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 .
Drawings
Figure 1 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Shiramizu (US 20060038621).
Regarding claim 1, Shiramizu (figures 1-3 and para 0033-0040) discloses a coil body (1) arranged in a plane and configured to produce an alternating magnetic field for delivering signal or power; and a first metal ring (3) arranged around the coil body (see figures 1-2) in the plane and configured to produce a first magnetic field having a direction opposite to the alternating magnetic field produced by the coil body (see figures 1-3). (note: “configured to” performing a function is not a positive limitation but only requires the ability to so perform, the coil body of Shiramizu has similar structural features of the applicant claimed invention in regards to producing an alternating magnetic field for delivering signal and to produce a first magnetic field having a direction opposite to the alternating magnetic field produced by the coil body)
2 Claims 1-2, 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Mostov (US 6175727).
Regarding claim 1, Mostov (figure 11 and Col 11, lines 46-67 and Col 12, lines 1-25) discloses a coil body (194) arranged in a plane and configured to produce an alternating magnetic field for delivering signal or power; and a first metal ring (206) arranged around the coil body (see figure 11) in the plane and configured to produce a first magnetic field having a direction opposite to the alternating magnetic field produced by the coil body (see figure 11). (note: “configured to” performing a function is not a positive limitation but only requires the ability to so perform, the coil body of Mostov has similar structural features of the applicant claimed invention in regards to producing an alternating magnetic field for delivering signal and to produce a first magnetic field having a direction opposite to the alternating magnetic field produced by the coil body)
Regarding claim 2, Mostov (figure 11) discloses wherein the coreless planar coil is arranged on a PCB (192).
Regarding claim 6, Mostov (figure 11 and Col 11, lines 46-67 and Col 12, lines 1-25) discloses a primary winding (194) configured to transmit power received from a power supply; and a secondary winding (196) configured to receive the power from the primary winding and provide the received power to a load, wherein at least one of the primary winding and the secondary winding comprises the coreless planar coil (see figure 11) (note: “configured to” performing a function is not a positive limitation but only requires the ability to so perform, the coil body of Mostov has similar structural features of the applicant claimed invention in regards to be able to transmitting power received from a power supply and to receive the power from the primary winding and provide the received power to a load)
Regarding claim 8, Mostov (figure 11 and Col 11, lines 46-67 and Col 12, lines 1-25) discloses wherein the coreless planar coil is arranged on a PCB.
3 Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Yoo (US 20190180931).
Regarding claim 1, Yoo (figures 3-5 and para 0036-0050) discloses a coil body (L3) arranged in a plane and configured to produce an alternating magnetic field for delivering signal or power; and a first metal ring (50) arranged around the coil body (see figures 4-5) in the plane and configured to produce a first magnetic field having a direction opposite to the alternating magnetic field produced by the coil body (see figures 4-5). (note: “configured to” performing a function is not a positive limitation but only requires the ability to so perform, the coil body of Yoohas similar structural features of the applicant claimed invention in regards to producing an alternating magnetic field for delivering signal and to produce a first magnetic field having a direction opposite to the alternating magnetic field produced by the coil body)
Regarding claim 2, Yoo (figure 3 and para 0040) discloses wherein the coreless planar coil (12) is arranged on a PCB.
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.
4 Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo (US 20190180931) in view of Lee (US 20110156854).
Regarding claim 3, Yoo (figures 3-5 and para 0036-0050) discloses all the limitations as noted above but does not expressly disclose a second metal ring arranged inside the coil body in the plane and configured to produce a second magnetic field having a direction opposite to the alternating magnetic field produced by the coil body.
Lee (figures 3-5 and para 0038-0050) discloses a second metal ring (226) arranged inside the coil body (205) in the plane and configured to produce a second magnetic field having a direction opposite to the alternating magnetic field produced by the coil body (205).
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 a second metal ring arranged inside the coil body in the plane and configured to produce a second magnetic field having a direction opposite to the alternating magnetic field produced by the coil body as taught by Lee to the inductive device of Yoo so as to cancel out stray magnetic fields or restrict the magnetic flux from penetrating sensitive components.
5 Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo (US 20190180931) in view of Lee (US 20110156854) in further view of Teshima et al. (US 20050174209).
Regarding claim 4, Yoo (figure 1 and para 0022) discloses all the limitations as noted above but does not expressly disclose wherein the first metal ring and the second metal ring are made of copper.
Teshima et al. (para 0022) discloses a teaching wherein metal rings (3) are made of copper.
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 metal rings are made of copper as taught by Teshima et al. to the inductive device of Yoo so as to attenuates both electrical and magnetic fields, ensuring clear, uninterrupted signal transmission in high-interference industrial or data environments.
6 Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo (US 20190180931) in view of Lee (US 20110156854) in further view of Yosui et al. (US 20170365389).
Regarding claim 5, Yoo (figure 1 and para 0022) discloses all the limitations as noted above but does not expressly disclose wherein the first metal ring and the second metal ring are made of copper foils on a PCB.
Yosui et al. (figure 8 and para 0020/0129) discloses a teaching wherein metal rings (41/42) are made of copper foils on a PCB (s1).
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 first metal ring and the second metal ring are made of copper foils on a PCB as taught by Yosui et al. to the inductive device of Yoo so as to maximizes surface area to create robust, reliable connections during manual or automated soldering processes.
7 Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mostov (US 6175727) in view of Matsuura.(US 20150155086)
Regarding claim 7, Mostov (figure 11 and Col 11, lines 46-67 and Col 12, lines 1-25) discloses all the limitations as noted above but does not expressly discloses wherein the primary winding and the secondary winding are arranged on different PCBs.
Matsuura (figure 4 and para 0051) discloses wherein the primary winding and the secondary winding are arranged on different PCBs.(see par 0051 disclosing the board can be multilayer structure)
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 primary winding and the secondary winding are arranged on different PCBs.as taught by Matsuura et al. to the inductive device of Mostov so as to have enhanced design flexibility and better thermal management.
8. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mostov (US 6175727) in view of Lee (US 20110156854).
Regarding claim 9, Mostov (figure 11 and Col 11, lines 46-67 and Col 12, lines 1-25) discloses all the limitations as noted above but does not expressly disclose a second metal ring arranged inside the coil body in the plane and configured to produce a second magnetic field having a direction opposite to the alternating magnetic field produced by the coil body.
Lee (figures 3-5 and para 0038-0050) discloses a second metal ring (226) arranged inside the coil body (205) in the plane and configured to produce a second magnetic field having a direction opposite to the alternating magnetic field produced by the coil body (205).
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 a second metal ring arranged inside the coil body in the plane and configured to produce a second magnetic field having a direction opposite to the alternating magnetic field produced by the coil body as taught by Lee to the inductive device of Mostov so as to cancel out stray magnetic fields or restrict the magnetic flux from penetrating sensitive components.
9 Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mostov (US 6175727) in view of Teshima et al. (US 20050174209).
Regarding claim 10, Mostov (figure 11 and Col 11, lines 46-67 and Col 12, lines 1-25) discloses all the limitations as noted above but does not expressly disclose wherein the first metal ring and the second metal ring are made of copper.
Teshima et al. (para 0022) discloses a teaching wherein metal rings (3) are made of copper.
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 metal rings are made of copper as taught by Teshima et al. to the inductive device of Mostov so as to attenuates both electrical and magnetic fields, ensuring clear, uninterrupted signal transmission in high-interference industrial or data environments.
10 Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mostov (US 6175727) in view of Yosui et al. (US 20170365389).
Regarding claim 11, Mostov (figure 11 and Col 11, lines 46-67 and Col 12, lines 1-25) discloses all the limitations as noted above but does not expressky discloses wherein the first metal ring and the second metal ring are made of copper foils on a PCB.
Yosui et al. (figure 8 and para 0020/0129) discloses a teaching wherein metal rings (41/42) are made of copper foils on a PCB (s1).
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 first metal ring and the second metal ring are made of copper foils on a PCB as taught by Yosui et al. to the inductive device of Mostov so as to maximizes surface area to create robust, reliable connections during manual or automated soldering processes.
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