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 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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura (US 2018/0036836) in view of Bocksrocker et al (US 12,115,595).
Regarding claim 1, Nakamura teaches a method for manufacturing a stator for a rotary electric machine (Para. 0039), which reads on applicants’ claimed invention, including:
a process of abutting, on each other, tip end parts (Fig. 4, 24a & 24b) of one coil piece and another one coil piece for forming a stator coil of a rotary electric machine; and
a welding process of irradiating (LB) a welding target location regarding the tip end part having been abutted with a laser beam having a wavelength of 0.6 μm or less (Para. 0058),
wherein in the welding process, the laser beam is generated for every pulse oscillation in a laser oscillator in a mode of having a laser output of 2.0 kW (Para. 0078), instead of 3.0 kW or more, and
in at least a part of a period during one pulse oscillation, the laser beam is moved so that an irradiation position changes linearly parallel (Fig. 5, 30; Para. 0049) to an abutment surface of the tip end part.
However, Nakamura fails to teach a laser output of 3.0 kW or more.
Bocksrocker et al teach a method of welding wire ends of hairpin (Fig. 1, 2; Abstract) using a laser beam (4) with a wavelength of 1030 nm or 515 nm (0.5 μm) (Col. 3, lines 12-16) and laser power ratio (Col. 2, lines 11-12) in the core region (Fig. 2a, 8) of 0.9 kW (Col. 3, line 13) to a ring region (9) of 5 kW (Col. 4, line 25) is between 10:90 and 70:30, in order to obtain significantly fewer pores and less spatter rise during the laser beam welding (Col. 2, lines 55-59).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Nakamura by applying the welding method of wire ends of hairpin using a laser beam, as taught by Bocksrocker et al, with a wavelength of 515 nm (0.5 μm) with laser power beam between 0.9 kW and 5 kW, in order to obtain significantly fewer pores and less spatter rise during the laser beam welding.
Regarding claim 2, Nakamura teaches a method for manufacturing a stator for a rotary electric machine wherein
in the welding process, the one welding target location is irradiated with the laser beam by two or more times of pulse oscillation (Fig. 6, 101), and
the one pulse oscillation constitutes the two or more times of pulse oscillation (Para. 0056 & 0057).
Regarding claim 3, Nakamura teaches a method for manufacturing a stator for a rotary electric machine wherein the pulse oscillation is performed in a mode where energy accumulated using a period before an oscillation period of the pulse oscillation is brought together in the oscillation period (Para. 0057).
Regarding claim 4, Nakamura teaches the two or more times of pulse oscillation (Fig. 6,101) include a first pulse oscillation for irradiating a first range of the welding target location with the laser beam and a second pulse oscillation for irradiating a second range of the welding target location (Fig. 9, Laser Beam Application Trajectory [LBAT]) with the laser beam, the first range and the second range partially overlap (Top of LBAT), and a moving direction of an irradiation position of the laser beam during the first pulse oscillation and a moving direction of an irradiation position of the laser beam during the second pulse oscillation oppose each other (at Start/End line of each LBAT).
Regarding claim 5, Nakamura teaches that the pulse oscillation is performed in a mode where energy accumulated using a period before an oscillation period of the pulse oscillation is brought together (Fig. 5, Start/End) in the oscillation period.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicants’ disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
examiner should be directed to THIEM D PHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4568. The examiner can normally be reached on Mo-Fr: 8AM-4PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
supervisor, Aneeta Yodichkas, can be reached on 571-272-9773. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/THIEM D PHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3729
April 28, 2025
Prosecution Insights