction (dotted line direction) of the toroidal core is less than a thickness (diameter of the “wire”) of the portions of the electric conductor in the radial direction (paras. [0044]-[0048], and [0054]).
PNG
media_image1.png
641
509
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
400
408
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Reyes does not expressly teach
gaps between the wall of the cylindrical cavity and the portions of the electric conductors are filled with electrically insulating solid material so that an electrically insulating outer lining of the electric conductor constitutes the electrically insulating solid material filling the gaps, wherein the electrically insulating outer lining of the electric conductor extends, in a longitudinal direction of the electric conductor, over a whole length of each turn of the winding and has a constant thickness over the whole length of each turn of the winding.
Clark teaches an inductive device (FIGs. 1A-3)
wherein gaps 131 between the wall 130d (annotated FIG. 1C) of the cylindrical cavity 130e and the portions of the electric conductors 200y are filled with electrically insulating solid material so that an electrically insulating outer lining of the electric conductor constitutes the electrically insulating solid material filling the gaps, wherein the electrically insulating outer lining of the electric conductor extends, in a longitudinal direction of the electric conductor, over a whole length of each turn of the winding and has a constant thickness over the whole length of each turn of the winding 200 (col. 4, lines 66-69).
PNG
media_image3.png
233
417
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the electrically insulating outer lining filling the gaps as taught by Clark to the inductive device of Reyes to maintain the desired spacing between winding turns.
With Respect to claim 2, Reyes in view of Clark teaches an inductive device according to claim 1, wherein the cross-sectional shape of the electric conductor is substantially rectangular.
Claims 5 and 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reyes in view of Clark, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Rippel (U.S. PG. Pub. No. 2010/0127810 A1).
With Respect to claim 5, Reyes in view of Clark teaches an inductive device according to claim 1. Reyes in view of Clark does not expressly teach the cooling element comprises cooling fins.
Rippel teaches an inductive device (FIG.4), wherein the cooling element 402 comprises cooling fins 404 (para. [0034]).
PNG
media_image4.png
367
431
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the cooling fin as taught by Ripple in FIG. 4 to the inductive device of Reyes in view of Clark to further improve heat transfer (para. [0034]).
With Respect to claim 7, Reyes in view of Clark teaches an inductive device according to claim 1. Reyes in view of Ness does not expressly teach the cooling element comprises a bottom section constituting a bottom of the cylindrical cavity and being in a heat conductive relation with the electric conductor.
Rippel teaches an inductive device (FIG.4), wherein the cooling element 402 comprises a bottom section (lower section) constituting a bottom of the cylindrical cavity 410 (annotated FIG. 4) and being in a heat conductive relation with the electric conductor (para. [0034]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the bottom section for heat conduction as taught by Ripple in FIG. 4 to the inductive device of Reyes in view of Clark to further improve heat transfer (para. [0034]).
With Respect to claim 8, Reyes in view of Clark and Rippel teaches an inductive device according to claim 7, wherein gaps 112 between the bottom section and the electric conductor are filled with electrically insulating solid material so that the electrically insulating solid material is between the bottom section and turns of the winding at a lower portion of the toroidal core (Reyes, para. [0053], and Rippel, para. [0028].
With Respect to claim 9, Reyes in view of Clark and Rippel teaches an inductive device according to claim 7, wherein the bottom section comprises cooling fins 404 (Rippel, para. [0034]).
With Respect to claim 10, Reyes in view of Clark and Rippel teaches an inductive device according to claim 7, wherein the bottom section comprises one or more cooling ducts 400 for conducting cooling fluid (Rippel, para. [0034]).
With Respect to claim 11, Reyes in view of Clark teaches an inductive device according to claim 1. Reyes in view of Ness does not expressly teach the toroidal core comprises ferromagnetic material.
Rippel teaches an inductive device (FIG.5), wherein the core 506 comprises ferromagnetic material (para. [0045]). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the ferromagnetic core as taught by Rippel to the inductive device of Reyes in view of Clark to provide distributed gap magnetic core to get the desired magnetic saturation characteristics.
Claims 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reyes in view of Clark, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lin (U.S. PG. Pub. No. 2009/0322460 A1).
With respect to claim 14, Reyes in view of Clark teaches an inductive device according to claim 1. Reyes in view of Clark does not expressly teach the cooling element comprises one or more cooling ducts for conducting cooling fluid.
Lin teaches an inductive device (FIG. 1),
wherein the cooling element 2 comprises one or more cooling ducts 210 for conducting cooling fluid (para. [0017]). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the cooling ducts as taught by Lin to the inductive device of Reyes in view of Clark to improve heat dissipation (para. [0027]).
With respect to claim 15, Reyes in view of Clark and Lin teaches an inductive device according to claim 14, wherein the cooling element 2 comprises two or more cooling ducts 210 and 220 inside the wall 21 of the cylindrical cavity 20, and there are the cooling ducts on opposite sides of the cylindrical cavity (Lin, para. [0017]).
With respect to claim 16, Reyes in view of Clark and Ness teaches an inductive device according to claim 15, wherein the cooling ducts extend to an upper end surface of the cooling element, the upper end surface coinciding, in the axial direction, with an end of the cylindrical cavity (Lin, para. [0017]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MANGTIN LIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5729. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 0800-1700.
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 S. 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.
/MANG TIN BIK LIAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837