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 § 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.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Cardone et al. (US 4847582) in view of White (US 9,039,901).
Regarding claim 1, Cardone discloses the device comprising:
a yoke plate (10) disposed on a plane; and
a magnetic field generator (10a) which is disposed on the yoke plate (10) and includes magnet parts (26) including magnet units (29),
magnetic bodies (27), and non-magnetic bodies (32),
wherein the magnetic bodies (27) overlap the magnet parts (26) in a plan view,
the non-magnetic bodies (32) overlap an area between the magnet units (29) in a plan view,
the magnet assembly (see the drawing below) operates in one of a first mode and a second mode (see col. 3, lines 17-20), and
the magnetic field generator (10a) generates a magnetic field below the magnetic bodies (27) and the non-magnetic bodies (32) in the first mode (Fig. 6) and does not substantially generate the magnetic field below the magnetic bodies (27) and the non-magnetic bodies (32) in the second mode (see col. 5, lines 47-58).
Since Cardone discloses the invention similar with the Applicant, it would produce the same function.
Regarding claim 1, Cardone i teaches the claimed subject as disclosed above, however, fails to explicitly disclose “the magnet units include first, second, third, and fourth magnet units, the first and second magnet units are arranged adjacently along a first direction, and the third and fourth magnet units are arranged adjacently along the first direction, the first and third magnet units are arranged adjacently along a second direction orthogonal to the first direction, and the second and fourth magnet units are arranged adjacently along the second direction, in the first mode, the first and third magnet units have the same polarity, and the second and fourth magnet units have the same polarity that is opposite the first and third magnet units, and in the second mode, the first and fourth magnet units have the same polarity, and the second and third magnet units have the same polarity that is opposite the first and fourth magnet units”.
White discloses a device comprising:
“the magnet units include first, second, third, and fourth magnet units, the first and second magnet units are arranged adjacently along a first direction, and the third and fourth magnet units are arranged adjacently along the first direction, the first and third magnet units are arranged adjacently along a second direction orthogonal to the first direction, and the second and fourth magnet units are arranged adjacently along the second direction, in the first mode, the first and third magnet units have the same polarity, and the second and fourth magnet units have the same polarity that is opposite the first and third magnet units, and in the second mode, the first and fourth magnet units have the same polarity, and the second and third magnet units have the same polarity that is opposite the first and fourth magnet units”.
See the drawings below.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make “the magnet units include first, second, third, and fourth magnet units, the first and second magnet units are arranged adjacently along a first direction, and the third and fourth magnet units are arranged adjacently along the first direction, the first and third magnet units are arranged adjacently along a second direction orthogonal to the first direction, and the second and fourth magnet units are arranged adjacently along the second direction, in the first mode, the first and third magnet units have the same polarity, and the second and fourth magnet units have the same polarity that is opposite the first and third magnet units, and in the second mode, the first and fourth magnet units have the same polarity, and the second and third magnet units have the same polarity that is opposite the first and fourth magnet units” for the purpose of providing High-efficiency switching, Precision control and Bi-stable holding.
PNG
media_image1.png
309
363
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (3)][AltContent: textbox (4)][AltContent: textbox (4)][AltContent: textbox (3)][AltContent: textbox (2)][AltContent: textbox (1)][AltContent: textbox (2nd Mode)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (1st Mode)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (2)][AltContent: textbox (1)]
PNG
media_image2.png
311
264
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (MAS)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image3.png
351
428
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Cardone discloses:
the magnetic bodies (27) include iron (Fe) (see col. 6, lines 1-2), and the non-magnetic bodies (32) include brass (Cu-Zn) (see col. 6, lines 23-24).
Regarding claim 3, Cardone discloses:
the magnet parts (26) include the magnet units (29) spaced apart from each other.
Regarding claim 4, Cardone discloses:
the magnet units (29) are arranged in a matrix structure in a first direction and a second direction different from the first direction.
Since Cardone discloses the invention similar with the Applicant, it would produce the same function.
Regarding claim 5, Cardone discloses:
the magnetic bodies (27) and the non-magnetic bodies (32) extend in the second direction and are adjacent to each other in the first direction.
Since Cardone discloses the invention similar with the Applicant, it would produce the same function.
Regarding claim 6, Cardone discloses:
wherein, in the first mode, the magnet units (29) have a same polarity in the second direction, and the magnet units (29) adjacent to each other in the first direction have different polarities.
Since Cardone discloses the invention similar with the Applicant, it would produce the same function.
Regarding claim 9, Cardone discloses:
wherein, in the second mode, the magnet units (29) alternately form different polarities in the first direction and alternately form different polarities in the second direction.
Since Cardone discloses the invention similar with the Applicant, it would produce the same function.
Regarding claim 7, Cardone discloses:
a yoke plate (10) disposed on a plane: and
a magnetic field generator (10a) which is disposed on the yoke plate (10) and includes magnet parts (26) including magnet units (29), magnetic bodies (27), and non-magnetic bodies (32),
wherein the magnetic bodies (32) overlap the magnet parts (26) in a plan view,
the non-magnetic bodies (32) overlap an area between the magnet units (29) in a plan view,
the magnet assembly (see the drawing below) operates in one of a first mode and a second mode (see col. 3, lines 17-20), and
the magnetic field generator (10a) generates a magnetic field below the magnetic bodies (27) and the non-magnetic bodies (32) in the first mode (Fig. 6) and does not substantially generate the magnetic field below the magnetic bodies (27) and the non-magnetic bodies (32) in the second mode (see col. 5, lines 47-58).
the magnet parts (26) include the magnet units (29) spaced apart from each other.
the magnetic bodies (27) and the non-magnetic bodies (32) extend in the second direction and are adjacent to each other in the first direction.
Since Cardone discloses the invention similar with the Applicant, it would produce the same function.
wherein, in the first mode, the magnet units (29) have a same polarity in the second direction, and the magnet units (29) adjacent to each other in the first direction have different polarities. Since Cardone discloses the invention similar with the Applicant, it would produce the same function.
Regarding claim 7, Cardone teaches the claimed subject as disclosed above, however, fails to explicitly disclose the magnetic field generated in the first mode has a first magnetic field intensity at a position corresponding to a central area of the magnetic bodies and a second magnetic field intensity at a position corresponding to a central area of the non-magnetic bodies, the first magnetic field intensity is a highest intensity of the magnetic field, and the second magnetic field intensity is a lowest intensity of the magnetic field.
It is inherent for the magnetic field generated in the first mode has a first magnetic field intensity at a position corresponding to a central area of the magnetic bodies and a second magnetic field intensity at a position corresponding to a central area of the non-magnetic bodies, the first magnetic field intensity is a highest intensity of the magnetic field, and the second magnetic field intensity is a lowest intensity of the magnetic field in order to provide the High Permeability of Magnetic Bodies.
When a magnetic field generator such as an area magnet is arranged as described the magnetic field will naturally be stronger under the magnetic material and weaker under the non-magnetic material, due to their physical properties. Magnetic bodies concentrate and channel magnetic field lines increasing intensity. Non-magnetic bodies do not conduct or concentrate field lines; so, the intensity is lower. If the arrangement for operation somehow alters this unless there is a shield or something in between that can manipulate the intensity. Also, since Cardone discloses the invention similar with the Applicant, it would produce the same function.
Regarding claim 8, Cardone discloses:
the magnetic bodies include adjacent magnetic bodies (see the drawing above).
However, Cardone, fails to explicitly disclose the adjacent magnetic bodies are spaced apart from each other by a distance in a range of about 1 mm to about 7 mm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the adjacent magnetic bodies are spaced apart from each other by a distance in a range of about 1 mm to about 7 mm for the purpose of Maximizing the Magnetic Field Gradient and Preventing Mechanical Collision and Demagnetization. Since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 has been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection above.
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 should be directed to Lisa Homza whose telephone number is (571) 272-3592.
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 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://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Lisa Nhung Homza/
Patent Examiner - Art Unit 2837
/SHAWKI S ISMAIL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights