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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species VI in the reply filed on 7/17/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the alleged species identified by the Examiner are not mutually exclusive because they are directed to combinable embodiments within a unified method.
The examiner has reviewed the election requirement mailed 5/20/2025 and withdraws the election requirement with respect to Species I-III and VII. However, the examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant, and maintains the election requirement with respect to Species IV, V and VI. Applicant focuses on the fact that some of the disclosed features can be used together. However, the specification also discloses embodiments in which not all features are present. For example, Fig. 4 is drawn to an embodiment in which spacers 36 are present, as is a sleeve 48 including sleeve body 50, but there are no pole and lamination retainers. Rather, the spacers take the whole space that is occupied by pole/lamination retainers in other embodiments. The sleeve 48 can be optional (see [0049]). Figs. 7A-8 show an embodiment including pole and lamination retainers, with spacers filling a gap between the pole/laminations and the retainers, but no sleeve body 50 is required. Figs. 5 and 6 show end caps 66 and 68, which may be formed from the same material as spacers 38, at the same time or at different times, or may me made from a different material. There is no indication that the end caps are positively required for all embodiments, and the discussion of Figs. 7A to 8 does not mention the end caps. From the overall disclosure, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand the embodiment of spacers plus sleeve and no retainers to be an alternative to the embodiment including spacers and retainers but no sleeve. The end caps do not appear to be positively required for any single embodiment. The examiner submits that, even if some of the features could be combined, the disclosure also includes a description/disclosure of an embodiment which spacers and sleeve but no retainers (Species V), an embodiment with spacers and retainers (Species VI), as well as spacers and ed caps (Species IV).
Applicant further argues “The Examiner has not provided sufficient evidence or explanation to support the assertion that the examination of the claims would require distinct searches or raise materially different issues under 35 U.S.C. §§ 101 or 112. The claims share a common core of manufacturing steps and are directed to the same field of endeavor, and thus do not impose an undue burden on the Office. The various optional aspects of the dependent claims (e.g., use of a sleeve, end caps, or mechanical retainers) do not require materially different search strategies or raise distinct issues under 35 U.S.C. §§ 101 or 112. Moreover, the Examiner has not provided any specific explanation or evidence to support the assertion that different classes/subclasses or search queries would be required. In fact, the Examiner has not recited any applicable classifications whatsoever.”
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Whereas fore restriction requirements an applicable classification must be provided, this is not required and is not standard practice for election of species requirements. Moreover, the Requirement does include a proper statement of burden (bridging pages 3 and 4). The examiner agrees the claims share a common core, which is why claim 1 was identified as generic. Moreover, the previous Office Action withdraws the Requirement with respect to Species I-III and VII. The remaining species do constitute a search and/or examination burden, because each of the features identified for the respective species is distinct from the other identified features, whereby separate/multiple prior art rejections are likely to be necessary to address all of these species, and searching for the corresponding limitations would require at least employing different search strategies or search queries.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. However, upon allowance of generic claim 1, withdrawn claims requiring all the features of an allowable claim will be rejoined.
Claims 8-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 7/17/2025.
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.
Claim 18 is 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 claim 18, the limitation “the second circumferential end of the first pole piece” lacks 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) 1-7 and 14-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schuerg (DE102016219120A1).
Schuerg discloses the claimed invention as follows:
Claim 1. A method of manufacturing a rotor assembly for an electric motor, the rotor assembly (141) including a lamination stack (16) extending along an axis (26), a plurality of magnets (48, Figs. 3-10(d)) including a first and second magnet each coupled to the lamination stack, a plurality of pole pieces (42) including a first pole piece spaced from the lamination stack and separate from the lamination stack, and a plurality of spacers including a first spacer (74; see [0051] and [0061]; see Fig. 6 and 10(c); for claim 15: the spacer is 64) spaced from the lamination stack, said method comprising the steps of:
disposing (see Fig. 10(b)) the first magnet and the second magnet between the lamination stack and the first pole piece; and
disposing (see Figs. 10(c) and 10(d)) the first spacer between the lamination stack and the first pole piece to reduce flux leakage between the lamination stack and the first pole piece.
Claim 2. The method as set forth in claim 1, wherein the step of disposing the first spacer between the lamination stack and the first pole piece includes disposing the first spacer such that the first spacer extends at least to the first magnet (see Fig. 10(c)).
Claim 3. The method as set forth in claim 1, wherein the step of disposing the first spacer between the lamination stack and the first pole piece includes disposing the first spacer such that the first spacer is disposed between the first magnet and the second magnet (see Fig. 10(c)).
Claim 4. The method as set forth in claim 1 further comprising the step of disposing a shaft (24, Fig. 2) within the lamination stack such that the shaft extends along the axis.
Claim 5. The method as set forth in claim 1, wherein the first spacer comprises a polymeric material (see [0051]), and wherein the step of disposing the first spacer between the lamination stack and the first pole piece includes molding the first spacer such that the first spacer is disposed between the lamination stack and the first pole piece (see [0051] and [0061]).
Claim 6. The method as set forth in claim 1, wherein the step of disposing the first magnet and the second magnet between the lamination stack and the first pole piece precedes the step of disposing the first spacer between the lamination stack and the first pole piece. Compare Figs. 10(b) and 10(c).
Claim 7. The method as set forth in claim 1, wherein the first pole piece has a first circumferential end and a second circumferential end spaced circumferentially from the first circumferential end, and has an outer pole surface facing away from the axis and extending between the first and second circumferential ends, and wherein the step of disposing the first spacer between the lamination stack and the first pole piece includes disposing the first spacer circumferentially between the first circumferential end of the first pole piece and the lamination stack. See for example left-most or right-most space 70 filled with thermoset 74, in Fig. 10(c).
Claim 14. The method as set forth in claim 1, wherein the lamination stack has a lamination retainer (56) and the first pole piece has a pole retainer (52) configured to mechanically cooperate with the lamination retainer, and said method further comprises the step of engaging the lamination retainer and the pole retainer to retain the first pole piece with respect to the lamination stack (compare Figs. 8(b) and 8(c)).
Claim 15. The method as set forth in claim 14 further comprising the step of disposing the first spacer (64) between the lamination retainer and the pole retainer.
Claim 16. The method as set forth in claim 14, wherein one (56) of the lamination retainer and the pole retainer has a generally C-shaped configuration defining a channel (56) and the other (52) of the lamination retainer and the pole retainer has a generally T-shaped configuration (see various figures), and said method further comprises the step of disposing the generally T-shaped configuration at least partially in the channel defined by the generally C-shaped configuration.
Claim 17. The method as set forth in claim 14, wherein the pole retainer includes a pole hook (52) defining a hook recess (space between upper and lower 62 in Fig. 4) and the lamination retainer includes a lamination hook (middle 60 fitting the recess), and said method further comprises the step of disposing the lamination hook at least partially into the hook recess defined by the pole hook to retain the first pole piece to the lamination stack. See Fig. 4.
Claim 18. The method as set forth in claim 14, wherein the pole retainer is further defined as a first pole retainer (the two upper 62 in Fig. 4), wherein the lamination retainer is further defined as a first lamination retainer (two upper spaces of 56, corresponding to 62 in Fig. 4), wherein the lamination stack further has a second lamination retainer (lower part of space 56, corresponding to the two lower 62 in Fig. 4), wherein the first pole piece further has a second pole retainer (two lower 62 in Fig. 4) disposed at the second circumferential end of the first pole piece and configured to mechanically cooperate with the second lamination retainer, and said method further comprises the step of engaging the second lamination retainer and the second pole retainer to retain the first pole piece with respect to the lamination stack. See Fig. 4.
Claim 19. A method of manufacturing an electric motor, the electric motor (10, Fig. 1 and 2) including a stator (12, Figs. 1 and 2) defining a stator interior, said method comprising the steps of: manufacturing the rotor assembly as set forth in claim 1; and disposing the rotor assembly in the stator interior of the stator. See Figs. 1 and 2, and footnote 1 above.
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) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cooper (US2008/0236908A1) in view of Schuerg.
Cooper discloses a method of manufacturing an electric drive unit (10), the electric drive unit including a gear reduction mechanism (16), said method comprising the steps of: coupling an electric motor (14) to the gear reduction mechanism. See Fig. 1.
Cooper does not disclose the motor 14 being manufactured according to claim 19. However, Cooper is not particularly concerned with the structure of the motor.
Schuerg discloses the invention is related to the drivetrain of electric or hybrid vehicles (see [0002]. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to utilize a motor manufactured as disclosed by Schuerg, as the motor 14 of Cooper, as a simple substitution of one conventional motor for another, based on its suitability for this intended application, with predictable results.
Conclusion
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 Schuerg shows the conventional motor structure, including a rotor 14, in Figs. 1 and 2. The rest of the figures then focus on the modified rotor geometry of rotor 14. It is then understood that all other features of the rotor, not explicitly discussed with respect to figures 3 through 10(d), are the same as in Figs. 1 and 2.
Prosecution Insights