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 without traverse of Group I (claims 1-5) in the reply filed on 12/02/25 is acknowledged. Thus, claim 6 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse.
An OA on the merits of claims 1-5 as follows:
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested:
--"ROTATING ELECTRICAL MACHINE INSTALLATION METHOD “—
Claim Objections
Claims 1-5 are objected to because of the following informalities:
“, comprising:” (claim 1, line 3) should be updated to: --", the method comprising steps of:” --.
The following changes is/are suggested to reflect change as suggested above.
“a placement step of placing a leg portion” (claim 1, line 4) should be updated to: --“placing a leg portion” --.
“a preparation step of preparing a key member” (claim 1, line 12) should be updated to: -- “preparing a key member”--
“a length adjustment step of shortening” (claim 1, line 16) should be updated to: --“adjusting a length by shorting”—
“after the placement step;” (claim 1, line 18) should be changed to: --“after the adjusting the length”--
“a fitting step of fitting the key member” (claim 1, line 19) should be updated to: -- “fitting the key member” --.
“after the length adjustment step” (claim 1, line 20) should be updated to: --“after the adjusting the length”--
whether or not “a length LW1” (claim 2, line 2) is directed to “a length in line 16 of claim 1?
limitations of claims 2-3 directed to condition statement which does not further limit the claimed method since no method inventive feature existed thereto.
“wherein the length adjustment step includes” (claim 5, line 2) should be updated to: --" wherein the adjusting the length includes” --, to reflect changes as in claim 1, line 16.
“a first measurement step of measuring” (claim 5, line 3) should be updated to:--”a first measuring”--
“a second measurement step of measuring” (claim 5, line 6) should be updated to: --" a second measuring”--.
“a cutting step of cutting” (claim 5, line 9) should be updated to: --"cutting” --.
“the first measurement step and the second measurement step” (claim 5, line 11) should be updated to: --" the first measuring and the second measuring” --, to reflect the changes as noted from lines 3 and 6 of claim 5 above. Appropriate correction is required.
The above is example of inconsistency and problematic issue noticed by the Examiner. Applicant is respectfully asked to review the entire application for any deficiency that may still be present.
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 1-5 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.
Since the scope of the claims is clearly directed to “An installation method for a rotating electrical machine associated with the installation structure (e.g., support member 4), and the recites of “a rotating electrical machine that includes a rotor, a stator disposed so as to surround the rotor, and a casing configured to house the rotor and the stator“ (claim 1, lines 1-2) directed to the outside elements which does not further limit the claimed method and make the scope of the claims unclear.
In formulate the rejection on the merits the Examiner presumes that claims directed to a method for mounting/coupling /installing a leg portion 3 of an electrical machine 2 on an installation structure 4, 12, 13 (see Fig. 3), and claims will be rejected accordingly.
Claims 2-3 directed to condition statement (see claims 2-3, line 2 recites satisfies condition bases on 0.95xLW<LW1<LW” which does not further limit the claimed method since no inventive method feature existed thereto. Since the value in term of measured unit is/are unknown.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 and 4 as best understood is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Makita (JP 2006006009A) in view of Sun et al (CN 213461469).
Makita discloses the claimed installation method for a rotating electrical machine that includes a rotor, a stator disposed so as to surround the rotor, and a casing configured to house the rotor and the stator of the instant application (in term of a coupling or mounting device) comprising:
a placement step of placing a leg portion (a frame 7 as broadly as readable as a leg portion), which is disposed in the casing and has a first surface formed with a first groove portion extending along a first direction intersecting an axial direction of the rotor, on a support member (8), which has a second surface formed with a second groove portion extending along the first direction, the placement step including placing the leg portion on the support member such that a narrow groove portion having a smaller groove width of the first groove portion or the second groove portion falls within a range in a width direction of a wide groove portion having a larger groove width of the first groove portion or the second groove portion (see abstract and discussed in ¶¶ [0027-0051];
PNG
media_image1.png
171
625
media_image1.png
Greyscale
regarding to the claimed of “a preparation step of preparing a key member which includes a narrow portion to be fitted into the narrow groove portion, and a wide portion having a one-side projecting portion projecting to one side in the width direction from the narrow portion and an another-side projecting portion projecting to another side in the width direction from the narrow portion; a length adjustment step of shortening at least either of the one-side projecting portion or the another-side projecting portion of the key member to be fitted into the wide groove portion, after the placement step; and a fitting step of fitting the key member into a key groove formed by the first groove portion and the second groove portion, after the length adjustment step” appears to satisfied by the Makita since “preparing, adjusting and/or fitting” is/are not inventive method features. Since no inventive effort would have been required to make a combined apparatus. A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have had the necessary technological capabilities to have incorporated the assembly feature includes preparing, adjusting and/or fitting as noted above into the process of the Makita in order to facilitate the installation process.
Furthermore, regarding the above steps of “preparing, adjusting and/or fitting” as defined in claims 1 above is considered a standard design option in motor mounting or installing on its intended structure support. The skilled person would incorporate such standard installing procedure includes steps of preparing, adjusting and/or fitting in order to perform its installation without exercising any inventive skills.
Limitation of claim 4 (see Fig. 5 or 8 which depicts the configurations set forth in claim 4 where the first groove portion (open area of 7) has the larger groove width than the second groove portion (open on support 8), respectively.
As applied to claims 2-3, regarding to condition statement includes bases on 0.95xLW<LW1<LW as in claims above, is considered to be matter of design choice that could have been appropriately derive by an ordinary having skill in the art without any difficulty.
Similar to claim 2 above applied to claim 3.
Potential claim Allowable
Claim 5 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MINH N TRINH whose telephone number is (571)272-4569. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH ~5:00-3:30.
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 J 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.
/MINH N TRINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3729
mt