Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/723,532

COIL DEVICE AND PRINTED WIRING BOARD

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 24, 2024
Examiner
ROBINSON, KRYSTAL
Art Unit
2848
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Sumitomo Electric Industries, Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 0m
To Grant
80%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
652 granted / 756 resolved
+18.2% vs TC avg
Minimal -6% lift
Without
With
+-5.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
783
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
47.8%
+7.8% vs TC avg
§102
33.6%
-6.4% vs TC avg
§112
10.4%
-29.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 756 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. This application is a 371 of PCT/JP2022/047444 filed on December 22, 2022. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on June 24, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claim(s) 2-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Noguchi (WO 2020175476). In regards to claim 2, Noguchi teaches a printed wiring board (31)(figure 12) comprising: a base film (2) having a first main surface and a second main surface (top and bottom surface); and a coil wire (33) (coil pattern; page 5, paragraph 5) formed in a spiral shape (figure 11) on the first main surface and the second main surface (top and bottom surface), wherein the printed wiring board (31) has a portion that satisfies expression (2), Expression (2) : 0.35 < R3 x R4 5 0.85 wherein R3 is obtained by dividing a width of the coil wire by a pitch between two adjacent portions of the coil wire, and R4 is a ratio of a thickness of the coil wire on the first main surface and the second main surface to a distance between an upper surface of the coil wire on the first main surface and an upper surface of the coil wire on the second main surface (for the coil wiring, in page 10, paragraph 2, a more preferable upper thickness limit of 70 μm, in paragraph 2, a more preferable upper width limit of 30 μm, and in paragraph 3, a more preferable lower spacing limit of 10 μm. For the base film, in page 5 paragraph 4, a more preferable lower thickness limit of 10 μm. It is possible to adopt values close to these limits as appropriate. In this case, R3, the value obtained by dividing the coil wiring width (30 μm) by the pitch between two adjacent coil wiring portions (40 μm, which is within the more preferable pitch range described in paragraph 3), is 30/40. The ratio of the thickness of the coil wiring on the first and second principal surfaces (70 + 70 = 140 μm) to the distance between the top surface of the coil wiring on the first principal surface and the top surface of the coil wiring on the second principal surface (70 + 10 + 70 = 150 μm), R4, is 140/150. R3 × R4 = 0.7, which satisfies equation (2): 0.35 ≤ R3 × R4 ≤ 0.85). In regards to claim 3, Noguchi teaches a printed wiring board (31) comprising: a base film (2) having a first main surface and a second main surface (top and bottom surface); a coil wire (33) formed in a spiral shape (coil pattern; page 5, paragraph 5) on the first main surface and the second main surface (top and bottom surfaces); and a protective layer (34) disposed on the first main surface and the second main surface (top and bottom surfaces) so as to cover the coil wire (33)(figure 12), wherein the printed wiring board (31) has a portion that satisfies expression (3), Expression (3) :0.30 < R3 x R5 s 0.90 wherein R3 is obtained by dividing a width of the coil wire by a pitch between two adjacent portions of the coil wire, and R5 is a ratio of a thickness of the coil wire on the first main surface and the second main surface to a thickness of the printed wiring board (preferable lower limit of 15 μm for the insulating layer, and it is possible to adopt a value close to this limit as appropriate. In this case, as discussed above, the value R3 obtained by dividing the coil wiring width (30 μm) by the pitch between two adjacent coil wiring segments (40 μm, which is within the more preferable pitch range described in paragraph 3) is 30/40. The ratio R5 of the thickness of the coil wiring on the first and second principal surfaces (70 + 70 = 140 μm) to the thickness of the printed wiring board (15 + 70 + 10 + 70 + 15 = 180 μm) is 140/180. R3 × R5 is approximately 0.583; Therefore, formula (3): 0.40 ≤ R3 × R5 ≤ 0.90 and formula (4): 0.40 ≤ R3 × R5 ≤ 0.65 are satisfied). In regards to claim 4, Noguchi teaches the printed wiring board according to claim 3, wherein the printed wiring board (31) has a portion that satisfies expression (4). Expression (4) :0.40 < R3 x R5 s 0.65 (R3 × R5 is approximately 0.583). In regards to claim 5, Noguchi teaches the printed wiring board according to claim 3, wherein the protective layer (34) includes an adhesive layer covering the coil wire (33), and a thickness of the adhesive layer is 10 pm or more and 25 pm or less (page 2). In regards to claim 6, Noguchi teaches the printed wiring board according to any one of claims 2 to 5, wherein the coil wire has a portion that satisfies expression (5), Expression (5) :0.72 <W+P< 0.93wherein W is a width of the coil wire, and P is a pitch between two adjacent portions of the coil wire (the width of the coil wiring is 30 μm (20 μm to 40 μm), the pitch P between two adjacent coil wiring sections is 40 μm, and W P is 0.75; Therefore, equation (5): 0.72 ≤ W + P ≤ 0.93 is satisfied.) In regards to claim 7, Noguchi teaches the printed wiring board according to any one of claims 2, wherein the coil wire (33) has a portion where the thickness thereof is 40 pm or more and 60 pm or less (the lower limit of the coil wiring thickness may be 40 μm, and therefore a value within the range of 40 μm to 60 μm is also acceptable). In regards to claim 8, Noguchi teaches the printed wiring board according to any one of claims 2 to 7, wherein the coil wire (33) has a portion where the width thereof is 20 pm or more and 40 pm or less (the lower limit of the coil wiring thickness may be 40 μm, and therefore a value within the range of 40 μm to 60 μm is also acceptable). 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. The factual inquiries 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. 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(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noguchi (WO 2020175476) in view of IIda (US 2019/0157001). In regards to claim 1, Noguchi teaches a coil device (31)(figure 12) comprising: a base film (2) having a first main surface and a second main surface (top and bottom surface); and a coil wire (33) (coil pattern; page 5, paragraph 5) formed in a spiral shape (figure 11) on the first main surface and the second main surface (top and bottom surface), wherein the printed wiring board (31) has a portion that satisfies expression (2), Expression (2) : 0.35 < R3 x R4 5 0.85 wherein R3 is obtained by dividing a width of the coil wire by a pitch between two adjacent portions of the coil wire, and R4 is a ratio of a thickness of the coil wire on the first main surface and the second main surface to a distance between an upper surface of the coil wire on the first main surface and an upper surface of the coil wire on the second main surface (for the coil wiring, in page 10, paragraph 2, a more preferable upper thickness limit of 70 μm, in paragraph 2, a more preferable upper width limit of 30 μm, and in paragraph 3, a more preferable lower spacing limit of 10 μm. For the base film, in page 5 paragraph 4, a more preferable lower thickness limit of 10 μm. It is possible to adopt values close to these limits as appropriate. In this case, R3, the value obtained by dividing the coil wiring width (30 μm) by the pitch between two adjacent coil wiring portions (40 μm, which is within the more preferable pitch range described in paragraph 3), is 30/40. The ratio of the thickness of the coil wiring on the first and second principal surfaces (70 + 70 = 140 μm) to the distance between the top surface of the coil wiring on the first principal surface and the top surface of the coil wiring on the second principal surface (70 + 10 + 70 = 150 μm), R4, is 140/150. R3 × R4 = 0.7, which satisfies equation (2): 0.35 ≤ R3 × R4 ≤ 0.85). Noguchi does not teach a plurality of printed wiring boards; and an adhesive layer, wherein the plurality of printed wiring boards are stacked in a thickness direction of the coil device. Iida teaches a laminated coil (coil device) constructed from multiple substrates (printed wiring boards (see figure 5) with base materials (11 and 12) with adhesive layer 41. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to the coil device of Noguchi have a plurality of printed wiring boards; and an adhesive layer, wherein the plurality of printed wiring boards are stacked in a thickness direction of the coil device, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see the attachment of the USPTO-892 form. Communication Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRYSTAL ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)272-9258. The examiner can normally be reached on 9-5 M-F. 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, Timothy Dole can be reached on (571)-272-2229. 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. /KRYSTAL ROBINSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2848
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 24, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604407
SECURELY LINKED NEAR FIELD COMMUNICATION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12592527
Current Signaling Wall Socket Face Plate
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592552
CENTRAL TENSION LINE FOR OVERHEAD POWER TRANSMISSION CABLE HAVING DAMAGE DETECTION FUNCTION AND OVERHEAD POWER TRANSMISSION CABLE COMPRISING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587001
WIRING MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588159
Dual Hinge Cable Management Cover
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
80%
With Interview (-5.7%)
2y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 756 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month