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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS’s) submitted on 09/09/2025 and 01/07/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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) 1,2,3,5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirata (US 2003/0218391) in view of Piascik et al. (US 2013/0021125).
Regarding claim 1, Hirata teaches:
A voice coil actuator assembly (abstract), comprising:
a housing assembly (1,7);
a magnet assembly (2) disposed within, and movable relative to, the housing assembly,
the magnet assembly including a plurality of permanent magnets (para 11);
a bobbin (4) fixedly mounted within the housing assembly (1,7) and surrounding the magnet assembly (2),
the bobbin comprising a plurality of winding cavities (para 89, Fig 6),
a plurality of coils electrically connected in series (para 195),
each coil wound on the bobbin and disposed, one each, within a different one of the winding cavities (Figs 5-6, para 89),
wherein, when the coils are electrically energized (paras 18-23), a linear force is generated that causes relative motion between the magnet assembly and the housing assembly (paras 16-23).
Hirata does not teach each winding cavity at least partially coated with a dielectric coating material and having a bottom surface and two side walls; and each coil comprising magnet wire coated with the dielectric coating material.
Piascik et al. teach the use of a dielectric material (paras 2,17,19,21,22).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify Hirata to have each winding cavity at least partially coated with a dielectric coating material and having a bottom surface and two side walls; and each coil comprising magnet wire coated with the dielectric coating material, as Piascik et al. teach the use of a dielectric material.
The motivation to do so would allow one to increase operating temperature capabilities of the electromagnetic coil assembly (para 17 of Piascik et al.), permit operation in high temperatures (para 3) and be based on cost.
Regarding claim 2/1, Hirata teaches wherein the plurality of permanent magnets includes a plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnets (para 14 – approximately radial direction) and a plurality of radially magnetized permanent magnets (paras 11-13).
Regarding claim 3/2, Hirata teaches the invention as discussed above, except wherein each radially magnetized permanent magnet is disposed between two axially magnetized permanent magnets.
However, a skilled artisan would readily recognize the benefits of arranging the parts wherein each radially magnetized permanent magnet is disposed between two axially magnetized permanent magnets, since it would depend on cost, desired cooling and available space by adjacent elements.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention was made to modify Hirata to arrange wherein each radially magnetized permanent magnet is disposed between two axially magnetized permanent magnets, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japiske, 86 USPQ 70.
The motivation to do so would depend on cost (paras 20,33 of Piascik et al.), desired cooling (para 192 of Hirata) and available space by adjacent elements
Regarding claim 5/1, Hirata teaches wherein: each coil has at least one adjacent coil; and each coil is wound on the bobbin in an associated winding direction that is opposite to that of its at least one adjacent coil (Fig 8).
Claim(s) 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirata (US 2003/0218391) in view of Piascik et al. (US 2013/0021125), further in view of Umehara et al. (US 4888506).
Regarding claim 15/1, Hirata teaches the invention as discussed above, except further comprising: a thermal insulating sleeve disposed around and contacting the magnet assembly.
Umehara et al. teach a device further comprising: protective cover disposed around and contacting the magnet assembly (C4 ll 1-63).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention was made to modify Hirata to further comprising: a thermal insulating sleeve disposed around and contacting the magnet assembly, as Umehara et al. teaches.
The motivation to do so is it would allow one to protect the magnet as needed (C4 ll 1-5 of Umehara et al.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 6-14 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: In claim 4/1 inter alia, the specific limitations of “…wherein: the plurality of magnets includes a first set of axially magnetized permanent magnets and a second set of axially magnetized permanent magnets; and the magnet assembly further includes a magnetically permeable pole piece, the magnetically permeable pole piece disposed between the first set of axially magnetized permanent magnets and the second set of axially magnetized permanent magnets.”, in the combination as claimed are neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
In claim 6/5 inter alia, the specific limitations of “…wherein: the bobbin assembly is formed axially symmetric about a longitudinal axis of symmetry: the bobbin assembly includes M-number of sidewalls; the bobbin assembly further includes N-number of winding direction slots and N-number of wire return slots; each winding direction slot extends through a different one of the side walls in a non-zero angular direction relative to the longitudinal axis of symmetry; each wire return slot is formed in a different one of the side walls and is disposed parallel to the longitudinal axis of symmetry; and N is an integer, M is an integer, and M>N.”, in the combination as claimed are neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
Claims 7 and 8 are also allowable for depending on claim 6.
In claim 9/1 inter alia, the specific limitations of “…wherein: the housing assembly comprises a coil case that surrounds the bobbin; the coil case has an outer surface, and the voice coil actuator assembly further comprises a plurality of triply periodic minimal surface (TPMS) gyroid fins in contact with, and extending radially outward from, the outer surface of the coil case.”, in the combination as claimed are neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
Claims 10/9 and 11/9 are also allowable for depending on claim 9.
In claim 12/1 inter alia, the specific limitations of “…wherein: the bobbin additionally includes a plurality of non-winding cavities; and the voice coil actuator assembly further comprises a plurality of lattice structures, each lattice structure in contact with the bobbin and disposed within a different one of the non-winding cavities.”, in the combination as claimed are neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
In claim 13/1 inter alia, the specific limitations of “…wherein: the housing assembly comprises a coil case that surrounds the bobbin; the coil case has an inner surface; each coil, when wound on the bobbin, has a coil outer surface that is spaced apart from the inner surface of the coil case to define a coil cavity therebetween; and the voice coil actuator assembly further comprises a plurality of metal foil wraps, each metal foil wrap disposed within a different one of the coil cavities and contacting the coil outer surface and the inner surface of the coil case.”, in the combination as claimed are neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
In claim 14/1 inter alia, the specific limitations of “…wherein: the housing assembly comprises a coil case that surrounds the bobbin; the coil case has an inner surface; each coil, when wound on the bobbin, has a coil outer surface that is spaced apart from the inner surface of the coil case to define a coil cavity therebetween; and the voice coil actuator assembly further comprises alumina ceramic disposed within each of the coil cavities and contacting the coil outer surface and the inner surface of the coil case.”, in the combination as claimed are neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see PTO-892 for details.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAISHADH N DESAI whose telephone number is (571)270-3038. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5.
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, Christopher M Koehler can be reached at 571-272-3560. 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.
NAISHADH N. DESAI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2834
/NAISHADH N DESAI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights