DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/12/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 17, the applicant argues that “…the insulating coating (103) shown in FIG. 5 of Kamibayashi is not analogous to features recited in amended claim 1 in which "…the first layer includes a first separation that extends across a width of the first layer and divides two slot segments that are identical in height and width"…” This argument is not persuasive because Figure 5 of Kamibayashi clearly shows separations between slot segments (102) with structures (103) positioned between the slot segments. There is no further argument made by the applicant as to the specifics of why the structure of Kamibayashi does not show the claimed separation.
On page 18, the applicant argues that “Additionally, Ooiwa, Kamibayashi, and Paetzold fail to teach or suggest the feature that is recited in amended claim 1 where "for each of the plurality of hairpin wires a width of each of the first leg and the second leg remains constant along its length from an end turn to an opposing end, wherein the width is measured alone a lateral axis and the length is measure along an axis that is perpendicular to the lateral axis." Ooiwa contrastingly discloses a stator with a hairpin wire that is twisted by 900 (as shown in FIG. 3 of Ooiwa, reproduced below), thereby precluding the wires width as measured along a lateral axis to be maintained.” This argument is not persuasive because a width of each of the shown legs remains constant as shown in figure 3 from an end turn (231c, 232c) to an opposing end (231d or 231e, and 232d or 232e) as shown in figure 3 and other figures.
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 12-13 and 15-17 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.
In re claim 12, there are two sets of separations claimed within the claim. It is unclear whether they are the same separations or different separations. Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1, 6, and 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ooiwa et al. (US 2010/0026132) in view of Kamibayashi et al. (US 8049390) and Paetzold et al. (US 2012/0206094).
In re claim 1, Ooiwa, in figures 1-15, discloses a system for a stator assembly of an electric motor, comprising: a plurality of segmented slots positioned around an inner cylindrical surface of the stator (22); and a plurality of hairpin wires (231,232) of different widths stacked within each of the segmented slots; wherein each of the segmented slots includes four layers wherein each layer in the four layers houses one or more legs of one or more corresponding hairpin wires; wherein each of the plurality of hairpins wires includes a first leg and a second leg (extending from 231c, 232c as shown in figure 3); wherein for each of the plurality of hairpin wires a width of each of the first leg and the second leg remains constant along its length from an end turn (231c, 232c) to an opposing end, wherein the width is measured along a lateral axis and the length is measure along an axis that is perpendicular to the lateral axis (as best seen in figure 3); wherein the four layers sequentially increase in width and decrease in height in a radially outward direction (as seen in figures 8-9 and 13-15); wherein a first width of a first layer of the four layers is less than a second width of a second layer of the four layers, the first layer proximal to the inner cylindrical surface of the stator; wherein the four layers include four layers; wherein a third width of a third layer of the four layers is greater than the second width; and wherein a fourth width of a fourth layer of the four layers is greater than the third width (as shown in figures 8-9 and 13-15), wherein the first layer is proximal to a rotor of the electric motor, wherein the third layer is adjacent to the fourth layer, wherein the second layer is adjacent to the third layer, and wherein the first layer is adjacent to the second layer (as seen in the figures). Ooiwa does not teach each layer having at least two legs. Kamibayashi teaches that it is known in the art to have each layer have a separation separating two separate legs/wires/windings across the width of each layer (the wires are separated within the slot as shown in the figures) of the same height and width in each layer, shown in a similar device and having the claimed widths relationships in each layer (see figure 5). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used layers of two (or more) windings as taught by Kamibayashi instead of single layer windings in the device of Ooiwa to increase redundancy and allow for independent current control in the windings. Ooiwa does not explicitly discuss a busbar. Paetzold however, in figures 1-5, teaches a similar device having phase busbars connecting an input voltage source to the wires (see paragraph 17 for detailed disclosure). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used phase busbars as taught by Paetzold in the device of Ooiwa/Kamibayashi to connect the wires to the input voltage source so that the device can be powered.
In re claim 6, Ooiwa, in figures 1-15, discloses fifth-seventh separations dividing the four layers from one another (as best seen in figures 8-9 and 13-15).
In re claim 8, Ooiwa, in figures 1-15, discloses end turns (231c, 232c).
In re claim 9, Ooiwa, in figures 1-15, discloses a motor housing (4) directly circumferentially surrounding the stator assembly.
Claim(s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ooiwa et al. (US 2010/0026132) in view of Kamibayashi et al. (US 8049390), Paetzold, and Horng et al. (US 2007/0216239).
In re claim 10, Ooiwa/Kamibayashi/Paetzold disclose the claimed device but do not explicitly discuss a permanent magnet in a rotor core. Horng however teaches that it is known in the art to use a permanent magnet (33) in a rotor core. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used a permanent magnet as taught by Horng in the device of Ooiwa/Kamibayashi/Paetzold to increase magnetic field strength of the rotor.
In re claim 11, Ooiwa/Kamibayashi/Paetzold disclose the claimed device but do not explicitly discuss a balancing plate. Horng however teaches that it is known in the art to use a balancing plate (35 or 45) coupled to the rotor core. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used a balancing plate as taught by Horng in the device of Ooiwa/Kamibayashi/Paetzold to assist in rotational balance of the device.
Claim(s) 12-13 and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ooiwa et al. (US 2010/0026132) in view of Rahman et al. (US 2010/0320864) and Paetzold et al. (US 2012/0206094).
In re claim 12, Ooiwa, in figures 1-15, discloses a system for conductive windings for a stator (22) of an electric motor, comprising: a first set of conductive hairpin winding wires of a first width extending through a first layer of a slot positioned along an inner surface of the stator; and a second set of conductive hairpin winding wires of a second width inserted within a second layer of the slot, the second width greater than the first width; a third set of conductive hairpin windings of a third width inserted within a third layer of the slot positioned adjacent to the second laver; and a fourth set of conductive hairpin windings of a fourth width inserted within a fourth layer of the slot positioned adjacent to the third layer, the third width greater than the second width and the fourth width greater than the third width, wherein the second layer has a greater width than the first layer; wherein the second layer has a smaller height than the first layer (as best seen in figures 8-9 and 13-15); a plurality of hairpin wires (231, 232) of different widths stacked within each of the segmented slots; wherein each of the segmented slots includes multiple layers with each laver housing one or more legs of one or more corresponding hairpin wires; and wherein the one or more legs in the first layer have a different width than the one or more legs in the second layer (as best seen in figures 8-9 and 13-15); wherein the first layer is proximal to a rotor of the electric motor, wherein the third layer is adjacent to the fourth layer, wherein the second layer is adjacent to the third layer, and wherein the first layer is adjacent to the second layer; wherein for each of the plurality of hairpin wires a width of each of the first leg and the second leg remains constant along its length from an end turn (231c, 232c) to an opposing end, wherein the width is measured along a lateral axis and the length is measure along an axis that is perpendicular to the lateral axis (as best seen in figure 3). Ooiwa does not disclose that each that each set of conductive hairpin winding wires includes two legs of different and separate wires. Rahman however teaches a similar device having legs of different wires (305A-D) in each set in a layer (as seen in figures 3-4) and having the claimed widths and heights, including a separation across a width of each layer and dividing two slot segments that have an identical width and height (305a-b or 305c-d, as seen in the figures). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used two legs of different wires as taught by Rahman instead of single leg in the device of Ooiwa to increase redundancy and allow for independent current control in the windings. Ooiwa does not explicitly discuss a busbar. Paetzold however, in figures 1-5, teaches a similar device having phase busbars connecting an input voltage source to the wires (see paragraph 17 for detailed disclosure). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used phase busbars as taught by Paetzold in the device of Ooiwa/Rahman to connect the wires to the voltage source so that the device can function as intended.
In re claim 13, Ooiwa/Rahman, in figures 1-15, discloses that the slot is segmented in shape with a width of the slot diverging from a first end proximal to a rotor to a second end proximal to a housing of the electric motor (as best seen in figures 8-9 and 13-15).
In re claim 15, Ooiwa in view of Rahman discloses that the two legs in the third set of conductive hairpin winding wires are greater than widths of the two legs in a portion of the plurality of winding wires that are positioned within the second set of conductive hairpin winding wires (Ooiwa discloses four sets while Rahman discloses two legs in each set); and the two legs in the fourth set of conductive hairpin winding wires are greater than widths of the two legs in a portion of the plurality of winding wires that are positioned within the third set of conductive hairpin winding wires.
In re claim 16, Ooiwa in view of Rahman discloses that the slot includes eight legs corresponding to eight conductive hairpin windings of four widths (as discussed above).
In re claim 17, Ooiwa, in figures 1-15, discloses fifth-seventh separations dividing the four layers from one another (as best seen in figures 8-9 and 13-15).
In re claim 18, Ooiwa, in figures 1-15, discloses a system for conductive windings for a stator of an electric motor, comprising: a plurality of radial slots (25) evenly spaced circumferentially around an inner cylindrical surface (see paragraph 32) with each slot diverging from the inner cylindrical surface of the stator towards an outer cylindrical surface of the stator; and a plurality of conductive hairpin winding wires (231, 232) of varying widths inserted within each radial slot; wherein each of the plurality of radial slots includes multiple layers with each layer housing one or more legs of one or more corresponding conductive hairpin windings; wherein the multiple layers sequentially increase in width and decrease in height in a radially outward direction; and wherein the one or more legs in the first layer have a different width than the one or more legs in the second layer (as best seen in figures 8-9 and 13-15); wherein the first layer is proximal to a rotor of the electric motor, wherein the third layer is adjacent to the fourth layer, wherein the second layer is adjacent to the third layer, and wherein the first layer is adjacent to the second layer; wherein for each of the plurality of hairpin wires a width of each of the first leg and the second leg remains constant along its length from an end turn (231c, 232c) to an opposing end wherein the width is measured along a lateral axis and the length is measure along an axis that is perpendicular to the lateral axis (as best seen in figure 3). Ooiwa does not disclose that each that each set of conductive hairpin winding wires includes two legs of different wires. Rahman however teaches a similar device having legs of different wires (305A-D) in each set (as seen in figures 3-4) and having the claimed widths, and also including a separation that extends across a width of a layer and divides two slot segments that have an identical width and height (305a-b or 305c-d, as seen in the figures). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used two legs of different wires as taught by Rahman instead of single leg in the device of Ooiwa to increase redundancy and allow for independent current control in the windings. Ooiwa does not explicitly discuss a busbar. Paetzold however, in figures 1-5, teaches a similar device having phase busbars connecting an input voltage source to the wires (see paragraph 17 for detailed disclosure). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used phase busbars as taught by Paetzold in the device of Ooiwa/Rahman to connect the wires to the voltage source so that the device can function.
In re claim 19, Ooiwa, in figures 1-15, discloses that each radial slot includes four sets of conductive hairpin winding wires with a width of the conductive hairpin winding wires increasing from a first end of the radial slot proximal to the inner cylindrical surface of the stator towards a second end of the radial slot proximal to the outer cylindrical surface of the stator (as best seen in figures 8-9 and 13-15).
In re claim 20, Ooiwa in view of Rahman discloses that each set of conductive hairpin winding wires includes two conductive hairpin winding wires of same dimensions (as shown by Rahman).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Alexander Talpalatski whose telephone number is (571)270-3908. The examiner can normally be reached 10 AM - 6 PM PT.
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, Shawki Ismail can be reached at 5712723985. 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.
/Alexander Talpalatski/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights