Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/161,369

STATOR ASSY, BRUSHLESS MOTOR, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING STATOR ASSY

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jan 30, 2023
Examiner
SINGH, ALEXANDER A
Art Unit
2834
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Murata Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
OA Round
4 (Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
78%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
493 granted / 640 resolved
+9.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +1% lift
Without
With
+1.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
663
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
52.7%
+12.7% vs TC avg
§102
28.1%
-11.9% vs TC avg
§112
16.6%
-23.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 640 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION 1. Claims 1-4 and 7-17 of U.S. Application 18/161369 filed on October 9, 2025 are presented for examination. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Response to Arguments 3. Applicant argues on page 5 that Higashiyama does not qualify as prior art under 35 USC 102(a)(1) because it was published after the effective filing date of the instant applicant, which is October 1, 2020. The examiner agrees that Higashiyama does not qualify as prior art under 102(a)(1), however, Higashiyama does qualify as prior art under 102(a)(2) has being effectively filed before the effective filing date of the instant application based on Higashiyama’s priority date of May 15, 2020. The applicant argues on pages 5-6, that both Higashiyama and that instant application are commonly owned by Murata Manufacturing Co. Ltd. and therefore the commonly owned 102(b)(2)(c) exception should apply. The examiner points out in accordance with MPEP 717.02(a)(I) that “in order to invoke common ownership to except a disclosure as prior art, the applicant (or the patent owner) must provide a statement that the disclosure of the subject matter on which the rejection is based and the claimed invention were owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The statement should either be on or begin on a separate sheet and must not be directed to other matters (37 CFR 1.4(c) ). The statement must be signed in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33(b).” The applicant has provided no such statement in accordance with the MPEP, therefore the rejection is maintained. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 4. 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. 5. Claims 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higashiyama (US 20230114545) in view of Saeki (JP 2014225944, see English Machine Translation attached). Regarding claim 8, Higashiyama teaches (see figs. 4 and 5 below) a stator assy (85) (¶ 30) comprising: a shaft (81) having a rotor yoke (89) extending therefrom (¶ 34; ¶ 32); a housing (83, 93) including a first housing member (83) and a second housing member (93) that define a space on an inner side thereof (¶ 29; ¶ 37); a stator (85) disposed in the space of the housing (83, 93) (¶ 30; ¶ 32); a magnet (90) on an outer surface of the rotor yoke (89) to face the stator (85) (¶ 32; ¶ 33); and wherein the first housing member (83) includes a main wall (83A), a side wall (83B), and an inner wall (84), wherein the main wall (83A) is circular in a plan view, and wherein the side wall (83B) is cylindrical in the plan view, is disposed along an outer peripheral end of the main wall (83A), and extends in a direction perpendicular to a main surface of the main wall (83A) (figs. 4 and 5; ¶ 29; ¶ 30). PNG media_image1.png 474 787 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 845 416 media_image2.png Greyscale Higashiyama does not explicitly teach an insulating resin disposed in the space and that fixes the first housing member, the second housing member, and the stator to each other. However, Saeki teaches (see fig. 1 below) an insulating resin (30) disposed in the space and that fixes the first housing member (24), the second housing member (25), and the stator (23) to each other (Abstract; pages 1-3) in order to enhance heat dissipation from the stator (Saeki, pages 1-2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Higashiyama and provide an insulating resin disposed in the space and that fixes the first housing member, the second housing member, and the stator to each other as taught by Saeki in order to enhance heat dissipation from the stator (Saeki, pages 1-2). PNG media_image3.png 542 683 media_image3.png Greyscale Regarding claim 9/8, Higashiyama in view of Saeki teaches the device of claim 8, Higashiyama further teaches (see figs. 4 and 5 above) the inner wall (84) is cylindrical in the plan view, is disposed at a center of the main wall (83A), and extends in a direction perpendicular to the main surface of the main wall (83A) (figs. 4 and 5; ¶ 29; ¶ 30). Regarding claim 10/9/8, Higashiyama in view of Saeki teaches the device of claim 9, Higashiyama further teaches (see figs. 4 and 5 above) the inner wall (84) includes a hollow portion (84A) and the main wall (83A) has an opening (see annotated fig. 5 above) in an area overlapping the hollow portion (84A) (figs. 4 and 5; ¶ 29; ¶ 30). Regarding claim 11/10/9/8, Higashiyama in view of Saeki teaches the device of claim 10, Higashiyama further teaches (see figs. 4 and 5 above) the second housing member (93) includes a main wall (see annotated fig. 5 above) and a side wall (see annotated fig. 5 above) (figs. 4 and 5; ¶ 29; ¶ 30). Regarding claim 12/11/10/9/8, Higashiyama in view of Saeki teaches the device of claim 11, Higashiyama further teaches (see figs. 4 and 5 above) the main wall (see annotated fig. 5 above) of the second housing member (93) is circular in the plan view, and wherein the side wall (see annotated fig. 5 above) of the second housing member (93) is cylindrical in the plan view, is disposed along an outer peripheral end of the main wall (see annotated fig. 5 above), and extends in a direction perpendicular to a main surface of the main wall (see annotated fig. 5 above) of the second housing member (93) (figs. 4 and 5; ¶ 29; ¶ 30). Regarding claim 13/12/11/10/9/8, Higashiyama in view of Saeki teaches the device of claim 12, Higashiyama further teaches (see figs. 4 and 5 above) the main wall (see annotated fig. 5 above) of the second housing member (93) has, at a center, an opening (see annotated fig. 5 above) that extends through the main wall (see annotated fig. 5 above) in a thickness direction (figs. 4 and 5; ¶ 29; ¶ 30). Allowable Subject Matter 6. Claims 1-4, 7 and 14-17 allowed. Conclusion 7. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER A SINGH whose telephone number is (571)270-0243. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5pm. 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, Seye Iwarere can be reached at 571-270-5112. 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. /ALEXANDER A SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 30, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 14, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 18, 2025
Response Filed
Apr 01, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jun 27, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 01, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 08, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 09, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 20, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603543
WIRING RING, STATOR AND ELECTRIC MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603544
CONNECTION STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603560
VEHICLE DRIVE SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12592618
EXTERNALLY EXCITED ELECTRIC MACHINE, MOTOR VEHICLE, AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING AN EXTERNALLY EXCITED ELECTRIC MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592602
COIL WIRE MODULE, SOLDER-INCORPORATED SOLDER JOINTING PART, AND MANUFACTURING METHOD FOR COIL WIRE MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
78%
With Interview (+1.4%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 640 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month