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 .
This final office action is responsive to Applicants' amendment filed on 05/12/26. Claims 1-20 are presented for examination and are pending for the reasons indicated herein below.
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 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/12/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues:
There is a need to reduce the size of a transformer used in a mass spectrometer power supply while maintaining a transformer factor. When a magnetic core is applied to reduce size, reducing the coupling factor in the same way as an air core transformer is limited, and a new method is required to reduce the coupling factor between the input coil and the output coil. The presently disclosed power supply provides an input coil in which an outer winding and an inner winding form a single turn winding and are connected in series to each other, such that leakage inductance is added to the input coil, the coupling factor between the input coil and the output coil is reduced, and a transformer factor greater than a turns ratio of the input coil and the output coil may be achieved.
In light of this background, claim 9 defines a printed circuit board comprising a board, a first conductive line placed on one surface of the board, and a second conductive line placed on a surface opposite to the one surface of the board, wherein the first conductive line includes an inner winding and an outer winding, the inner winding and the outer winding form a single turn winding, and the outer winding and the inner winding are connected in series to each other.
On the other hand, Bowman concerns magnetic core structures for magnetic devices, including integrated magnetic devices used in push-push DC/DC converters. Bowman discloses a core having legs of different cross-sectional areas so that air gaps in the legs may be of uniform length. Bowman describes an E-E core with windings associated with different legs, and also notes that, in some embodiments, the windings may be fabricated in a multi-layer printed wiring board.
Folker is directed to a magnetic component apparatus having an auxiliary winding circuit board positioned between a bobbin and a core. Folker explains that the auxiliary winding circuit board includes one or more auxiliary windings formed from conductive material such as a copper trace, with an opening aligned with an axial bobbin passage such that a core leg extends through the opening. Folker describes this arrangement as providing additional windings on the magnetic component that are separated from the bobbin winding region, improving voltage isolation between a main winding on the bobbin and one or more auxiliary windings on the auxiliary winding circuit board.
The Office Action alleges that Bowman teaches the claimed conductive-line arrangement, including a first conductive line, a second conductive line, and the recited winding relationship, while Folker is relied upon for teaching that the structure is implemented as a printed circuit board including a board.
However, Bowman does not disclose the board structure recited in claim 9 in the manner claimed by the Office Action. At most, Bowman states generally that windings may be fabricated in a multi-layer printed wiring board, but Bowman does not disclose a board having a first conductive line placed on one surface of the board and a second conductive line placed on a surface opposite to that surface, including the configuration of the inner winding and outer winding of the first conductive line as defined in claim 9. Folker does not cure these deficiencies.
Examiner respectively disagrees: Although the application describes features that may differ from those disclose in the cited reference, the rejection is based on the claim language. As currently drafted, the claims recite elements in a manner that is fully met by the teachings of the cited reference, even if the reference operates differently or serves a different purpose. The examiner’s analysis focuses on what the claims actually requires, and the cited reference discloses each of those recited limitations. For this reason, the distinction of the applicant identifies does not overcome the rejection, because the claims, as written, still follow on the reference use on record. The cited “board” of Folker is analogues to applicant’s board, since it gives a base to place the circuit structure.
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.
Claims 9-10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bowman et al. (US 5619400 A) in view of Folker et al. (US 9396865 B1)
PNG
media_image1.png
373
470
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9. Bowman teaches a device [fig 1-2] comprising:
a first conductive line [line in leg 2 and leg 3] placed on one surface of the board [implicit col 8 lines 35-45];
and a second conductive line [line in leg 1] placed on a surface opposite to the one surface of the board, wherein the first conductive line includes an inner winding and an outer winding [see inner/outer winding cited above], and wherein the inner winding and the outer winding form a single turn winding [winding form a single turn in each leg], and the outer winding and the inner winding are connected in series to each other [implicit from n2 and n3 winding shown in fig 1].
However, Bowman does not explicitly mention printed circuit board (PCB) comprising: a board.
Folker teaches printed circuit board (PCB) comprising: a board [50]. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the features of Folker in order to provide electrical reliability by reducing risk of loose wires, and wiring mistakes.
Regarding claim 10. Bowman as modified teaches the PCB of claim 9, wherein the second conductive line is placed in a spiral shape [fig 2, lines are shown in a spiral shape in Bowman].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 20 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, and if the claim objections stated above were overcome.
Claims 1-8 and 11-19 are allowed.
Regarding claim 1, Wang teaches a power supply [fig4, 58] comprising: a radio frequency (RF) power source [58]; a magnetic core transformer [70] including a first transformer and a second transformer [L1-L1/L3-L4], each of which boosts an output of the RF power source [36].
The following is an examiner' s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art does not disclose or suggest, in combination with the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, primarily, “…direct current (DC) decoupling capacitors connected between a ground and a first terminal among output terminals of the first transformer and the second transformer; variable capacitors connected between the ground and a second terminal among the output terminals of the first transformer and the second transformer; a DC power source configured to provide a DC voltage to the first terminal; an output terminal configured to output the DC voltage and a boosted RF voltage, wherein each of the first transformer and the second transformer includes an input coil, a magnetic core, and an output coil, wherein the input coil includes an outer winding and an inner winding, and wherein the outer winding and the inner winding form a single turn winding, and the outer winding and the inner winding are connected in series to each other.”
Regarding claim 11, Folker teaches a magnetic core transformer [fig 1] comprising: a first magnetic core [30b]; a second magnetic core [30a]; and a first printed circuit board [50] and a second printed circuit board [60], wherein a first conductive line is placed on one surface of each of the first printed circuit board [70 placed perpendicular] and the second printed circuit board [70 placed parallel], and a second conductive line [40] is placed on a surface opposite to the one surface [40 is opposite to 70’s surface location].
The following is an examiner' s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art does not disclose or suggest, in combination with the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, primarily, “…wherein the first conductive line includes an inner winding and an outer winding, and wherein the inner winding and the outer winding form a single turn winding, and the outer winding and the inner winding are connected in series to each other.”
Examiner Note
The examiner cites particular columns and lines numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bryan Perez whose telephone number is (571)272-8837. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon.-Fri. (7:30 – 5:00).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Crystal Hammond, can be reached on (571) 270-1682. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/BRYAN R PEREZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights