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 .
Specification
The amendments to the specification was received on 08/14/2025. These amendments are ACCEPTABLE.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 08/14/2025. These drawings are ACCEPTABLE.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-4, 7-14, and 17-21 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 Line 13 currently states:
“a plurality of clamping mechanisms spaced about the outer diameter of the motor configured to”.
Should be changed to state:
--a plurality of clamping mechanisms spaced about [[the]] an outer diameter of the motor configured to--.
Claim 1 Line 18 currently states:
“and a channel located on the inner diameter of the housing, each channel being configured to”.
Should be changed to state:
--and a channel located on [[the]] an inner diameter of the housing, each channel being configured to--.
Claim 7 Line 1 currently states:
“The electric compressor, as set forth in claim 6, wherein the lateral”.
Should be changed to state:
--The electric compressor, as set forth in claim [[6]] 1, wherein the lateral--.
Claim 8 Line 1 currently states:
“The electric compressor, as set forth in claim 1,”.
Should be changed to state:
-- The electric compressor, as set forth in claim [[1]] 7,--.
Claim 11 Line 5 currently states:
“a plurality of clamping mechanisms spaced about the outer diameter of the motor configured to”.
Should be changed to state:
--a plurality of clamping mechanisms spaced about [[the]] an outer diameter of the motor configured to--.
Claim 11 Line 7 currently states:
“include a tab located on the outer diameter of the motor and a channel located on the inner”.
Should be changed to state:
-- include a tab located on the outer diameter of the motor and a channel located on [[the]] an inner --.
Claim 13 Line 1-2 currently states in part:
“The assembly, as set forth in claim, as set forth in claim 12, wherein”.
Should be changed to state:
-- The assembly
Claim 21 Line 25 currently states:
“a plurality of clamping mechanisms spaced about the outer diameter of the motor configured to”.
Should be changed to state:
--a plurality of clamping mechanisms spaced about [[the]] an outer diameter of the motor configured to--.
Claim 21 Line 27 currently states:
“having an inner diameter, the motor including a stator having an outer diameter, wherein each of”.
Should be changed to state:
--having an inner diameter, the motor including a stator having an outer diameter which defines the outer diameter of the motor, wherein each of--.
Claim 21 Line 29 currently states:
“and a channel located on the inner diameter of the housing, each channel being configured to”.
Should be changed to state:
--and a channel located on [[the]] an inner diameter of the housing, each channel being configured to--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments to the SPEC, filed 08/14/2025, have made the specification objection moot. The specification objection of 02/24/2025 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims, filed 08/14/2025, have made the claim objections and the §112(b) rejections moot. The claim objections and the §112(b) rejections of 02/04/2025 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments to the DRW, filed 08/14/2025, have made the objections to the drawings moot. The objections to the drawings of 02/04/2025 have been withdrawn.
With regards to applicants bald assertion (see REM Page 13 ¶2) that the ribs 91 in Figs 6A and 6B of Kobayashi (i.e. EP 1860753) have a dimension that decreases as the ribs extend outward and because of this the sides of rib 91 are not parallel. The examiner notes that this argument is unpersuasive. With respect to Applicants' assertion that “the ribs 91 in Figs 6A and 6B of Kobayashi (i.e. EP 1860753) have a dimension that decreases as the ribs extend outward and because of this the sides of rib 91 are not parallel” at (REM Page 13 ¶2, filed 08/14/2025), Applicant has provided no evidence to support this assertion. Because this assertion lacks support in the record, the examiner gives the assertion little weight. See, e.g., In re Pearson, 494 F.2d 1399, 1405 (CCPA 1974) (“Attorney’s argument in a brief cannot take the place of evidence.”).
Additionally the evidence of JP 2002-281698 which is the patent document being described in Fig 6A and 6B of EP 1860753 (see ¶0004 of EP ‘753) clearly shows in at least Figures 2a & 2b the structure being illustrated in Fig 6A and 6B of EP 1860753.
Furthermore, Figure 2b of JP 2002-281698 illustrates the longitudinal extension of the ribs along the axial direction of the motor stator 3, and the ribs are shown as being straight. Accordingly, the totality of the disclosure of Fig 6A and 6B of EP 1860753 and Figures 2a & 2b of JP 2002-281698 suggest that contrary to applicants argument the first and second sides of the ribs are parallel as claimed.
Accordingly, for the reasons discussed above, Applicants argument is not persuasive.
Also, it is noted that explanation of the parallel sides being claimed is also discussed below in the claim interpretation section, which also relates to the interpretation of the prior art of Kobayashi (i.e. EP 1860753).
Claim Interpretation
It is noted that each of independent claim 1 (Line 20-21), independent claim 11 (Line 9-10), and independent claim 21 (Line 31-32) have the limitations: “wherein the first and second sides of each tab are parallel and the opposing sides of each channel are parallel”.
With regards to the prior art and the instant application, it is noted that:
If the first and second sides of the rib 91 of EP 1860753 were NOT parallel, then a cross section perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the motor (like the ones shown in Fig 6A and 6B of EP 1860753) would illustrate either a trapezoidal or keystone shape. This can be clearly seen in the annotated prior art Figures below.
PNG
media_image1.png
1006
1031
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
470
959
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
553
890
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Additionally, while it is noted that the evidence of JP 2002-281698 states at Line 497-499 (see Attached translation) that: “Further, each rib 8 is arranged so as to be diagonal and asymmetrical in a cross section in a direction perpendicular to the axial direction of the stator core 3.” This statement is describing the arrangement of the ribs 8 illustrated in Fig 2a is such that they (the ribs 8) are diagonal and asymmetrical from each other in the cross section of the stator illustrated in Fib 2a. This is also evident from the annotated Figure 2 of JP 2002-281698 provided below.
PNG
media_image4.png
259
450
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Furthermore, Figure 2b of JP 2002-281698 illustrates the longitudinal extension of the ribs along the axial direction of the motor stator 3, and the ribs are shown as being straight in the horizontal direction of Fig 2b. Accordingly, the totality of the disclosure of Fig 6A and 6B of EP 1860753 and Figures 2a & 2b of JP 2002-281698 suggest that the first and second sides of the ribs are parallel as claimed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-4, 7-14, and 17-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claims 1, 11, and 21: It is noted that each of independent claim 1 (Line 20-21), independent claim 11 (Line 9-10), and independent claim 21 (Line 31-32) have the limitations: “wherein the first and second sides of each tab are parallel and the opposing sides of each channel are parallel”.
Furthermore, applicant admits (see page 13 ¶1 of REM filed 08/14/2025) that the as filed SPEC does not specifically state that the first and second sides of each tab are parallel and the opposing sides of each channel are parallel as recited in the independent claims. To overcome this defect applicant argues that this feature is inherent because the lateral force (represented by the line 182 in FIG. 22B) is only possible if the first and second sides of each tab are parallel and the opposing sides of each channel are parallel. However the examiner is not convinced by Applicants argument. This is because there is nothing in the disclosure that indicates that the lateral force 182 in Fig 22B is the ONLY force generated by the engagement of each of the respective tabs with the respective channels.
Thus the lateral force 182 in Fig 22B could simply be the horizontal component of the force vector created by the engagement of each of the respective tabs with the respective channels, and there could be additionally vertical, and radial components of the force vector which are present but just not described.
Furthermore, Applicant only provides reasoning for the first and second sides of each tab as being parallel, and has not provided any explanation for the opposing sides of the channels as being parallel. Thus since Applicant has admitted that the SPEC dose not describe the opposing sides of each channel are parallel as recited in the independent claims the language of the independent claims identified above is new mater.
The examiner would like to know:
Since applicants argument for the claimed components being parallel is the presence of the lateral clamping force being present only if the claimed components are parallel – this would also mean that there are no other clamping forces (e.g. vertical clamping forces or radial clamping forces) present when the stator is assembled with the housing. What parts of the disclosure state that there are no other clamping forces (e.g. vertical clamping forces or radial clamping forces) present when the stator is assembled with the housing?
How does the open ended claim language (due to the transition phrase comprising being used in the claims as opposed to using the transition phrase consisting of – MPEP 2111.03) preclude other clamping forces (e.g. vertical clamping forces or radial clamping forces) from being present when the stator is assembled with the housing?
Why does Applicant believe that the opposing sides of each channel are inherently parallel as claimed?
How is it known that the claimed components are parallel and not just close to being parallel or almost parallel? How is perfect precision of the claimed components being parallel achieved?
Additionally, Applicants failure to resolve the questions asked by the examiner in response to this office action, will consequently raise doubt that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing as required by 35 U.S.C. §112. Also see MPEP §2166 and the examiners note regarding rejections under §112(a).
Finally; depending claim(s) inherit deficiencies from the parent claim(s). Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 11, 17 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by EP 1860753 as evidenced by JP 2002-281698. Examiners Note: For the purposes of examining the instant application, the examiners submitted copy of EP 1860753 and JP 2002-281698 (a translation of JP 2002-281698 is submitted with this office action; see the foreign patent document provided by the examiner on 02/24/2025 in the file wrapper), are referenced hereinafter.
Regarding Claim 11: EP 1860753 does disclose the limitations: An assembly (the assembly is defined by the sum of its parts), comprising: a housing (92, ¶0004) having a generally cylindrical shape (Fig 6B illustrates the housing 92 surrounding the stator core 90 as being cylindrical) and having a central axis (L, Fig 1, the stator core 90 in Fig 6B inherently has a central axis like central axis L in Fig 1); a motor (motor = electric motor 100 having the stator and rotor described in ¶0004-¶0005) mounted inside the housing (the stator of the motor is fixed inside the housing by fitting as described in ¶0004-¶0005; also the evidenced by JP 2002-281698 states in Line 245-248 that the stator and housing are fitted together by gap fitting); a drive shaft coupled to the motor (the rotor of the motor would inherently have a shaft in order to transmit the rotary motion generated by the motor; additionally the evidenced by JP 2002-281698 states in Line 41-47, and Line 486-490 that the rotor is fixed to rotating shaft 6); and
a plurality of clamping mechanisms (plurality of clamping mechanisms = grooves 93 formed in housing 92 and ribs 91 on the outer circumferential surface of the stator as described in ¶0004-¶0005, each clamping mechanism includes one rib 91 and one groove 93) spaced about an outer diameter of the motor (the motor inherently has an outer diameter, the outer diameter of the motor = the outer diameter of the stator that defines the outer circumference of the stator core that each rib extends from as shown in Fig 6B; since each rib 91 is formed on the stator core 90 of the motor and the ribs 91 are spaced in the circumferential direction (Fig 6B); each of the clamping mechanisms is spaced about the outer diameter/outer circumference of the motor/stator as claimed; also see Line 419-425 of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698) configured to constrain the motor within the housing (the clamping mechanisms attach (i.e. constrain) the stator core 90 of the stator of the motor to the housing 92 – as described in ¶0004-¶0005; also see Line 739-758 of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698), wherein each of the plurality of clamping mechanisms include a tab (= rib 91) located on the outer diameter of the motor (Fig 6A-6B, as described in ¶0004-¶0005) and a channel (= grooves 93) located on an inner diameter of the housing (the cylindrical housing inherently has an inner diameter, each groove 93 is formed on an inner circumference of the housing as seen in Figs 6A-6B, since the inner circumference of the housing is defined by the inner diameter, each of the grooves 93 is located on the inner diameter/inner circumference as claimed), each channel being configured receive a respective tab (Fig 6A-6B, as described in ¶0004-¶0005; also see Line 739-758 of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698), each tab 91 has a first and second sides (first and second sides = left side/surface 91a in Fig 6A and the opposite right side/surface illustrated (but not labeled in Fig 6A, ¶0005), each channel having opposing sides (it does, each groove 93 has left and right sides (i.e. opposing sides) as seen in Fig 6A-6B; also see Line 730-738 of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698), wherein the first and second sides of each tab are parallel (as seen in Fig 6A-6B of EP ‘753, also see Figs 2a-6b of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698 – which each illustrate the articulated first and second sides as being parallel, especially since the drawings showing longitudinal section views (JP ‘698 – Line 481-485) of the stator core 3 show the ribs as being straight in the left-right direction) and the opposing sides of each channel are parallel (as seen in Fig 6A-6B of EP ‘753 and see Figs 6a-6b of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698 the left and right sides of each grove are parallel as claimed), wherein a lateral clamping force is applied to each of the first and second sides of each tab by opposing sides of the channel (since each tab 91 is fitted into a corresponding channel 93 – (see Fig 6A-6B, as described in ¶0004-¶0005 of EP ‘753; also see Line 739-758 of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698) – in the assembled state the opposing sides of each channel would inherently exert a lateral clamping force to the first and second sides of each tab due to the fit connection between the tabs 91 and channels 93; additionally, applicant stated that when tabs with parallel sides are fit into channels having parallel sides a lateral clamping force is inherently present (see REM filed 08/14/2025 page 13 ¶1), accordingly the prior art of EP ‘753 would inherently have a lateral clamping force just like the instant application for the same inherency reasons argued by applicant).
Regarding Claim 17: EP 1860753 does disclose the limitations: wherein the lateral clamping force is established by an interference therebetween (it is, as explained above the lateral clamping force is established by the fit between elements 91 and elements 93).
Regarding Claim 19: EP 1860753 does disclose the limitations: wherein each tab 91 has a top surface (91a, Fig 6A, ¶0005) and each channel 93 has an outer surface (93a, Fig 6A, ¶0005), the top surface of each tab and the outer surface of a respective channel having a radial clearance (radial clearance = 0, since element 93a contacts element 91a the radial clearance between the two elements is zero, Fig 6A, ¶0005).
Regarding Claim 20: EP 1860753 does disclose the limitations: wherein the radial clearance is 0 microns (since Fig 6A and ¶0005 discloses that element 93a contacts element 91a the radial clearance between the two elements is zero microns).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 1860753 as evidenced by JP 2002-281698 as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Kingman US 2009/0212649.
Regarding Claim 12: EP 1860753 as evidenced by JP 2002-281698 discloses in the above mentioned Figures and Specifications the limitations set forth in claim 11. Additionally, EP 1860753 as evidenced by JP 2002-281698 discloses the limitations: wherein the housing (EP ‘753 - 92) includes an inner motor cavity (EP ‘753 - inner motor cavity = cavity defined by inner circumferential surface and grooves 93 in housing 92, ¶0004-¶0005, Fig 6B) having an inner diameter (EP ‘753 – inner diameter = inner diameter which defines the inner circumferential surface of housing 92 in Fig 6B), the motor including a stator (EP ‘753 - including the stator having stator core 90 and coils (e.g. coils shown in Fig 12 of JP 2002-281698 – since the motors shown in Figs 2a-6b each include the conventional structure shown in Fig 12 – Line 481-490)) having an outer diameter which defines the outer diameter of the motor (EP ‘753 - stator core 90 inherently has an outer diameter which defines the outer circumference of the stator core as described in ¶0004, Figs 6A-6B; additionally as explained in the rejection of claim 11 above the outer diameter of the stator core 90 defines the outer diameter of the motor), wherein the outer diameter of the stator and the inner diameter of the inner motor cavity are configured to establish a fit (JP 2002-281698 – are capable of establishing the gap fit (Line 730-756) between ribs 8 (e.g. ribs 91 of EP ‘753) and to grooves 11 (e.g. grooves 93 of EP ‘753)) to maintain concentricity therebetween (as seen in Fig 6B the stator core 90 of the stator is concentrically arranged within the housing 92, thus the two parts are concentric and “maintain concentricity” as claimed). EP 1860753 is silent that the fit between the stator and the housing is a slip fit. The prior art of Kingman which is directed to an inner rotor motor with a stator secured to a housing surrounding the stator (Kingman - ¶0002, ¶0015, ¶0021) like EP 1860753, is noted.
However Kingman US 2009/0212649 does disclose the limitations: an electric motor (electric motor assembly 212, Fig 4, ¶0021) mounted inside a housing (214, Fig 4, ¶0021); a plurality of clamping mechanisms (plurality of clamping mechanisms = plurality of teeth 240 (formed on outer surface 236 of stator 216), plurality of slots 242 (formed in inner surface 238 of housing 214), and plural pairs of roll pins 234 (inserted between either side of teeth 240 in slot 242), ¶0021; each clamping mechanisms includes a tooth 240, a slot 242 and a pair of roll pins 234) spaced about the outer diameter of the motor (as seen in Fig 4 the clamping mechanisms 240,242,234 are spaced about the outer surface 236/outer diameter of stator 216 of the motor) configured to constrain the motor within the housing (i.e. configured to attach the stator to the housing with a slip-fit, ¶0021, ¶0004, ¶0007); and
wherein the housing 214 includes an inner motor cavity (218, Fig 4, ¶0021) having an inner diameter (i.e. having the inner diameter defined by inner surface 238 of the housing 214, Fig 4, ¶0021), the motor 212 including a stator (216, Fig 4, ¶0021) having an outer diameter which defines the outer diameter of the motor (the stator inherently has an outer diameter, additionally as explained above the outer diameter of the stator defines the outer diameter of the motor), wherein the outer diameter of the stator and the inner diameter inner motor cavity are configured to establish a slip fit (¶0021) to maintain concentricity therebetween (as seen in Fig 4, the outer diameter defined by surface 236 of the stator and the inner diameter defined by surface 238 of the housing are concentrically arranged, thus the slip fit formed by the plurality of clamping mechanisms in Fig 4 and described in ¶0021 are capable of (i.e. configured to) maintain concentricity as claimed).
Hence it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to replace the gap fit connection between plurality of clamping mechanisms taught by EP 1860753 as evidenced by JP 2002-281698 with a slip fit connection as taught by Kingman US 2009/0212649 in order to connect the stator to the housing, using a slip fit connection (¶0021) as known in the art.
Regarding Claim 13: EP 1860753 as evidenced by JP 2002-281698 and modified by Kingman US 2009/0212649 does disclose the limitations: wherein the slip fit between the outer diameter of the stator and the inner diameter is established by an interference therebetween (it is, in the combination of art the slip fit is established by the interference created by the interference created the ribs and grooves and thus creates a slip fit between the outer diameter defined by the circumferential surface of the stator that the ribs 91 and the inner diameter defined by surface 93 in Fig 6A of the housing 92 of EP ‘753 in the same manner that the interference between element 178C and 180C in Fig 22B creates a slip fit between the outer diameter defined by surface 176 of the stator and the inner diameter 174 of the housing 12 in the instant application).
Regarding Claim 14: EP 1860753 as evidenced by JP 2002-281698 and as modified by Kingman US 2009/0212649 discloses in the above mentioned Figures and Specifications the limitations set forth in claim 13. Further Kingman US 2009/0212649 does disclose that the slip-fit is characterized by a gap between the housing and stator that will maintain contact between the housing and the stator over the expected range of thermal expansion of the device (¶0022).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the interference between the outer diameter of the stator and the inner diameter of the housing 92 of EP ‘753, specifically to set the interference between the outer diameter of the stator and the inner diameter to be between -25 and 75 microns, to ensure that the size of the slip-fit being used is able to maintain contact with the housing and the stator over the expected range of thermal expansion (¶0021) as a matter of routine optimization since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Claim(s) 1, 7, 9-10, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kowada US 2020/0003199 in view of EP 1860753 as evidenced by JP 2002-281698.
Regarding Claim 1: Kowada US 2020/0003199 discloses the limitations:
An electric compressor (the electric compressor is defined by the sum of its parts) configured to compress a refrigerant (¶0001), comprising:
a housing (= housing 140, ¶0019) defining an intake volume (H1, ¶0019) and a discharge volume (H2, ¶0019), the housing having a generally cylindrical shape (housing 140 includes 142,144,146, 148, ¶0024 elements 142A, 142B1, 144, and 146 of the housing are substantially cylindrical ¶0025, ¶0027, ¶0030) and having a central axis (central axis = longitudinal axis of shaft 166);
a refrigerant inlet port (= conduit of the refrigerant circuit which inherently connects to port P1 of the compressor, ¶0026) coupled to the housing (as seen in Fig 1 P1 is formed in the housing, thus the conduit of the refrigerant circuit which forms the inlet port would inherently be connected to the housing at port P1) and configured to introduce the refrigerant to the intake volume (the conduit forming the inlet port would inherently introduce the refrigerant to the intake volume H1 in Fig 1 via port P1, ¶0026);
a refrigerant outlet port (= pipe connecting to port P2, ¶0033) coupled to the housing (as seen in Fig 1 P2 is formed in the housing – the pipe described in ¶0033 connects port P2 to the condenser of the refrigeration circuit) and configured to allow compressed refrigerant to exit the electric compressor from the discharge volume (as seen in Fig 1 the compressed refrigerant flows from the discharge volume H2 to port P2 wherefrom it would inherently flow to the articulated outlet port and to the condenser of the refrigerant circuit, ¶0033-¶0034);
an inverter module (180, ¶0019, ¶0036-¶0037) mounted inside the housing (Fig 1, ¶0024) and adapted to convert direct current electrical power to alternating current electrical power (i.e. convert direct current from a battery to alternating current as described in ¶0036);
a motor (160, ¶0036) inside the housing (electric motor 160 is shown inside element 142 of the housing 140 in Fig 1, ¶0024);
a drive shaft 166 coupled to the motor (i.e. coupled to rotor 162 of the motor 160, Fig 1, ¶0037);
a compression device (compression device = scroll unit 120, ¶0020-¶0023) coupled to the drive shaft (the orbiting scroll 124 of the scroll unit/compression device 120 is coupled to shaft 166, ¶0037, ¶0020), for receiving the refrigerant from the intake volume (Fig 1, ¶0029) and compressing the refrigerant as the drive shaft is rotated by the motor (¶0037,¶0020-¶0023). Kowada US 2020/0003199 is silent regarding the limitations: a plurality of clamping mechanisms spaced about an outer diameter of the motor configured to mount and constrain the motor within the housing, wherein each of the plurality of clamping mechanisms include a tab located on the outer diameter of the motor and a channel located on an inner diameter of the housing, each channel being configured to receive a respective tab, each tab has first and second sides, each channel having opposing sides, wherein the first and second sides of each tab are parallel and the opposing sides of each channel are parallel, wherein a lateral clamping force is applied to each of the first and second sides of each tab by the opposing sides of a respective channel. The prior art of EP 1860753 which is directed to an electric motor driven scroll refrigerant compressor (EP - ¶0011) like Kowada US 2020/0003199, is noted.
However, EP 1860753 does disclose the limitations: a housing (92, ¶0004) having a generally cylindrical shape (Fig 6B illustrates the housing 92 surrounding the stator core 90 as being cylindrical) and having a central axis (L, Fig 1, the stator core 90 in Fig 6B inherently has a central axis like central axis L in Fig 1); a motor (motor = electric motor 100 having the stator and rotor described in ¶0004-¶0005) mounted inside the housing (the stator of the motor is fixed inside the housing by fitting as described in ¶0004-¶0005; also the evidenced by JP 2002-281698 states in Line 245-248 that the stator and housing are fitted together by gap fitting); a drive shaft coupled to the motor (the rotor of the motor would inherently have a shaft in order to transmit the rotary motion generated by the motor; additionally the evidenced by JP 2002-281698 states in Line 41-47, and Line 486-490 that the rotor is fixed to rotating shaft 6); and
a plurality of clamping mechanisms (plurality of clamping mechanisms = grooves 93 formed in housing 92 and ribs 91 on the outer circumferential surface of the stator as described in ¶0004-¶0005, each clamping mechanism includes one rib 91 and one groove 93) spaced about an outer diameter of the motor (the motor inherently has an outer diameter, the outer diameter of the motor = the outer diameter of the stator that defines the outer circumference of the stator core that each rib extends from as shown in Fig 6B; since each rib 91 is formed on the stator core 90 of the motor and the ribs 91 are spaced in the circumferential direction (Fig 6B); each of the clamping mechanisms is spaced about the outer diameter/outer circumference of the motor/stator as claimed; also see Line 419-425 of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698) configured to constrain the motor within the housing (the clamping mechanisms attach (i.e. constrain) the stator core 90 of the stator of the motor to the housing 92 – as described in ¶0004-¶0005; also see Line 739-758 of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698),
wherein each of the plurality of clamping mechanisms include a tab (= rib 91) located on the outer diameter of the motor (Fig 6A-6B, as described in ¶0004-¶0005) and a channel (= grooves 93) located on an inner diameter of the housing (the cylindrical housing inherently has an inner diameter, each groove 93 is formed on an inner circumference of the housing as seen in Figs 6A-6B, since the inner circumference of the housing is defined by the inner diameter, each of the grooves 93 is located on the inner diameter/inner circumference as claimed), each channel being configured receive a respective tab (Fig 6A-6B, as described in ¶0004-¶0005; also see Line 739-758 of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698), each tab 91 has a first and second sides (first and second sides = left side/surface 91a in Fig 6A and the opposite right side/surface illustrated (but not labeled in Fig 6A, ¶0005), each channel having opposing sides (it does, each groove 93 has left and right sides (i.e. opposing sides) as seen in Fig 6A-6B; also see Line 730-738 of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698), wherein the first and second sides of each tab are parallel (as seen in Fig 6A-6B of EP ‘753, also see Figs 2a-6b of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698 – which each illustrate the articulated first and second sides as being parallel, especially since the drawings showing longitudinal section views (JP ‘698 – Line 481-485) of the stator core 3 show the ribs as being straight in the left-right direction) and the opposing sides of each channel are parallel (as seen in Fig 6A-6B of EP ‘753 and see Figs 6a-6b of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698 the left and right sides of each grove are parallel as claimed), wherein a lateral clamping force is applied to each of the first and second sides of each tab by opposing sides of the channel (since each tab 91 is fitted into a corresponding channel 93 – (see Fig 6A-6B, as described in ¶0004-¶0005 of EP ‘753; also see Line 739-758 of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698) – in the assembled state the opposing sides of each channel would inherently exert a lateral clamping force to the first and second sides of each tab due to the fit connection between the tabs 91 and channels 93; additionally, applicant stated that when tabs with parallel sides are fit into channels having parallel sides a lateral clamping force is inherently present (see REM filed 08/14/2025 page 13 ¶1), accordingly the prior art of EP ‘753 would inherently have a lateral clamping force just like the instant application for the same inherency reasons argued by applicant).
Hence it would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the stator 164 and element 142A of the housing which surrounds the stator 164 of Kowada US 2020/0003199 with the ribs 91 formed on an outer circumrenal surface of the stator, and the grooves 93 arranged along the inner circumferential surface of the housing as taught by EP 1860753 in order to fix the stator to the housing (¶0004-¶0005 of EP ‘753).
Regarding Claim 7: EP 1860753 does disclose the limitations: wherein the lateral clamping force is established by an interference therebetween (it is, as explained above the lateral clamping force is established by the interference of the fit between elements 91 and elements 93).
Regarding Claim 9: EP 1860753 does disclose the limitations: wherein each tab 91 has a top surface (91a, Fig 6A, ¶0005) and each channel 93 has an outer surface (93a, Fig 6A, ¶0005), the top surface of each tab and the outer surface of a respective channel having a radial clearance (radial clearance = 0, since element 93a contacts element 91a the radial clearance between the two elements is zero, Fig 6A, ¶0005).
Regarding Claim 10: EP 1860753 does disclose the limitations: wherein the radial clearance is 0 microns (since Fig 6A and ¶0005 discloses that element 93a contacts element 91a the radial clearance between the two elements is zero microns).
PNG
media_image5.png
811
948
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1 of Kowada US 2020/0003199 (Attached Figure A)
Regarding Claim 21: Kowada US 2020/0003199 discloses the limitations:
An electric compressor (the electric compressor is defined by the sum of its parts) having a central axis (i.e. central axis extending through passage L2 in Fig 1) and being configured to compress a refrigerant (¶0001), comprising:
a housing (= housing identified in Annotated Figure 1 of Kowada US 2020/0003199 (Attached Figure A) above, ¶0019, ¶0024) defining an intake volume (H1, ¶0019) and a discharge volume (H2, ¶0019);
a refrigerant inlet port (= conduit of the refrigerant circuit which inherently connects to port P1 of the compressor, ¶0026) coupled to the housing (as seen in Fig 1 P1 is formed in the housing, thus the conduit of the refrigerant circuit which forms the inlet port would inherently be connected to the housing at port P1) and configured to introduce the refrigerant to the intake volume (the conduit forming the inlet port would inherently introduce the refrigerant to the intake volume H1 in Fig 1 via port P1, ¶0026);
a refrigerant outlet port (= pipe connecting to port P2, ¶0033) coupled to the housing (as seen in Fig 1 P2 is formed in the housing – the pipe described in ¶0033 connects port P2 to the condenser of the refrigeration circuit) and configured to allow compressed refrigerant to exit the electric compressor from the discharge volume (as seen in Fig 1 the compressed refrigerant flows from the discharge volume H2 to port P2 wherefrom it would inherently flow to the articulated outlet port and to the condenser of the refrigerant circuit, ¶0033-¶0034);
an inverter (the inverter section is defined by the sum of its parts) section including:
an inverter housing (Attached Figure A),
an inverter back cover (Attached Figure A) connected to the inverter housing (¶0024) and forming an inverter cavity (Attached Figure A),
an inverter module (180, Attached Figure A, ¶0019, ¶0036-37) mounted inside the inverter cavity (as seen in Fig 1, ¶0024 and Attached Figure A) and adapted to convert direct current electrical power to alternating current electrical power (i.e. convert direct current from a battery to alternating current as described in ¶0036);
a motor section (the motor section is defined by the sum of its parts) including:
a drive shaft 166 located within the housing (Fig 1), having first and second ends (first and second ends = end identified by element 240C in Fig 1 and end identified by element OL in Fig 1) and defining a center axis (shaft 166 inherently defines a central longitudinal axis of shaft 166), and
a motor (160, ¶0036) located within the housing (electric motor 160 is located inside element 142A of the housing in Attached Figure A, ¶0024) to controllably rotate the drive shaft about the center axis (motor rotor 162 of the motor 160 is able to rotate the drive shaft 166 about the center axis in response to the magnetic field generated in the stator ¶0036-¶0037),
a compression device (compression device = scroll unit 120, ¶0020-¶0023) coupled to the drive shaft (the orbiting scroll 124 of the scroll unit/compression device 120 is coupled to shaft 166, ¶0037, ¶0020), for receiving the refrigerant from the intake volume (Fig 1, ¶0029) and compressing the refrigerant as the drive shaft is rotated by the motor (¶0037,¶0020-¶0023), the compression device including:
a fixed scroll 122 located within, and being fixed relative to, the housing (as seen in ¶0030 and Attached Figure A element 122 is fixed to elements 144A & 146 of the housing);
an orbiting scroll 124 coupled to the drive shaft (¶0037, ¶0020), the orbiting scroll and the fixed scroll forming compression chambers (Attached Figure A, ¶0023) for receiving the refrigerant from the intake volume and compressing the refrigerant as the drive shaft is rotated about the center axis (Attached Figure A, ¶0037, ¶0020-¶0023),
wherein the housing 140 includes an inner motor cavity (space inside 142A where motor 160 is located in Fig 1, ¶0018-¶0019) having an inner diameter (since element 142A has a substantially cylindrical shape ¶0025, it would inherently have an inner diameter in Fig 1), the motor 160 including a stator (164, ¶0036, Fig 1). Kowada US 2020/0003199 is silent regarding the limitations: a plurality of clamping mechanisms spaced about an outer diameter of the motor configured to constrain the motor within the housing, the stator having an outer diameter which defines the outer diameter of the motor, wherein each of the plurality of clamping mechanisms include a tab located on the outer diameter of the motor and a channel located on an inner diameter of the housing, each channel being configured to receive a respective tab, each tab has first and second sides, each channel having opposing sides, wherein the first and second sides of each tab are parallel and the opposing sides of each channel are parallel, wherein a lateral clamping force is applied to each of the first and second sides of each tab by the opposing sides a respective channel. The prior art of EP 1860753 which is directed to an electric motor driven scroll refrigerant compressor (EP - ¶0011) like Kowada US 2020/0003199, is noted.
However, EP 1860753 does disclose the limitations: a housing (92, ¶0004) having a generally cylindrical shape (Fig 6B illustrates the housing 92 surrounding the stator core 90 as being cylindrical) and having a central axis (L, Fig 1, the stator core 90 in Fig 6B inherently has a central axis like central axis L in Fig 1); a motor (motor = electric motor 100 having the stator and rotor described in ¶0004-¶0005) mounted inside the housing (the stator of the motor is fixed inside the housing by fitting as described in ¶0004-¶0005; also the evidenced by JP 2002-281698 states in Line 245-248 that the stator and housing are fitted together by gap fitting); a drive shaft coupled to the motor (the rotor of the motor would inherently have a shaft in order to transmit the rotary motion generated by the motor; additionally the evidenced by JP 2002-281698 states in Line 41-47, and Line 486-490 that the rotor is fixed to rotating shaft 6); and
a plurality of clamping mechanisms (plurality of clamping mechanisms = grooves 93 formed in housing 92 and ribs 91 on the outer circumferential surface of the stator as described in ¶0004-¶0005, each clamping mechanism includes one rib 91 and one groove 93) spaced about an outer diameter of the motor (the motor inherently has an outer diameter, the outer diameter of the motor = the outer diameter of the stator that defines the outer circumference of the stator core that each rib extends from as shown in Fig 6B; since each rib 91 is formed on the stator core 90 of the motor and the ribs 91 are spaced in the circumferential direction (Fig 6B); each of the clamping mechanisms is spaced about the outer diameter/outer circumference of the motor/stator as claimed; also see Line 419-425 of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698) configured to constrain the motor within the housing (the clamping mechanisms attach (i.e. constrain) the stator core 90 of the stator of the motor to the housing 92 – as described in ¶0004-¶0005; also see Line 739-758 of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698), wherein the housing 92 includes an inner motor cavity (inner motor cavity = cavity defined by inner circumferential surface and grooves 93 in housing 92, ¶0004-¶0005, Fig 6B) having an inner diameter (inner diameter = inner diameter which defines the inner circumferential surface of housing 92 in Fig 6B), the motor including a stator (including the stator having stator core 90 and coils (e.g. coils shown in Fig 12 of JP 2002-281698 – since the motors shown in Figs 2a-6b each include the conventional structure shown in Fig 12 – Line 481-490)) having an outer diameter which defines the outer diameter of the motor (stator core 90 inherently has an outer diameter which defines the outer circumference of the stator core as described in ¶0004, Figs 6A-6B; additionally as explained above the outer diameter of the stator defines the outer diameter of the motor), wherein each of the plurality of clamping mechanisms include a tab (= rib 91) located on the outer diameter of the motor (Fig 6A-6B, as described in ¶0004-¶0005) and a channel (= grooves 93) located on an inner diameter of the housing (the cylindrical housing inherently has an inner diameter, each groove 93 is formed on an inner circumference of the housing as seen in Figs 6A-6B, since the inner circumference of the housing is defined by the inner diameter, each of the grooves 93 is located on the inner diameter/inner circumference as claimed), each channel being configured to receive a respective tab (Fig 6A-6B, as described in ¶0004-¶0005; also see Line 739-758 of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698), each tab 91 has first and second sides (first and second sides = left side/surface 91a in Fig 6A and the opposite right side/surface illustrated (but not labeled in Fig 6A, ¶0005), each channel having opposing sides (it does, each groove 93 has left and right sides (i.e. opposing sides) as seen in Fig 6A-6B; also see Line 730-738 of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698), wherein the first and second sides of each tab are parallel (as seen in Fig 6A-6B of EP ‘753, also see Figs 2a-6b of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698 – which each illustrate the articulated first and second sides as being parallel, especially since the drawings showing longitudinal section views (JP ‘698 – Line 481-485) of the stator core 3 show the ribs as being straight in the left-right direction) and the opposing sides of each channel are parallel (as seen in Fig 6A-6B of EP ‘753 and see Figs 6a-6b of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698 the left and right sides of each grove are parallel as claimed), wherein a lateral clamping force is applied to each of the first and second sides of each tab by the opposing sides a respective channel (since each tab 91 is fitted into a corresponding channel 93 – (see Fig 6A-6B, as described in ¶0004-¶0005 of EP ‘753; also see Line 739-758 of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698) – in the assembled state the opposing sides of each channel would inherently exert a lateral clamping force to the first and second sides of each tab due to the fit connection between the tabs 91 and channels 93; additionally, applicant stated that when tabs with parallel sides are fit into channels having parallel sides a lateral clamping force is inherently present (see REM filed 08/14/2025 page 13 ¶1), accordingly the prior art of EP ‘753 would inherently have a lateral clamping force just like the instant application for the same inherency reasons argued by applicant).
Hence it would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the stator 164 and element 142A of the housing which surrounds the stator 164 of Kowada US 2020/0003199 with the ribs 91 formed on an outer circumrenal surface of the stator, and the grooves 93 arranged along the inner circumferential surface of the housing as taught by EP 1860753 in order to fix the stator to the housing (¶0004-¶0005 of EP ‘753).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 1860753 as evidenced by JP 2002-281698 as applied to claims 17 above, and further in view of Kozarekar US 2020/0112226.
since each tab 91 is fitted into a corresponding channel 93 – (see Fig 6A-6B, as described in ¶0004-¶0005 of EP ‘753; also see Line 739-758 of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698
Regarding Claim 18: EP 1860753 as evidenced by JP 2002-281698 discloses the limitations: the interference between the first and second sides of each tab and the opposing sides (since EP ‘753 states that each tab 91 is fitted into a corresponding channel 93 – (see Fig 6A-6B, as described in ¶0004-¶0005 of EP ‘753; also see Line 739-758 of the evidenced by JP 2002-281698) the connection between the stator core 90 and the housing 92 is achieved by fitting each rib 91 to groove 93 – thus, the art of EP ‘753 discloses the interference of the fit is used to connect the stator core to the housing). EP 1860753 is silent regarding the limitations: the interference is 100-200 microns.
Furthermore, Kozarekar US 2020/0112226 discloses that: the tightness of a press fit (i.e. the force required to make the press fit connection) is based on the extent of the interference (¶0021-¶0022).
Hence it would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the initial size difference between the opposing sides of the channels 93 and the first and second sides of each rib 91 which are fit together (EP - ¶0004) in the art of EP 1860753 with the interference size of between 0.1 mm to 0.2 mm (i.e. 100-200 microns) between the stator and the housing which are press-fit together (Kozarekar - ¶0021-¶0022) as taught by Kozarekar US 2020/0112226 in order to ensure: that the stiffness of the stator housing assembly reduces the resonance during operation of the motor (Kozarekar - ¶0021), and/or that the tightness of the fit is appropriate for the size and materials of the stator housing assembly (Kozarekar - ¶0021-¶0022).
Additionally or in the alternate, it would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the initial size difference between the opposing sides of the channels 93 and the first and second sides of each tab 9