Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/783,499

END SHIELD FOR A ROTARY ELECTRIC MACHINE

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Jun 08, 2022
Examiner
MOK, ALEX W
Art Unit
2834
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
VALEO EQUIPEMENTS ELECTRIQUES MOTEUR
OA Round
4 (Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
827 granted / 1114 resolved
+6.2% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+21.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
1158
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
63.6%
+23.6% vs TC avg
§102
26.1%
-13.9% vs TC avg
§112
7.1%
-32.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1114 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Amendment Acknowledgement is made of Amendment filed September 5, 2025. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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) 1-4, 9-11, 15, 16, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Abadia et al. (US Patent No.: 7224093). For claim 1, Abadia et al. disclose the claimed invention having: a plate (i.e. portion of plate 14 extending perpendicularly to axis X, see figure 7) extending generally transversely with respect to an axis (reference character X, see figures 1, 7); and a skirt (reference numeral 114) extending generally axially from the plate (see figure 7), the skirt (reference numeral 114) having at least one shoulder (reference numeral 147, figures 7, 10) forming an axial stop for axially immobilizing a stator body (reference numeral 8) of the rotary electric machine (see figure 7), wherein a circumference of the skirt (reference numeral 114) extends along an entire circumference of the plate (see figure 7), wherein the shoulder (reference numeral 147) is in one piece with the skirt (i.e. shoulder 147 is attached to the skirt 114 as shown in figure 7, which constitutes the shoulder being in one piece with the skirt) and extends only over a portion of the circumference of the skirt (see figure 10), and wherein the skirt has radial openings (see annotated figure below of Abadia et al.’s figure 10) allowing the passage of an air flow (i.e. radial openings common in end plate components as exhibited in Hirsou et al., US 6734587, figures 1, 2, reference numeral 5), the shoulder extending circumferentially between two radial openings (see annotated figure below of Abadia et al.’s figure 10). PNG media_image1.png 627 821 media_image1.png Greyscale For claim 2, Abadia et al. disclose the claimed invention having a plurality of shoulders (reference numeral 147) arranged at a distance from one another along the circumference of the skirt (see figure 10, also annotated figure above of Abadia et al.’s figure 10). For claim 3, Abadia et al. disclose the skirt having at least one fastening means (see annotated figure above of Abadia et al.’s figure 10) for contributing to the assembly between said bracket and another bracket of the rotary electric machine (i.e. between brackets 13 and 14 shown in figure 7) and in that the shoulder (see annotated figure above of Abadia et al.’s figure 10) is arranged radially between the fastening means (see annotated figure above of Abadia et al.’s figure 10) and the axis of the bracket (see annotated figure above of Abadia et al.’s figure 10). For claims 4, 11, and 16, Abadia et al. disclose the shoulders (see annotated figure above of Abadia et al.’s figure 10) extending, in total, circumferentially over a portion less than 70% of the total circumference of the skirt (see annotated figure above of Abadia et al.’s figure 10). For claims 9 and 15, Abadia et al. disclose a stator (reference numeral 8) having a stator body forming slots and an electric winding housed at least partially in said slots (i.e. figure 7 disclose stator 8 with windings disposed through the ends of the stator, windings being disposed within slots of the stator being a common configuration), and at least one bracket (reference numeral 14, figure 7), as claimed in claim 1 (and claim 2), arranged to surround, at least partially, the stator (reference numeral 8) and forming an axial stop for the stator body (see figure 7). For claim 10, Abadia et al. disclose the machine having a second bracket (i.e. brackets 13, 14, figure 7), the stator body having a shrinking zone (i.e. stator body 8 in between brackets 13, 14) with said second bracket (see figure 7). For claim 19, Abadia et al. disclose a stator (reference numeral 8) having a stator body forming slots and an electric winding housed at least partially in said slots (i.e. figure 7 disclose stator 8 with windings disposed through the ends of the stator, windings being disposed within slots of the stator being a common configuration), and at least one bracket (reference numeral 14, figure 7), as claimed in claim 3, arranged to surround, at least partially, the stator (reference numeral 8) and forming an axial stop for the stator body (see figure 7). 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) 5-7, 12, 13, 17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abadia et al. as applied to claims 1-3 above, and further in view of Sakuma et al. (US Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2009/0108700 A1). For claims 5, 12, and 17, Abadia et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the shoulder being formed of a holding surface extending in a generally radial direction toward the axis and of a circumferential surface extending generally axially from the holding surface, said holding surface and said circumferential surface being machined. Sakuma et al. disclose the shoulder (reference numeral 40b, see figures 1, 3) being formed of a holding surface (i.e. portion of shoulder 40b contacting stator 11b, see figures 1, 3) extending in a generally radial direction toward the axis and of a circumferential surface (i.e. portion of shoulder 40b extending in the axial direction from the holding surface, see figure 3) extending generally axially from the holding surface (see figures 1, 3), said holding surface and said circumferential surface shown by Sakuma et al. can be considered machined (i.e. the surfaces of shoulder 40b can be machined, see figures 1, 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the holding surface and circumferential surface as disclosed by Sakuma et al. for the shoulder of Abadia et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating the assembly of the device. For claim 6, Abadia et al. in view of Sakuma et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the circumferential surface extending from the holding surface to the plate. Sakuma et al. already disclose the circumferential surface extending in the axial direction (i.e. portion of shoulder 40b extending in the axial direction from the holding surface, see figure 3), and when applied to the shoulder of Abadia et al. in view of Sakuma et al. this would disclose the circumferential surface extending from the holding surface to the plate. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the circumferential surface extending axially as disclosed by Sakuma et al. so that the circumferential surface extends from the holding surface to the plate of Abadia et al. in view of Sakuma et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating the assembly of the device. For claims 7 and 13, Abadia et al. in view of Sakuma et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the circumferential surface extending in a direction parallel to the axis. Sakuma et al. already disclose the circumferential surface extending in the axial direction (i.e. portion of shoulder 40b extending in the axial direction from the holding surface, see figure 3), and when applied to the shoulder of Abadia et al. in view of Sakuma et al. this would disclose the circumferential surface extending in a direction parallel to the axis. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the circumferential surface extending axially as disclosed by Sakuma et al. so that the circumferential surface extends in a direction parallel to the axis of Abadia et al. in view of Sakuma et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating the assembly of the device. For claim 20, Abadia et al. disclose the shoulders (see annotated figure above of Abadia et al.’s figure 10) extending, in total, circumferentially over a portion less than 70% of the total circumference of the skirt (see annotated figure above of Abadia et al.’s figure 10). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 9/5/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to Abadia not disclosing the claimed feature of the shoulder being in one piece with the skirt, the reference of Abadia et al. still discloses the shoulder 147 being attached to the skirt 114 in figure 7, and these two components together would constitute one piece, therefore teaching the shoulder being “in one piece with the skirt” as recited in claim 1. Also in response to applicant’s assertion that Abadia does not teach the radial openings since there is “material between the opening and the radial end of the plate” (applicant’s Remarks submitted 9/5/25, page 9), this is not found persuasive since Abadia et al.’s figure 10 only shows a cross section of the invention while other figures in Abadia et al. such as figures 1 and 7 show radial openings in the end plate 14 (i.e. areas of end plate 14 that do not have hash markings in figures 1 and 7 would constitute the radial openings in the end plate); and also in addition to Abadia et al. disclosing radial openings, other prior art references such as Hirsou et al. (US 6734587) also disclose radial openings (see Hirsou et al.’s figures 1, 2, reference numeral 5). 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 ALEX W MOK whose telephone number is (571)272-9084. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-4pm. 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, Seye 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. /ALEX W MOK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 08, 2022
Application Filed
May 04, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Oct 29, 2024
Response Filed
Jan 16, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 24, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
May 23, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
May 27, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Sep 05, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 14, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603533
ROTOR ASSEMBLY FOR AN ELECTRIC MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603532
ELECTRIC MOTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597815
ROTOR FOR A ROTARY ELECTRIC MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592625
PERMANENT MAGNET ARRANGEMENT OF A SHUTTLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592623
ROTOR STRUCTURE OF ROTARY ELECTRIC MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+21.2%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1114 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month