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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 11/13/2023 and 06/05/2025 have been considered.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-3, 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al. (hereinafter Yoshida), U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0013134, in view of Tokyo Denki CC (Toshiba) (hereinafter Toshiba), Japanese Patent JPS62-80315 (JPU_1987080315).
Regarding Claim 1, Yoshida teaches (except where italicized), an electromagnetic device (Fig. 1), comprising:
a core body (100), wherein
the core body comprises an outer peripheral iron core composed of a plurality of outer peripheral iron core portions (11, 12, 13), and at least three iron cores (id.) joined with the plurality of outer peripheral iron core portions, the electromagnetic device further comprising:
coils (21-23) which are installed on the at least three iron cores, and
coil cases (31-33) which at least partially cover each of the at least three iron cores to insulate them from the coils, wherein
mating parts by means of which the core body and the coil cases are mated with each other are formed on each of the core body and the coil case. (Yoshida: Figs. 1-7 and 10-13, para. [0034], [0035], [0037], [0086]-[0089]).
Yoshida does not explicitly teach, mating parts by means of which the core body and the coil cases are mated with each other are formed on each of the core body and the coil case.
However, Toshiba teaches (Fig. 1), mating parts (28, 29) by means of which the core body and the coil cases are mated with each other are formed on each of the core body and the coil case. (Toshiba: Figs. 1-4, machine translation, page 1 and 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the component of Yoshida to include the lead-out portion and the end of the coil having an interface formed therebetween of Toshiba, the motivation being “the insertion workability becomes good at the time of junction of side leg iron core 29. Once coil 21 is positioned by central leg iron core 20, both relative physical relationship is maintained by fitting with protruding line part 28 and crevice 29 in the same position”. (Toshiba: Figs. 1-4, machine translation, page 2). Therefore, the limitation of Claim 1 would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 2 and similarly claim 3, the combination of Yoshida in view of Toshiba further teaches, wherein the mating parts each comprise a concave part which is formed so as to extend at least partially parallel to an axial direction of the core body, and a convex part which mates with the concave part (id.), the motivation being “the insertion workability becomes good at the time of junction of side leg iron core 29. Once coil 21 is positioned by central leg iron core 20, both relative physical relationship is maintained by fitting with protruding line part 28 and crevice 29 in the same position”. (Toshiba: Figs. 1-4, machine translation, page 1 and 2).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Yoshida in view of Toshiba further teaches, wherein a number of the at least three iron cores is a multiple of three. (Yoshida: Figs. 1-7 and 10-13, para. [0034], [0035], [0037], [0086]-[0089]).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Yoshida in view of Toshiba further teaches, wherein a number of the at least three iron cores is an even number of four or more (“the iron cores may be an even number of four or more” [0021]). (Yoshida: Figs. 1-7 and 10-13, para. [0021]).
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Shirouzu (US 20210057140) and Yoshida et al. (JP2019004126A).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if claim 4 is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitation of the base claims and any intervening claims.
Claim 4 recites, inter alia, “…wherein the mating parts each comprise a first mating part formed between an outer peripheral surface of the coil cases and the iron cores, and a second mating part formed between an inner peripheral surface of the coil cases and the outer peripheral iron core, and a distance between the first mating part and a center of the electromagnetic device is different from a distance between the second mating part and the center of the electromagnetic device”. (Emphasis added).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MALCOLM BARNES whose telephone number is (408)918-7512. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:00 pm (PST).
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 on 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 http s://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.
/MALCOLM BARNES/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
6/26/2026
Prosecution Insights