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 § 103
1. 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.
2. Claims 1-2, 4, 7, 10, 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higo et al. (Pub. No. US 20190385647) in view of Liu et al. (Pub. No. US20040145002)
As per claim 1, Higo discloses an information processing device (fig.2, a magnetic memory 1) comprising:
a plurality of magnetic circuits (fig.2, a magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ) MTJ element 10 is a magnetic storage elements);
at least one input terminal that is connected to at least one of the plurality of magnetic circuits (paragraph 53, one terminal into of the MTJ element 10);
at least one output terminal that is connected to at least one of the plurality of magnetic circuits (paragraph 53, one terminal out of the MTJ element 10); and
at least one connection portion that electrically or magnetically couples at least two of the plurality of magnetic circuits (paragraph 53, one terminal of the MTJ element 10 is electrically connected to further another wiring (not shown) and a word line (not shown) via a selection transistor (not shown), and another terminal of the MTJ element 10 is electrically connected to a bit line).
Higo discloses all the limitations as the above but does not explicitly disclose each of the magnetic circuits including a ferromagnetic material that forms a closed magnetic circuit through which a magnetic flux circulates. However, Liu discloses this (paragraph 6, a ferromagnetic element is capable of storing one bit of information in the form of the direction of magnetic flux imparted to the element by means of an applied electric current. Ferromagnetic memory stores information in response to current passed through an elemental inductor, the core of which is formed of ferromagnetic material.)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Liu with the teaching of Higo so as to yield the predicatable result so as to control efficiently, thus enhance the system performance.
As per claim 2, Higo discloses wherein at least one of the plurality of magnetic circuits has a shape different from the other magnetic circuits (paragraph 78, design rules which define the shapes, sizes, or the like of the wirings such as bit lines and word lines and the contact parts connecting the wirings).
As per claim 4, Higo discloses wherein at least one of the plurality of magnetic circuits is connected to a load (paragraph 6, determining the four types of resistance states).
As per claim 7, Higo discloses wherein the connection portion includes a switch that switches an electrical or magnetic coupling state between at least two magnetic circuits (fig.5, switches 60a and 60b).
As per claim 12, Higo discloses wherein each of the plurality of magnetic circuits is connected to each other through one connection portion. (paragraph 53, one terminal of the MTJ element 10 is electrically connected to further another wiring (not shown) and a word line (not shown) via a selection transistor (not shown), and another terminal of the MTJ element 10 is electrically connected to a bit line).
As per claim 13, Higo discloses wherein each of the plurality of magnetic circuits is connected to all of the different magnetic circuits through the connection portion. (paragraph 78, design rules which define the shapes, sizes, or the like of the wirings such as bit lines and word lines and the contact parts connecting the wirings).
As per claim 14, Higo discloses the information processing device further comprising:
an input layer that is connected to the input terminal (paragraph 53, one terminal into of the MTJ element 10); and
an output layer that is connected to the output terminal (paragraph 53, one terminal out of the MTJ element 10).
3. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higo et al. (Pub. No. US 20190385647) in view of Liu et al. (Pub. No. US20040145002) and further in view of Ishizuka et al. (US Patent No. US12504091)
As per claim 3, Higo in view of Liu disclose all the limitations as the above but does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one of the plurality of magnetic circuits has a gap in a portion of a magnetic path through which a magnetic flux circulates. However, Ishizuka discloses this. (col. 14, lines 35-38, magnetic-flux-density threshold K is used to determine whether or not the rotor 41 is at a proximity position Rk or a position nearer the reference position Rx than is the proximity position Rk.)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Ishizuka with the teaching of Higo in view of Liu so as to induce electric current and voltage to make system more efficient, thus enhance the system performance.
4. Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higo et al. (Pub. No. US 20190385647) in view of Liu et al. (Pub. No. US20040145002) and further in view of Fernandes et al. (Pub. No. US 20160099517)
As per claim 5, Higo discloses all the limitations as the above but does not explicitly disclose wherein the connection portion includes a coil wound around two or more different magnetic circuits. However, Fernandes discloses this (paragraph 87, Excitation coil is wound in a direction to create a magnetic field opposing the field of permanent magnet, with both fields having an axial direction indicated by center line.)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Fernandes with the teaching of Higo in view of Liu so as to strengthening the magnetic field proportional to the number of turns and current magnitude to make system more efficient, thus enhance the system performance.
As per claim 6, Higo discloses wherein the at least one connection portion is a plurality of connection portions, the plurality of connection portions include a first connection portion and a second connection portion, the first connection portion and the second connection portion each include a coil wound around two or more different magnetic circuits (paragraph 87, Excitation coil is wound in a direction to create a magnetic field opposing the field of permanent magnet, with both fields having an axial direction indicated by center line), and the number of turns of a coil constituting the first connection portion is different from the number of turns of a coil constituting the second connection portion (paragraph 87, excitation coil has at least 10 turns of magnet wire. Excitation coil can be automatically activated in accordance with instructions contained in the memory of the processor, and/or can be activated by a user operating a switch).
5. Claims 8-9, 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higo et al. (Pub. No. US 20190385647) in view of Liu et al. (Pub. No. US20040145002) and further in view of Rudkowski et al. (Pub. No. US 20190003819)
As per claim 8, Higo in view of Liu disclose all the limitations as the above but does not explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of magnetic circuits are arranged three-dimensionally through the connection portion. However, Rudkowski discloses this (paragraph 70, all three ring magnets 55, 57, 58 of the first axial magnetic bearing 47 have the same radial dimensions and are preferably formed identically.)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to consider the teachings of Rudkowski with the teaching of Higo in view of Liu so as to create forces that can cause motion, levitation, or torque, often utilized to enhance motor efficiency by directing flux to make system more efficient, thus enhance the system performance.
As per claim 9, Rudkowski discloses wherein the plurality of magnetic circuits are arranged in a ring shape through the connection portion. (paragraph 70, all three ring magnets 55, 57, 58 of the first axial magnetic bearing 47 have the same radial dimensions and are preferably formed identically.)
As per claim 11, Rudkowski discloses wherein the plurality of magnetic circuits are arranged in a tree shape through the connection portion. (paragraph 70, all three ring magnets 55, 57, 58 of the first axial magnetic bearing 47 have the same radial dimensions and are preferably formed identically.)
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Ma et al. [Pub. No. US 20250237712] discloses where a center hole passes through a conductor to be measured, and a magnetic ring air gap is machined on one of the ferrite rings to arrange a current monitoring unit circuit.
Response to Amendment
7. Applicant's amendment filed on 6/25/2026 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
8. 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.
Contact Information
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIM T HUYNH whose telephone number is (571)272-3635 or via e-mail addressed to [kim.huynh3@uspto.gov]. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7.00AM- 4:00PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tsai Henry can be reached at (571)272-4176 or via e-mail addressed to [Henry.Tsai@USPTO.GOV].
The fax phone numbers for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned are (571)273-8300 for regular communications and After Final communications. Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is (571)272-2100.
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.
/K. T. H./
Examiner, Art Unit 2184
/HENRY TSAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2184
Prosecution Insights