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 .
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendment filed on 04/27/2026, claims 1,7-8,& 12-13 have been amended, claim 4 is cancelled, and claims 1-3 & 5-13 are pending and under examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant’s reply, filed 4/27/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 7, 8, 12, and 13 under 35 USC 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection of claims 12 and 13 is made under 35 USC 112(a).
Applicant’s arguments filed on 04/27/2026 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on page 3-4 that Guercioni does not teach or suggest that the “mounting unit” is coupled to an upper portion of the “supporting unit” as identified in FIG. 15 below. The Applicant also argues that the “supporting unit” does not extend downward from a lower portion of the “mounting unit”.
PNG
media_image1.png
193
629
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Respectfully, the applicant appears to be improperly reading limitations into the claim though they are not recited therein. The claim does not require that the mounting unit be directly coupled to the supporting unit, and therefore a coupling of the two elements, even though it may be indirect, satisfies the argued limitation of the claim
Also, the Applicant’s argument is not found to be compelling, as the mounting unit understandably must be held up by a general supporting structure. In order for a mounting unit to be held, preventing the possibility of misalignment and movement during the manufacturing process of a stator using an apparatus as claimed in the immediate application, coupling between units, namely the mounting unit and supporting unit, must be present. As shown in another interpretation of Guercioni FIG. 15 below, the newly annotated structures map to such structures used for mounting a stator body and support for holding the mounting structure. More specifically, white horizontal plate is mapped as the mounting unit and the black square-like structure is mapped as the supporting unit.
PNG
media_image2.png
189
540
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding the argument for coupled location, as depicted in FIG. 15 above, the mounting unit is positioned such that there is space below, forming a gap. The amended claim utilizes the word “portion” rather than a clear defined “surface” which can be interpreted such that the top half of the body of the plate, namely the mounting unit, is to be the upper portion while the bottom half of the body of the plate is to be the lower portion. The supporting unit is positioned along the entire sidewall of the mounting unit, and extends further below to attach to a secondary horizontal plate below. Thus, it is understood that the supporting unit is coupled to the side wall’s upper and lower portion of the mounting unit, and the supporting unit further extends below the mounting unit.
Also, the limitation “upper” is a subjectively defined and relative term, not being further defined by the claim with referential directions. As such, the determination of what is above or below or upper or lower or the like is subjectively determined based upon point of view, rather than any absolute definition.
For the reasons explained above, the examiner asserts the position of rejection for amended claim 1. Furthermore, being that claims 2-3 and 5-13 are dependent on claim 1, the examiner asserts the position of rejection for claims 2-3 and 5-13 as well.
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 12 and 13 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.
More specifically, claims 12 and 13 are rejected as they recite the limitation “a vehicle comprising the apparatus for bending and expanding the plurality of hairpins of the hairpin motor of claim 11” (claim 13 recites a similar limitation to claim 12). As such, insufficient detail was provided within the specifications that would allow one skill in the art to reasonably conclude the applicant had possession of the claimed invention, namely a vehicle that comprises of the apparatus and not the product made by the apparatus.
Claims 12 and 13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. More specifically, Claim 12 recites the limitation “a vehicle comprising the apparatus for bending and expanding the plurality of hairpins of the hairpin motor of claim 11”. For the same reasons described below, claim 13 is rejected for recitation of a similar limitation “an electric vehicle comprising the apparatus…”.
Wands analysis of the claim in the rejection:
The claim is broadly encompassing many different vehicles such as cars. The nature of the invention is an apparatus that is claimed to be used for bending and expanding a plurality of hairpins to then be used in a manufacturing process for producing a hairpin motor. See Spec. Fig. 1.
At the time of the invention, it was well understood, as indicated by prior art, that a motor and an apparatus used to manufacture the motor are distinct articles having different structures and functions. During a manufacturing process, the apparatus is used as a means to bend and expand a plurality of hairpin segment coils to then insert them into a motor body. The prior art appears to include the produced motor into a vehicle. Also, it was well-known that such apparatus is installed in facilities such as factories. None appear to provide any evidence as to the apparatus being provided within a vehicle.
While the use of an apparatus to bend a plurality of pins in a manufacturing process of a hairpin motor is well known in the art, the specification provides no disclosure regarding the integration of the apparatus into a vehicle. Although motor manufacturing and vehicle designs are each established in respective fields, it is unpredictable whether the claimed apparatus can be used within a vehicle. Specifically, the function of the combination is unclear as to how the apparatus and vehicle will used together and if any interference would occur. Thus, the predictability of applying such a combination encompassed by the claim would be low given that there doesn’t appear to be a clear linkage between the two.
The specifications (¶2, 9, and 19) shows that a vehicle to be provided with the motor produced by the apparatus is to be included into the vehicle. The specification does not disclose the apparatus itself being included into the vehicle. Thus, the specification does not reasonably convey to a POSITA of a combination between a vehicle and apparatus. Guidance regarding the vehicle to be provided with the apparatus is absent as no disclosure was provided regarding the structure, arrangement, operation, and intended use of the apparatus within the vehicle. A POSITA would be required to determine through undue experimentation how to implement the claimed subject matter.
Accordingly, the state of art, to one of ordinary skill, the lack of guidance and examples in the specifications, as well as the absence of disclosure concerning such an integration of an apparatus into a vehicle would amount to undue experimentation.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claims 1-3 & 5-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ciuk et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 20220094246 A1) hereinafter Ciuk, and further in view of Guercioni (U.S. Patent Publication 9520762 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Ciuk discloses an apparatus (Title: Device for Positioning Electrically Conductive Segments of a Winding of a Stator) for bending and expanding a plurality of hairpins (pair of segments 501-504, ¶121) of a hairpin motor (motor, ¶2), the apparatus comprising:
a driving unit (device 1, ¶75) comprising a jig (series of fingers 6 & 7, ¶94) that fixes the plurality of hairpins, a first actuator (means for rotating 9, ¶77) connected to the jig to rotate the jig so that the plurality of hairpins is bent (¶75, “the function of the device 1 is to allow a correct positioning of each segment of the winding”), and a second actuator (means for rotating 9, ¶77) connected to the jig and configured to move the jig in a state in which the hairpins are fixed by the jig so that each of the hairpins is expanded outwardly (¶15, “the fingers moving in opposite radial directions, as explained above, the finger moving towards the outside of the device”) from a center of the stator (center of the circular support, ¶86, “each guiding groove is open towards a center of the circular support in order to authorize the radial motion of the fingers which are arranged in”),
PNG
media_image3.png
405
510
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
385
435
media_image4.png
Greyscale
However, Ciuk fails to disclose the apparatus comprising a holder on which a stator of a hairpin motor coupled to the plurality of hairpins is mounted. Ciuk also fails to disclose the apparatus wherein the holder comprises a supporting unit extending in upward and downward directions; and a mounting unit coupled to an upper portion of the supporting unit and having the stator mounted thereon, wherein the supporting unit extends downward from a lower portion of the mounting unit.
Guercioni discloses an apparatus & method (Title: Method and Fixture for Twisting End Portions of Bar Conductors, In Particular for Bar Winding of Electric Machines) wherein the apparatus comprises a holder (close up annotated FIG. 15 below depicts a plate that secures the stator core 20 in place about the fixture 10) on which a stator of a hairpin motor (rotor core 20, col. 6, ll. 64) coupled to the plurality of hairpins (conductors 1, col. 7, ll. 25) is mounted.
PNG
media_image5.png
189
540
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Guercioni also discloses the apparatus, wherein the holder comprises:
a supporting unit extending in upward and downward directions (annotated FIG. 15 below depicts the apparatus consisting of a support, namely the black square-like figure located on opposite ends to hold up additional elements); and
PNG
media_image2.png
189
540
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a mounting unit coupled to an upper portion of the supporting unit and having the stator mounted thereon (annotated FIG. 15 above depicts the apparatus comprising of a structure that is contained within the plate to secure the stator core 20. The mounting unit is mounted on an upper portion of the supporting unit, namely the black square-like figure located on opposite ends),
wherein the supporting unit extends downward from a lower portion of the mounting unit (annotated FIG. 15 above depicts the mounting unit that is mounted to an upper portion of the supporting unit, namely the black square-like figure located on opposite ends, and the supporting unit extends downwardly below the mounting unit).
Ciuk discloses an apparatus for manipulating the movement segment coils of a motor wherein the use of actuators, fingers, and jig to guide the fingers, allowing the bending and expanding of the segments during manufacturing a stator. Guercioni discloses an apparatus and method for twisting end portions of bar conductors, using a holder comprised of a supporting unit and mounting unit for a stator to be mounted thereon. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize the stator securing and arrangement technique taught by Guercioni to the stator manufacturing method of Ciuk to achieve predictable results, allowing for the core and fixtures to be axially brought together in order to insert one part of the end portions into pockets of the main structure (Guercioni, col. 7, ll. 63-67).
Regarding claim 2, Ciuk in view of Guercioni teaches an apparatus of claim 1, and Guercioni further discloses the apparatus wherein the stator being mounted on the holder so that the plurality of hairpins faces downwardly (FIG. 10 depicts stator core 20 mounted such that segments 1 face downwardly and connection portion 4 is facing upwardly), and the driving unit is disposed on a bottom portion of the holder (fixture 10, col. 4, ll. 36-41, “fixture 10 is suitable for twisting fee end portions”), and
PNG
media_image6.png
578
656
media_image6.png
Greyscale
wherein the apparatus further comprises an ascending and descending apparatus configured to move the driving unit upward and downward directions from the bottom portion (col. 8, ll. 37-46, “pocket members 11, 14, 15, and 16 are rotationally actuated about twisting axis Z-Z and are simultaneously translated in the axial direction, in particular by bringing the fixture 10 closer to the core 20”; annotated FIG. 15 below depicts the fixture 10 below the hairpins with ascending/descending apparatus to move fixture 10 along the Z-Z axis, as indicated in FIG. 10) so that the jig is inserted into or separated from the hairpin (FIG. 10 depicts the fixture 10 able to separate from the segment 1). (Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 1, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 2 in the manner of utilizing a stator securing and arrangement technique to an apparatus for bending and expanding hairpins).
PNG
media_image7.png
189
540
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Ciuk in view of Guercioni teaches an apparatus of claim 2, and Guercioni further disclose the apparatus wherein the ascending and descending apparatus comprises:
a first driving motor (col. 9, ll. 18-22, “secondary structures are actuated in order to axially translate until they take up the above said axially forward position, at which the remaining free end portions of arrays T1-T4 are received within pockets of secondary structure”); and
a connecting link connected to a rotating shaft of the first driving motor to move the driving unit in upward and downward directions (FIG. 15 above depicts a structure resembling a connection link that is driven upward/downward). (Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 1, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 3 in the manner of utilizing a stator securing and arrangement technique to an apparatus for bending and expanding hairpins).
PNG
media_image8.png
189
540
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Ciuk in view of Guercioni teaches an apparatus of claim 1, and Guercioni further disclose the apparatus wherein the driving unit comprises:
a main plate connected to the holder and configured to be movable in upward and downward directions (FIG. 15 below depicts the apparatus with a plate); and
PNG
media_image9.png
189
540
media_image9.png
Greyscale
a support extending upward from the main plate and having an upper portion on which the jig is disposed (FIG. 15 above depicts the apparatus with a support integrated extending upward from the main plate). (Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 1, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 5 in the manner of utilizing a stator securing and arrangement technique to an apparatus for bending and expanding hairpins).
Regarding claim 6, Ciuk in view of Guercioni teaches an apparatus of claim 5, and Ciuk further disclose the apparatus wherein the driving unit further comprises a guide plate (circular support 4, ¶80) disposed on the upper portion of the support and connected to the jig to rotate the jig, and a rotating plate (second rotative ring 3, ¶80) configured to rotate relative to the guide plate to guide the jig to expand the jig from a center portion to the outside (¶86, “each guiding groove is open towards a center of the circular support in order to authorize the radial motion of the fingers which are arranged in). (Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 1, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 6 in the manner of utilizing a stator securing and arrangement technique to an apparatus for bending and expanding hairpins).
PNG
media_image10.png
492
686
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Ciuk in view of Guercioni teaches an apparatus of claim 6, and Ciuk further disclose the apparatus wherein the first actuator comprises:
a second driving motor (servomotor, ¶77, “each means for rotating 9 can be controlled by a servomotor”); and
a first connecting gear connecting the second driving motor and the guide plate (first toothed part 200, ¶85, “the first rotative ring 2 comprises a first toothed part 200 arranged at a peripheral edge of the ring… configured to be link to the gear of one of the means for rotating”) and rotate the guide plate with respect to a center of the guide plate (revolution axis 100 in FIG. 2, ¶76, “said revolution axis 100 is the same as the rotating axis”). (Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 1, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 7 in the manner of utilizing a stator securing and arrangement technique to an apparatus for bending and expanding hairpins).
Regarding claim 8, Ciuk in view of Guercioni teaches an apparatus of claim 6, and Ciuk further disclose the apparatus of claim 6, wherein the second actuator comprises:
a third driving motor (servomotor, ¶77); and
a second connecting gear that connects the third driving motor and the rotating plate (second toothed part 300, ¶90, “the second rotative ring 3 also comprises a toothed part, more particularly a second toothed part 300 arranged to interact with one of the means for rotating”) so that the jig moves to a center side of the guide plate or from a center of the guide plate to the outside (revolution axis 100 in FIG. 2, ¶76). (Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 1, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 8 in the manner of utilizing a stator securing and arrangement technique to an apparatus for bending and expanding hairpins).
Regarding claim 9, Ciuk in view of Guercioni teaches an apparatus of claim 6, and Ciuk further disclose the apparatus wherein the driving unit further comprises a bearing unit (cover 21 & 31, ¶76) configured to connect the guide plate and the support and allow the guide plate to freely rotate (¶76, “the device 1 comprises a firs rotative ring and a first cover 21, a second rotative ring and a second cover 31, and a circular support 4… and they are superposed one to the other with respect to the revolution axis 100 of the annular bodies”; covers include the method for mounting onto a structure or stator core situated to contact the hairpins directly) on the upper portion of the support. (Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 1, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 9 in the manner of utilizing a stator securing and arrangement technique to an apparatus for bending and expanding hairpins).
Regarding claim 10, Ciuk in view of Guercioni teaches an apparatus of claim 1, and Ciuk further disclose the apparatus wherein the first actuator and the second actuator operate simultaneously (¶18, “the characteristics of two separate rotating rings makes it possible to perform several simultaneous functions of spacing of the segments which must be isolated and of bridging of the segments which must be welded together, with radial movements in opposite directions of some of the series of fingers and radial movements in the same direction of other series of fingers”). (Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 1, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 9 in the manner of utilizing a stator securing and arrangement technique to an apparatus for bending and expanding hairpins).
Regarding claim 11, Ciuk in view of Guercioni teaches an apparatus of claim 1, and Ciuk further disclose the apparatus wherein the hairpin motor is an electric motor (abstract, “a device for positioning electrically conductive segments of a winding of a stator of a rotary electrical machine”). (Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 1, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 11 in the manner of utilizing a stator securing and arrangement technique to an apparatus for bending and expanding hairpins).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 EUGENE REY D LEGASPI whose telephone number is (571)272-2956. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5PM.
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, Thomas Hong can be reached at (571) 272-0993. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/E.D.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3729 /THOMAS J HONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3729
Prosecution Insights