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
Applicants election with traverse of the invention of Group II, Claims 2 through 5, in the reply filed on February 5, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that all of the features of Claims 6 through 9 can be found in the same embodiment of Claims 1 and 2 and thus are in the same category of invention. Therefore, all of the claims should be examined together.
This is not found persuasive because despite the fact that Claims 6 through 9 depended from Claim 2 prior to the preliminary amendment, the features of Claims 6 through 9 and the features of Claims 3 through 5 are shared by the features of Claims 1 and 2. Claims 1 and 2 do not make a contribution over the prior art as applied below. Moreover, the features of Claims 6 through 9 are separate and distinct from the features of Claims 3 through 5 and thus, are certainly considered to be in different categories of inventions. For example, the die forging in Claim 3, and the cross section forming step being done before bending in Claim 4, are nowhere recited in Claims 6 through 9.
It is at least for these reasons that the requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Upon further consideration by the examiner, Claims 8 and 14 have been rejoined with Claims 1 and 2. It was determined that in conducting a search for Claims 2 through 5, there was no burden to search for Claims 8 and 14.
Therefore, Claims 6, 7, 9 and 11 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on February 5, 2026.
Newly submitted Claims 12, 13, 15 and 16 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons:
The features of new Claims 12, 13 and 15 correspond to non-elected Claims 6, 7 and 9, respectively. New Claim 16 corresponds to non-elected Claims 6, 7 and 9.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, Claims 12, 13, 15 and 16 have been withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
NOTE: Claims 1 through 5, 8, 10 and 14 are pending for examination as follows. If at some point during prosecution, Claim 1 is found to be allowable over the prior art, full consideration will be given to rejoining Claims 6, 7, 9, 11 through 13, 15 and 16 with Claim 1.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
In Claim 1: “a bending step” (line 3), “a cross section forming step” (line 5), and “an insulation step” (line 8).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
In this case, the claim limitations recite acts to entirely perform the recited function. For example, the “bending step” follows with the act that entirely performs the recited function, e.g. “bending a coil wire that is not subjected to an insulation coating process so that the coil wire is disposed in the stator” (lines 3-4 of Claim 1). The same can be said for the other recited “step(s)”.
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 1 through 5, 8, 10 and 14 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 Claim 1, it is unclear what is meant by the phrase of “after bending and cross section forming” (lines 9-10). The phrase appears to be redundant with the phrase of “after the bending step and the cross section forming step” (lines 8-9), which already implies that the “insulation step” is done after the bending step and the cross section forming step.
In Claim 4, it is unclear what is meant by “before the bending step” (line 2). In Claim 1, “a coil wire” (line 3) is first presented in the “bending step” (lines 3-4). This implies that the bending step is performed first. Subsequently, the “cross-section forming step” transforms an outer shape of “the coil wire” (line 6). By antecedent basis of the “coil wire”, clearly the cross section forming step is done after the bending step in Claim 1. Yet Claim 4 contradicts this with “before the bending step”. This contradiction raises a great deal of confusion and renders Claim 4 as indefinite.
In Claim 5, it is unclear what is meant by the phrase of “after the cross section forming and before bending” (line 3). The phrase appears to be redundant with the phrase of “after the cross section forming step and before the bending step” (lines 2-3).
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 1 and 2, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Publication 2014/0300236 to Takizawa et al (hereinafter “Takizawa”).
Takizawa discloses a method for manufacturing a coil to be disposed in a stator including slots (e.g. ¶ [0002]), the method comprising:
a bending step for bending a coil wire (e.g. R, Fig. 10A) that is not subjected to an insulation coating process so that the coil wire is disposed in the stator (e.g. Figs. 10A, 11A to 11B, ¶¶ [0189], [0192], [0193]);
a cross section forming step for transforming an outer shape of a part to be housed in the slot in the coil wire that has a circular cross section (in Fig. 3) and is not subjected to the insulation coating process (e.g. Figs. 10B, 11B to 11C, ¶¶ [0194], [0195]); and
an insulation step for performing, after the bending step and the cross section forming step, the insulation coating process on the coil wire (e.g. ¶¶ [0157], [0158], [0204]).
Claim 2: Takizawa discloses the method for manufacturing the coil according to claim 1, wherein the cross section forming step is a step of forming the cross section of the coil wire so that an outer shape of a part to face inner side surfaces of the slot conforms to the inner side surfaces of the slot (e.g. 11c, Fig. 5).
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.
Claims 1, 2, 8 and 14, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication 2020/0220411 to Kim (hereinafter “Kim”) in view of U.S. Publication 2019/0068020 to Knerr et al (hereinafter “Knerr”).
Claim 1: Kim discloses a method (e.g. Figs. 1 to 4B) for manufacturing a coil (e.g. 200) to be disposed in a stator (e.g. 100) including slots (e.g. 130), the method comprising:
a bending step for bending a coil wire (e.g. 200, Fig. 1) so that the coil wire is disposed in the stator (e.g. ¶ [0062]); and
a cross section forming step for transforming [rolling] an outer shape of a part (e.g. 220) to be housed in the slot in the coil wire that initially has a circular cross section to a non-circular cross section (e.g. ¶ [0070]).
Claim 2: Kim discloses the method for manufacturing the coil according to claim 1, wherein the cross section forming step is a step of forming the cross section of the coil wire so that an outer shape (e.g. surfaces of 200-1, 200-2, etc.) of a part to face inner side surfaces of the slot conforms to the inner side surfaces of the slot (e.g. Fig. 3).
Claims 8 and 14: Kim discloses the method for manufacturing the coil according to claim 1 or 2, [elements emphasized below are illustrated in a partial view of Kim’s Figure 3] wherein the coil includes a plurality of slot housing portions to be housed in the slots so as to be arranged in a radial direction of the stator, and
the cross section forming step is a step of forming the cross section of the coil wire so that a part to face inner side surfaces of the slot has a shape conforming to the inner side surfaces and a part to face the slot housing portion adjacent in the radial direction has a flat surface orthogonal to the radial direction when viewed in an axial direction of the stator.
PNG
media_image1.png
506
529
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kim do not mention that within the bending step and the cross section forming step, each is done “that is not subjected to an insulation coating process”. Kim also does not teach an insulation step for performing the insulation coating process after the bending step and the cross section forming step.
Knerr discloses a process of making a coil to be disposed in a stator (e.g. Fig. 6) that comprises an insulation step for performing, after a bending step (e.g. U-shaped bending) and a cross section forming step (e.g. twisting, ¶ [0059]), an insulation coating process (e.g. coating of parylene insulation) on the coil wire (e.g. Fig. 6, block 615, ¶ [0061]). The coil wire in the bending step and cross section forming step (e.g. blocks 505, 510, 515 of Fig. 5, or block 605, 610 of Fig. 6), is “not subjected to an insulating coating process” of parylene. There are several associated advantages with Knerr’s manufacturing method, e.g. eliminating pin hole defects in the coil wire, reducing insulation breakdown, improved high temperature resistance, etc. (e.g. ¶ [0015]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Kim by adding the insulation step after the bending step and the cross section forming step such that in each of these steps the coil wire is not subjected to an insulating coating process, as taught by Knerr, for anyone, or all, of the associated advantages taught by Knerr.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Knerr, as applied to Claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of U.S. Publication 2021/0006141 to Ruggieri et al (hereinafter “Ruggieri”).
Kim, as modified by Knerr, discloses the claimed manufacturing method as relied upon above in Claims 1 and 2, further including that Kim teaches that the cross section forming step is a step of forming, after the bending step, the cross section of the coil wire after the bending by rolling so that the outer shape of the part to face the inner side surfaces of the slot conforms to the inner side surfaces of the slot.
The modified Kim method does not teach die forging.
Ruggieri teaches that in a cross section forming step to form an outer shape of a coil wire (e.g. Figs. 3a to 3b), it is well known to do this by die forging (e.g. punch-and-die type system, ¶ [0009]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the die forging of Ruggieri for the rolling of Kim, to form an outer shape of an art-recognized equivalent coil wire that is to be housed in a slot of a stator.
Claim 4, as best understood, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Knerr, as applied to Claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of U.S. Publication 2020/0358343 to Lee et al (hereinafter “Lee”).
Kim, as modified by Knerr, discloses the claimed manufacturing method as relied upon above in Claims 1 and 2.
The modified Kim method does not teach that the cross section forming step is done by rolling before the bending step.
Lee teaches a method of manufacturing a coil where a cross section forming step is done by rolling (e.g. Fig. 6) so that an outer shape of a part to face inner side surfaces of a slot conforms to the inner side surfaces of the slot (e.g. ¶ [0070]). This cross section forming step (in Fig. 6) is done before a bending step (e.g. in Fig. 11, ¶ [0094]). One benefit of Lee’s method is to manufacture large quantities of coil wire with excellent efficiency and output density (e.g. ¶ [0027]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Kim by performing the cross section forming step before the bending step, as taught by Lee, to manufacture large quantities of coil wire with excellent efficiency and output density.
Claim 5, as best understood, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Knerr and Lee, as applied to Claims 1, 2 and 4 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent 6,459,187 to Oohashi et al (hereinafter “Oohashi”).
Kim, as modified by Knerr and Lee, discloses the claimed manufacturing method as relied upon above in Claims 1, 2 and 4.
The modified Kim method does not teach an annealing step for annealing after the cross section forming step.
Oohashi teaches that a coil wire (e.g. 90A, 90B) can have an outer shape formed by a cross section forming step (e.g. in Figs. 9 or 10). Subsequently, the coil wire has an annealing step within slots of a stator core (e.g. Fig. 12B), to allow the stator core (e.g. 36) to be shaped with the coil wire (e.g. col. 7, lines 17-36).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified method of Kim by adding an annealing step, as taught by Oohashi, to positively allow the stator core to be shaped with the coil wire in the slots.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Knerr, as applied to Claim 1, and further in view of U.S. Publication 2014/0300239 to Takizawa et al (hereinafter “Takizawa”).
Kim, as modified by Knerr, discloses the claimed manufacturing method as relied upon above in Claim 1, further including that the insulating coating process is done after the cross section forming step.
The modified Kim method does not teach that the insulation coating process is done be electrodeposition.
Takizawa discloses that a coil wire (e.g. 4, 5, Fig. 1) can have an insulation step of coating an insulating material on the coil wire by electrodeposition (e.g. ¶¶ [0041], [0127]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the insulating material of Kim with the electrodeposition coating process taught by Takizawa, to form an art-recognized equivalent coil wire having an insulating material with the very same purpose to be used as a coil within a stator.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a) Japanese Patent Publication, JP 2017-131046, discloses a method of manufacturing a coil to be disposed in a stator (e.g. Fig. 3) where the coil wire is subjected to a bending step (e.g. Fig. 1, see SOLUTIONS).
b) Non-Patent Literature IEEE Publication to Wirth et al, entitled "Influence of Wire Tolerances on Hairpin Shaping Processes", discloses a bending step for a coil wire (e.g. Fig. 4, see entire document).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to A. DEXTER TUGBANG whose telephone number is (571)272-4570. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.
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, JESSICA HAN can be reached at (571) 272-2078. 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.
/A. DEXTER TUGBANG/ Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2896