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 .
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.
Claims 1, 3, 6, 8-15 and 18-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Joumard [US 2019/0027291].
Claim 1, Joumard discloses a magnetic field generation system (20) comprising a magnetic circuit comprising: a central pole (37) arranged above a plane (XY; figure 2B), the axis of said central pole extending along an orthogonal direction (Z figure 2A) substantially corresponding to the direction orthogonal to the plane; at least two planar poles (28A, 28B, 28C and 28D) arranged symmetrically on the plane with respect to the axis of the central pole (36; figures 2A and 3), each planar pole being supported by a portion of the magnetic circuit; and at least two coils (50A, 50B, 50C and 50D), including at least one coil associated with each planar pole (28A, 28B, 28C and 28D; figure 3), each coil associated with a planar pole surrounding the magnetic circuit portion supporting said planar pole (figure 3); two coils associated with two different planar poles being adapted to being connected to two distinct power supply circuits [paragraphs 0039, 0042 and 0043 discuss changing the current in different coils, therefore the coils must be independently connected to different power supply circuits); each power supply circuit being adapted to circulating through at least one coil to which it is connected a current having an intensity and a direction determined according to a desired magnetic field and to the orientation in the plane of the planar pole associated with said coil (paragraphs 0039 and 0044); wherein the further system comprises a processing unit adapted to determining the current to be circulated through each coil (not disclosed but inherent in order to select combinations of currents for the coils to achieve a desired magnetic field; paragraphs 0039 and 0044), the processing unit is adapted to determining an equivalent current, for example in the form of an equivalent current vector, for the desired magnetic field, and to determining the current to be circulated through each coil according to the determined equivalent current and to the orientation in the plane of the planar pole associated with said coil (not disclosed but inherent in order to select combinations of currents for the coils to achieve a desired magnetic field; paragraphs 0039 and 0044).
Claim 3, Joumard discloses a system according to claim 1, wherein the equivalent current is in the form of an equivalent current vector, (not disclosed but inherent in order to select combinations of currents [vector = intensity and direction, paragraph 0044] for the coils to achieve a desired magnetic field; paragraphs 0039 and 0044).
Claim 6, Joumard discloses a system according to claim 3, comprising four coils (50A, 50B, 50C and 50D) and four planar poles (28A, 28B, 28C and 28D) symmetrical with respect to two orthogonal planes containing the axis of the central pole (36, figures 2A-3), two adjacent planar poles being oriented by a second angle (α) of approximately 90° with respect to each other (figures 2A-3).
Claim 8, Joumard disclose a system according to claim 3, wherein the central pole (36) is surrounded with a fifth coil (52A, 52B) adapted to being connected to a distinct power supply circuit of the coils associated with the planar poles and adapted to circulating through said fifth coil a current having an intensity and a direction determined according to the desired magnetic field and to the orientation of the central pole (paragraphs 0039, 0042 and 0043 discuss changing the current in different coils, therefore the coils must be independently connected to different power supply circuits).
Claim 9, Joumard discloses a system according to any of claim 1, wherein each pole corresponds to a first end of an arm (26), the arms being coupled to a frame (22).
Claim 10, Joumard discloses a system according to claim 9, wherein each arm (26 associated with a planar pole (28A, 28B, 28C and 28D) extends substantially in a direction parallel to the plane, a second end of said arm being assembled to a bar (24) running inside of the at least one coil (50A, 50B, 50C and 50D) associated with said planar pole (28A, 28B, 28C and 28D), each bar substantially extending in the orthogonal direction (Z; figure 2A).
Claim 11, Joumard discloses a system according to claim 9, wherein the arm (36) associated with the central pole (37) is assembled with a horizontal rod (32) coupled to two opposite sides of the frame (22; figure 2A).
Claim 12, Joumard discloses a system according to claim 1, wherein the coils have outer diameters greater than 70 mm (paragraph 0037).
Claim 18, Joumard discloses a system according to claim 3, wherein the determined equivalent current vector and the desired magnetic field are dynamic (paragraph 0044).
Claim 20, Joumard discloses a system according to claim 8, wherein the current circulating through the fifth coil is: I5 = Ieqz; where Ieqz is the vector component representing the equivalent current Ieq along the orthogonal direction (Z). (it is inherent that a current is run though the fifth coil to generate a magnetic field, that current has a value I5; paragraph 0044).
Claims 13, 14, 15, 19 and 21, a magnetic field generation method implementing a system is inherent in the product structure as outlined in claims 1-3, 6 and 18 above by Joumard.
Claims 1, 3, 6, 8-10, 13-15 and 18-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dedman [WO 2021226652].
Claim 1, Dedman discloses a magnetic field generation system (10) comprising a magnetic circuit comprising: a central pole (34) arranged above a plane 24), the axis of said central pole extending along an orthogonal direction (figure 1) substantially corresponding to the direction orthogonal to the plane; at least two planar poles (free tips of 16C, 18C, 20C and 22C) arranged symmetrically on the plane with respect to the axis of the central pole (figure 1), each planar pole being supported by a portion of the magnetic circuit; and at least two coils (16A, 18A, 20A and 22A), including at least one coil associated with each planar pole, each coil associated with a planar pole surrounding the magnetic circuit portion supporting said planar pole (figure 1); two coils associated with two different planar poles being adapted to being connected to two distinct power supply circuits (figure 8; page 18 lines 17-15, five current drivers are used, one per coil); each power supply circuit being adapted to circulating through at least one coil to which it is connected a current having an intensity and a direction determined according to a desired magnetic field and to the orientation in the plane of the planar pole associated with said coil (third operating mode; page 18 lines 17-23); wherein the system further comprises a processing unit adapted to determining the current to be circulated through each coil (computer algorithm is used to determine each of the five coils currents; page 18 lines 17-23), the processing unit being adapted to determining an equivalent current, for the desired magnetic field, and to determining the current to be circulated through each coil according to the determined equivalent current and to the orientation in the plane of the planar pole associated with said coil (page 18 lines 17-23).
Claim 3, Dedman discloses a system according to claim 2, wherein the equivalent current is in the form of an equivalent current (page 18 lines 17-23).
Claim 6, Dedman discloses a system according to claim 1, comprising four coils (16A, 18A, 20A and 22A) and four planar poles (free tips 16C, 18C 20C and 22C) symmetrical with respect to two orthogonal planes containing the axis of the central pole (top of 34B, figure 1), two adjacent planar poles being oriented by a second angle (α) of approximately 90° with respect to each other (figure 1).
Claim 8, Dedman disclose a system according to claim 1, wherein the central pole (36) is surrounded with a fifth coil (36a) adapted to being connected to a distinct power supply circuit of the coils associated with the planar poles and adapted to circulating through said fifth coil a current having an intensity and a direction determined according to the desired magnetic field and to the orientation of the central pole (third mode; page 18 lines 17-23).
Claim 9, Dedman discloses a system according to claim 1, wherein each pole (free tips of 16C, 18C, 20C, 22C) corresponds to a first end of an arm (16C, 18C, 20C and 22C), the arms being coupled to a frame (24).
Claim 10, Dedman discloses a system according to claim 9, wherein each arm (6C, 18C, 20C and 22C) associated with a planar pole (free tips 16C, 18C 20C and 22C) extends substantially in a direction parallel to the plane, a second end of said arm being assembled to a bar (10B, 18B, 20B and 22B) running inside of the at least one coil (16A, 18A, 20A and 22A) associated with said planar pole, each bar substantially extending in the orthogonal direction (figure 1).
Claim 18, Dedman discloses a system according to claim 3, wherein the determined equivalent current vector and the desired magnetic field are dynamic (page 18 lines 17-23).
Claim 20, Dedman discloseS a system according to claim 8, wherein the current circulating through the fifth coil is: I5 = Ieqz; where Ieqz is the vector component representing the equivalent current Ieq along the orthogonal direction (Z). (it is inherent that a current is run though the fifth coil to generate a magnetic field, that current has a value I5; third mode; page 18 lines 17-23).
Claims 13, 14, 15 and 19, a magnetic field generation method implementing a system is inherent in the product structure as outlined in claims 1-3, 6 and 19 above by Dedman.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joumard [US 2019/0027291].
Claim 4, Joumard discloses a system according to claim 1, comprising two coils and two planar poles arranged symmetrically on the plane with respect to the axis of the central pole (figures 4a-5) and a system comprising four coils and four planar poles arranged symmetrically on the plane with respect to the axis of the central pole wherein other configuration are possible (paragraph 0054).
Joumard fails to specifically teach that the system comprises three coils and three planar poles arranged symmetrically on the plane with respect to the axis of the central pole and being oriented by a first angle of approximately 1200 with respect to one another.
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 system of
Joumard to comprises three coils and three planar poles arranged symmetrically on the plane with respect to the axis of the central pole and being oriented by a first angle of approximately 1200 with respect to one another in view of the other configurations taught by Joumard as an obvious design choice among a finite numbers of known symmetrical multipole configurations to achieve the desired magnetic field.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 7, 16 and 17 are 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/06/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., not requiring relays or does not seek to maximize the current generated by each coil) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant contends that neither Joumard nor Dedman disclose precisely adjusting the three components of the magnetic field.
In response, Joumard specifically discloses driving coils with selected intensities and directions to obtain desired magnetic vectors. There Joumard’s control circuit adjusts currents to independently set the magnetic field in the X, Y and Z directions as claimed.
“[0044] Generally, by combinations of currents of selected intensities and directions flowing through the coils, one may advantageously select the orientation and the intensity of the magnetic field under polar end 37 in a volume located under plane 29, the magnetic field generator being entirely located above plane 29.’ (paragraph 0044)
In response, Dedman specifically discloses driving coils with selected intensities and directions to obtain desired magnetic vectors (page 18 lines 17-23). There Dedman’s control circuit adjusts currents to independently set the magnetic field in the X, Y and Z directions as claimed.
“In a third mode of operation, five current drivers and five coils are provided, but the field in the Z-direction may be boosted over what would be possible with the Z-coil alone, by simultaneously operating the four electromagnetic elements in phase. A suitable computer algorithm may be used to determine the appropriate current to each of the five coils, so as to produce the desired field component in X, Y and Z. . Therefore, this mode is effectively a combination of the first and second modes.” (page 18 lines 17-23).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Bernard Rojas whose telephone number is (571)272-1998. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. thru Fri. 7:00 am - 4:00 pm.
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.
/BERNARD ROJAS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights