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 action is in response to the communication filed 5/18/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the pending claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
The previous 112 rejections are withdrawn in light of applicant’s amendments, as applicant has removed the term “annular” and thus removed the purpose of the rejections.
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.
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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toyama (US 2019/0113404) in view of RYU (KR 20110039875A).
PNG
media_image1.png
620
708
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Note the cited paragraphs for RYU come from the provided English machine translation.
As to Claim 1,
Toyama discloses A magnetic yoke assembly comprising: a pair of yoke cores (81,82) (Figures 2,3,8), (Paragraph [0035]); a collar (83) (Figures 2,3,8), (Paragraph [0035]); and a tubular holder (84) that holds the pair of yoke cores and the collar (Figures 2,3,8), (Paragraph [0035]); wherein the holder includes a gear portion (7) that includes a plurality of external teeth protruding radially outward from the holder (Figures 1,2) (Paragraph [0022]), the collar is disposed near an inner periphery of the gear portion (Figure 2), and an axial range in which the collar is present in the holder overlaps an axial range in which the gear portion is provided in the holder (Figures 2 and 8 / note axial ranges are not limited to the axial extent of the collar or holder, and that ranges can be defined that include the above collar and holder as claimed).
Toyama does not disclose the collar is disposed within an inner periphery of the gear portion, and an axial extent of the collar within the holder overlaps an axial extent of the external teeth along the holder.
RYU discloses the collar is disposed within an inner periphery of the gear portion (200) (Figure 4 / note that when combined, the collar will be within the gear portion), and an axial extent of the collar within the holder overlaps an axial extent of the external teeth along the holder (Figure 4 / note the gear portion fits within the holder’s grooves 101,102 and the collar is radially inside the gear portion (200)), (Paragraphs [0037],[0038]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Toyoma to modify the location of the collar relative to the gear portion to therefore include the collar is disposed within an inner periphery of the gear portion, and an axial extent of the collar within the holder overlaps an axial extent of the external teeth along the holder as taught by RYU in order to advantageously maintain a perfectly circular shape overall after manufacturing (Paragraph [0039]), and to therefore improve the accuracy of rotation detection (Paragraph [0042]), and to advantageously provide a more compact portion for the sensing device that needs less room to be implemented, thereby allowing the device to be used in in areas with limit space.
As to Claim 2,
PNG
media_image2.png
263
303
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Toyama discloses the collar includes a body portion that fits onto a shaft, and a flange portion protruding radially inward from an inner peripheral surface of the body portion and configured to abut on an end of the shaft (see above figure), (Figure 2).
As to Claim 3,
Toyama discloses the collar is configured to be moved relative to the shaft in a first direction along an axis of the holder to fit onto the shaft (Figures 3,8), (Paragraph [0053]); and tooth spaces between the plurality of external teeth are open in the first direction. (Figures 3,8 / note the gap between teeth in the first (circumferential) direction).
As to Claim 4,
PNG
media_image3.png
222
258
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Toyama discloses the holder further includes a positioning portion configured to circumferentially position the holder with respect to a shaft onto which the collar is fitted (see above figure / note this portion of the hold is configured to position the holder on the shaft, such that it is circumferentially positioned about the shaft).
As to Claim 5,
Toyama discloses A sensor device comprising: a sensor magnet (85) configured to rotate with a first shaft ((Paragraph [0035]); the magnetic yoke assembly according to claim 1 (see the above rejection of Claim 1), the magnetic yoke assembly being configured to rotate with a second shaft (232) connected to the first shaft via a torsion bar (233) (Figures 2,3), (Paragraphs [0029],[0053]) ; a pair of magnetic flux collecting members (86,87) disposed around an outer periphery of the magnetic yoke assembly with a space between the pair of magnetic flux collecting members and the outer periphery of the magnetic yoke assembly (Figures 2,3), (Paragraph [0034]); a magnetic sensor (73,74) that generates a signal according to magnetic flux flowing through the pair of magnetic flux collecting members (Figures 2-4), (Paragraph [0034]); a driven gear (76,77) that rotates in response to rotation of the magnetic yoke assembly (Paragraph [0036] / note the gears 76,77 are driven by rotation of the gearing (7) from the yoke); and a rotation sensor (73,74) that generates a signal according to a rotation angle of the driven gear (Paragraphs [0036],[0053]).
As to Claim 6,
Toyama discloses the collar of the magnetic yoke assembly is configured to be moved relative to an end of the second shaft in a first direction along an axis of the holder to fit onto the end (Figures 2-4 / note the collar / fitting ring is fit onto the end of the shaft in a downward direction, which is the first direction); and the driven gear is disposed in a direction opposite to the first direction with respect to the end (Figure 2 / note the driven gear is upward relative to the end up the shaft, and is therefore upward relative to the shaft end and this in an opposite direction).
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 DAVID M. SCHINDLER whose telephone number is (571)272-2112. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-4:30pm.
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, Lee Rodak can be reached at 571-270-5628. 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.
DAVID M. SCHINDLER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2858
/DAVID M SCHINDLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights