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 Office Action is responsive to the Applicant' s communication filed December 16, 2024. In view of this communication, claims 1-11 are now pending in the application.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Japan on June 28, 2022. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the JP2022-103445 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on December 16, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on December 16, 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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 1, the limitation “the short-circuit flux path” is recited in line 15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as reading “the short-circuiting flux path”, consistent with the recitation “a short-circuiting flux path” in line 10.
Claims 5, and 8-11 are rejected due to their dependence on claim 1.
Regarding Claim 2, the limitation “the short-circuit flux path” is recited in line 15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as reading “the short-circuiting flux path”, consistent with the recitation “a short-circuiting flux path” in line 10.
Regarding Claim 3, the limitation “the short-circuit flux path” is recited in line 15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as reading “the short-circuiting flux path”, consistent with the recitation “a short-circuiting flux path” in line 10.
Claims 6-7 are rejected due to their dependence on claim 3.
Regarding Claim 4, the limitation “the short-circuit flux path” is recited in line 15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as reading “the short-circuiting flux path”, consistent with the recitation “a short-circuiting flux path” in line 10.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Matsumoto et al. (US 20230344304 A1) discloses relevant prior art in Figures 2-9.
Sutani et al. (US 20140167546 A1) discloses relevant prior art in Figures 1-17.
Atkins et al. (US 20140060241 A1) discloses relevant prior art in Figures 1-2.
Atkins et al. (US 9704631 B2) discloses relevant prior art in Figures 18-25.
Atkins et al. (US 8808096 B2) discloses relevant prior art in Figures 18-25.
Davis et al. (US 20180187794 A1) discloses relevant prior art in ¶ [0063].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLIE FRANK MANN whose telephone number is (703)756-1275. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30AM - 4:30PM PST.
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, Oluseye Iwarere can be reached at (571) 270-5112. 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.
/C.F.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/ALEXANDER A SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights