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 Objections
Claim 36 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim does not end in a period. Appropriate correction is required.
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 31-33 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.
At line 11, claim 13 refers to "another of the core pieces". The claim limitation "said other of the core pieces" (claim 32, lines 3 and 5; claim 33, lines 3, 4 and 5; claim 36, lines 4 and 5) lacks proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 31, the claim limitations “the same other of the core pieces” and “said same other of the core pieces” lack proper antecedent basis.
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) 13, 14, 20, 21, 32, 34 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takemura (JP2012075213A).
Takemura discloses the claimed invention as follows:
Claim 13. A stator comprising (1):
a plurality of core pieces (10 with 20 and 30) each of which includes a magnetic material part (20) in which a yoke (22) extending in an arc shape and a tooth (24) protruding from the yoke toward a rotation axis are formed, and a coil (30) wound around the tooth, the plurality of core pieces being arranged in a ring shape (see Fig. 3) around the axis, wherein a coupling part(18 with 19; see Fig. 8) having a fitting structure is formed between the core pieces adjacent to each other in an arrangement of the ring shape (see Fig. 8), the fitting structure allowing (some degree of) rotation about a pillar portion (191) and restricting displacement in the axis direction (see [0062]) by a snap-fit coupling1 that is formed with the pillar portion (191) being provided on the yoke side of one of the core pieces and extending in a direction parallel to the axis and an open ring portion (18) being provided on the yoke side of another of the core pieces, and
the open ring portion opens in the circumferential direction to permit the open ring portion and the pillar portion to be connected by snap-fit coupling in the circumferential direction.
Claim 14. The stator according to claim 13, wherein a direction in which the pillar portion is fitted into the open ring portion is perpendicular to an extending direction of the pillar portion. Circumferential direction is perpendicular to the axial direction.
Claim 20. A rotating electrical machine (90) comprising: a stator (1) according to claim 13; a rotor (92) coaxially disposed on a side of an inner peripheral face of the stator; and a housing (94) holding the stator and including a bearing (961, 962) to support the rotor rotatably.
Claim 21. A rotating electrical machine (90) comprising: a stator (1) according to claim 14; a rotor (92) coaxially disposed on a side of an inner peripheral face of the stator; and a housing (94) holding the stator and including a bearing (961, 962) to support the rotor rotatably.
Claim 32. The stator according to claim 13, wherein the open ring portion of said other of the core pieces includes an opening portion (182), and a center of the opening portion in said other of the core pieces is provided closer to a central side of the yoke in the circumferential direction in the one of the core pieces than a line extending from a center of the open ring portion in said other of the core pieces toward the axis. See Figs. 6 and 8.
Claim 34. The stator according to claim 13, wherein, in the one of the core pieces, a first pillar portion (19 of 11, Fig. 5) is provided on the yoke side of the core piece on an upper axial side, a first open ring portion (18 of 11, Fig. 5) is provided on the opposite side to the first pillar portion in the circumferential direction, a second pillar portion (19 of 12, Fig. 5) is provided on the yoke side of the core piece on a lower axial side, and a second open ring portion (18 of 12, Fig. 5) is provided on the opposite side to the second pillar portion in the circumferential direction.
Claim 35. The stator according to claim 34, wherein, in the one of the core pieces, the second open ring portion is provided on the opposite side in the axial direction with respect to the first pillar portion on the upper axial side (see Fig. 5), and the second pillar portion is provided on the opposite side in the axial direction with respect to the first open ring portion on the upper axial side.
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.
Claim(s) 15 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takemura in view of Echizen.
Takemura further discloses the claimed invention as follows:
Claim 15. The stator according to claim 13, wherein the pillar portion and the open ring portion are provided as an integrally molded product of an insulator
Claim 22. A rotating electrical machine (90) comprising: a stator (1) according to claim 15; a rotor (92) coaxially disposed on a side of an inner peripheral face of the stator; and a housing (94) holding the stator and including a bearing (961, 962) to support the rotor rotatably.
Echizen discloses a stator very similar to that of Takemura, wherein a pillar portion (44) and the open ring portion (53) are provided as an integrally molded product of an insulator made of resin (see [0030]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to use a resin for forming the insulators of Takemura, as matter of using a known material in a similar application, with predictable results.
Claim(s) 16 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takemura in view of APA (admitted prior art).
Regarding claim 16, in the Office Action mailed 2/13/2025 the examiner took official notice of the fact that forming sectional cores from powder, as compression-molded products, is ubiquitous in the art, as an alternative magnetic core construction for motors. This is taken as admitted prior art, since Applicant did not traverse the assertion of official notice (see MPEP 2144.03(C)).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to replace the laminated sectional cores of Takemura ([0030]) with compressed powder cores, as a simple substitution of one core construction type for another, with predictable results.
Claim(s) 13-15, 20-22 and 31-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Echizen (JP 2010110048 A) in view of Takemura.
Echizen discloses the claimed invention as follows (limitations not disclosed are crossed out, below):
Claim 13. A stator (3, Fig. 1) comprising:
a plurality of core pieces (10 together with 5 and 6 in Fig. 1; see [0028] and [0029]) each of which includes a magnetic material part (10, Fig. 1) in which a yoke (11, Fig. 1; see [0029]) extending in an arc shape and a tooth (8, Fig. 1; see [0029]) protruding from the yoke toward a rotation axis are formed, and a coil (6, Fig. 1; see [0028]) wound around the tooth, the plurality of core pieces being arranged in a ring shape around the axis, wherein
a coupling part (13, Fig. 1) having a fitting structure is formed between the core pieces adjacent to each other in an arrangement of the ring shape, the fitting structure allowing rotation about a pillar portion (44, Fig. 2(a)) and restricting displacement in the axis direction by a snap-fit coupling that is formed with the pillar portion being provided on the yoke side of one of the core pieces and extending in a direction parallel to the axis and an open ring portion (54, Fig. 2(b)) being provided on the yoke side of another of the core pieces (see alternating insulation members 40 and 50 on consecutive teeth, in Fig. 1), and
Claim 14. The stator according to claim 13, wherein a direction in which the pillar portion is fitted into the open ring portion is perpendicular to an extending direction of the pillar portion. See [0052] and arrow Ya in Fig. 4.
Claim 15. The stator according to claim 13, wherein the pillar portion and the open ring portion are provided as an integrally molded product of an insulator made of resin (see [0030]), the insulator being interposed between the magnetic material part and the coil (see [0028]).
Claim 20-22. A rotating electrical machine comprising:
a stator (3) respectively according to claims 13-15;
a rotor (4, Fig. 1) coaxially disposed on a side of an inner peripheral face of the stator; and
a housing (2, Fig. 1) holding the stator and including a bearing2 to support the rotor rotatably.
Claim 31. The stator according to claim 13,
Claim 32. The stator according to claim 13,
Claim 33. The stator according to claim 13,
Claim 34. The stator according to claim 13, wherein, in the one of the core pieces, a first pillar portion is provided on the yoke side of the core piece on an upper axial side, a first open ring portion is provided on the opposite side to the first pillar portion in the circumferential direction, a second pillar portion is provided on the yoke side of the core piece on a lower axial side, and a second open ring portion is provided on the opposite side to the second pillar portion in the circumferential direction. See [0078]. Although Echizen does not explicitly mention it, it is understood the bottom part of the core piece also has an open ring portion and a pillar portion. [0036] clarifies the tooth covering portion 1 is U-shaped, covering one axial surface of the tooth portion 8 and both circumferential side surfaces. This implies a second U-shaped insulator is provided to cover the lower axial surface. If Applicant disagrees, Echizen implies this, such an arrangement is, nevertheless deemed to have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in order to fully cover the tooth portion, facilitating winding and reducing the risk of the coil shorting to the core if the wire insulation fails.
Claim 35. The stator according to claim 34,
Claim 36. The stator according to claim 13, wherein the pillar portion is provided so as to extend from a base portion (43) having a larger diameter than the pillar portion (44), and
Regarding claim 13, Takemura discloses an invention similar to that of Echizen, and shows it is known to position the opening 182 of the open ring portion 18 such that the open ring portion opens in the circumferential direction to permit the open ring portion and the pillar portion 191 to be connected by snap-fit coupling in the circumferential direction.
In view of the teachings of Takemura, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify the open ring portion of Echizen to be rotated such that the opening 54a faces the circumferential direction. Replacing one open ring portion design with another conventional open ring design would have been obvious and with predictable results.
Regarding claims 32 and 33, Echizen discloses the claimed opening portion (54a) and the claimed notch (54b), but not located at a position as claimed. In rotating the position of the opening to be facing the circumferential direction, as discussed with respect to claim 13, the limitation of claim 32 would also be met. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to maintain the portion of the notch relative to the opening. Therefore, in modifying the open ring portion of Echizen as discussed above, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious that the notch would be disposed as claimed in claim 33.
Regarding claim 34, based on [0078] of Echizen, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to implement the modification mentioned above, while keeping this arrangement of alternating pillars and open ring portions in the circumferential direction. Further, regarding claim 35, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to have the same or the opposite pillar portion and open ring portion arrangement at the lower axial end as at the upper axial end, these are obvious design choices, with few possibilities to choose from. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found predictable the result of such an arrangement, without any effect on the functioning of the stator or the ability to assemble it.
Regarding claim 36, the invention of Echizen differs from the claimed invention in that the base portion (53) of the open ring portion (54) in the one of the core pieces is sandwiched between the magnetic material part (10) present in at least the one or said another of the core pieces and a base portion (43) of the pillar portion (44) in said another of the core pieces.
However, referring to Fig. 2(a) and 2(b), one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify the insulators 40 and 50 so that pillar and the open ring portion change position and orientation, in the axial direction, as in the attached figure (compare to Fig. 2). Note that these figures do not include the modification made in view of Takemura.
PNG
media_image1.png
287
480
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Changing the location of the two elements would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, with predictable results, and without affecting the manner in which the stator is assembled and functions.
Regarding claim 31, modifying Echizen as proposed above with respect to claim 36, results in the claimed gap between the magnetic material and the base portion of the base of the open ring portion.
Claim(s) 16 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Echizen as modified in view of Takemura, in view of APA (admitted prior art).
Regarding claim 16, in the Office Action mailed 2/13/2025 the examiner took official notice of the fact that forming sectional cores from powder, as compression-molded products, is ubiquitous in the art, as an alternative magnetic core construction for motors. This is taken as admitted prior art, since Applicant did not traverse the assertion of official notice (see MPEP 2144.03(C)).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to replace the laminated sectional cores of Echizen with compressed powder cores, as a simple substitution of one core construction type for another, with predictable results.
Regarding claim 23, Echizen discloses the electrical machine comprising a rotor 4 and a housing 2. As discussed in footnote 2, a bearing must also necessarily be present.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 27, 28, 29 and 30 are allowable over the prior art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 13-23 and 31-35 have been considered but are not persuasive. The present Office Action includes a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1). However, with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103, Applicant’s argument that “Echizen's elements 53 would have to be substantially redesigned to function in the same way if modified so as to open in the circumferential direction to permit the open ring portion and the pillar portion to be connected by snap-fit coupling in the circumferential direction.”
The examiner agrees that such a modification would not have been obvious based on Exhizen alone. However, Takemura discloses an open ring portion oriented as claimed, thereby providing a sufficient teaching to allow one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Echizen.
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 LIVIUS R CAZAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8032. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday noon-8:30 pm ET.
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, Thomas Hong can be reached at 571-272-0993. 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.
/LIVIUS R. CAZAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3729
1 Engaging projection 19 engages engaging recess 18 when the core pieces are arranged in a ring shape (see [0054] and [0055]). [0054] discuses projection 19 widening opening 182 when engaging projection 19 is engaged with the recess 18.
2 A bearing surface must, necessarily be present, it is not possible to dispose a rotor to rotate relative to the housing without a bearing.
Prosecution Insights