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 .
Amendment
Acknowledgement is made of Amendment filed December 26, 2025.
Claim Objections
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: For claim 18, the limitations reciting that “the stator is configured by a non-stacked rigid body” and also that “the stator is configured by stacking the plurality of electric steel sheets” are objected to, as the non-stacked configuration is contradictory to the configuration described as stacking the plurality of electric steel sheets. Appropriate correction is required.
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, 4, 8, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blattler et al. (WIPO Document No.: WO 2021/089180 A1) in view of Nakamura et al. (Foreign Patent Document No.: TW I672891 B) and Kumano et al. (US Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2004/0046632 A1).
For claim 1, Blattler et al. disclose the claimed invention comprising: a motor (reference numeral 6, figures 4, 5) configured to provide feedback torque to a steering wheel (see the Abstract), wherein the motor comprises: a rotor (reference numeral 62) configured to be rotated by supplied power (figures 4, 5); and a stator (reference numeral 61) configured to surround the rotor (see figures 4, 5). Blattler et al. however do not specifically disclose the stator being configured by stacking a plurality of electric steel sheets that is conductors, wherein when the steering feedback actuator is broken down, an iron loss of the stator is increased by adjusting a thickness of the electric steel sheet to generate residual frictional torque for ensuring traveling stability, wherein the stator is configured by stacking the plurality of electric steel sheets while insulating each of plurality of electric steel sheets with an insulator, and wherein the iron loss of the stator is further increased by adjusting the occupancy of the insulator in the stator in order to generate the residual frictional torque for ensuring traveling stability when the steering feedback actuator is broken down.
Adjusting the thickness of the plurality of stator steel sheets is a known skill as exhibited by Nakamura et al. (see translation of Nakamura et al., thirteenth page, first paragraph), the structure of which when applied to the stator would provide the configuration of stacking a plurality of electric steel sheets that is conductors, and also would provide an increase in iron loss to generate residual frictional torque when the steering feedback actuator is broken down. Insulating each of the electric steel sheets with an insulator is a known skill as exhibited by Kumano et al. (see paragraph [0224]), and Kumano et al. also disclose improving the insulation for optimizing the iron loss (see paragraph [0014]), the structure of which would provide the iron loss of the stator being further increased by adjusting the occupancy of the insulator in the stator in order to generate the residual frictional torque for ensuring traveling stability when the steering feedback actuator is broken down.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the adjustment of thickness as disclosed by Nakamura et al. and also have the improvement of the insulation as disclosed by Kumano et al. for the electric steel sheets of Blattler et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal torque characteristics for the device.
For claim 4, Blattler et al. in view of Nakamura et al. and Kumano et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the iron loss being increased by adjusting the occupancy of the insulator to less than 4%. Having a particular occupancy for the insulator would merely involve adjusting the thickness of the insulator which is a known skill as exhibited by Kumano et al. (see paragraphs [0029-0030]), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a certain thickness as disclosed by Kumano et al. for having a particular iron loss for the steel sheets of Blattler et al. in view of Nakamura et al. and Kumano et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal torque characteristics for the device.
For claim 8, Blattler et al. disclose the claimed invention comprising a motor (reference numeral 6, figures 4, 5) configured to provide feedback torque to a steering wheel (see the Abstract), wherein the motor comprises: a rotor (reference numeral 62) configured to be rotated by supplied power (figures 4, 5); and a stator (reference numeral 61) configured to surround the rotor (see figures 4, 5). Blattler et al. however do not specifically disclose the stator being configured by stacking a plurality of electric steel sheets, which is conductors, while insulating each of the plurality of electric steel sheets with an insulator, and wherein when the steering feedback actuator is broken down, an iron loss of the stator is increased by adjusting the occupancy of the insulator in the stator to generate residual frictional torque for ensuring traveling stability.
Stacking a plurality of electric steel sheets is a known skill as exhibited by Nakamura et al. (i.e. electromagnetic steel plates, see translation of Nakamura et al., third page, fifth full paragraph), the structure of which when applied to the stator would provide the stator being configured by stacking a plurality of electric steel sheets, which is conductors. Insulating each of the electric steel sheets with an insulator is a known skill as exhibited by Kumano et al. (see paragraph [0224]), and Kumano et al. also disclose improving the insulation for optimizing the iron loss (see paragraph [0014]), the structure of which would provide the iron loss of the stator being further increased by adjusting the occupancy of the insulator in the stator in order to generate the residual frictional torque for ensuring traveling stability when the steering feedback actuator is broken down.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the stacked electric steel sheets as disclosed by Nakamura et al. and also have the improvement of the insulation as disclosed by Kumano et al. for the electric steel sheets of Blattler et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal torque characteristics for the device.
For claim 9, Blattler et al. in view of Nakamura et al. and Kumano et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the iron loss being increased by adjusting the occupancy of the insulator to less than 4%. Having a particular occupancy for the insulator would merely involve adjusting the thickness of the insulator which is a known skill as exhibited by Kumano et al. (see paragraphs [0029-0030]), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a certain thickness as disclosed by Kumano et al. for having a particular iron loss for the steel sheets of Blattler et al. in view of Nakamura et al. and Kumano et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal torque characteristics for the device.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blattler et al. in view of Nakamura et al. and Kumano et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Okubo (US Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2017/0144693 A1).
For claim 2, Blattler et al. in view of Nakamura et al. and Kumano et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the thickness of the electric steel sheet being adjusted to be larger than 0.5 mm. Having a particular thickness such as 0.5 mm is a known skill as exhibited by Okubo (see paragraph [0097]), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a particular thickness as disclosed by Okubo for the electric steel sheet of Blattler et al. in view of Nakamura et al. and Kumano et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal torque characteristics for the device.
Claim(s) 5-7 and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blattler et al. in view of Nakamura et al. and Kumano et al. as applied to claims 4 and 9 above, and further in view of Zaizen et al. (US Patent No. 11136645).
For claims 5 and 10, Blattler et al. in view of Nakamura et al. and Kumano et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the iron loss being further increased by adjusting quality of the electric steel sheet of the stator. Producing a particular quality for the steel sheet is a known skill as exhibited by Zaizen et al. which disclose lamination of steel sheets and adjusting the iron loss (see column 3, lines 28-55) affecting the quality. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust the iron loss as disclosed by Zaizen et al. for the electric steel sheets of Blattler et al. in view of Nakamura et al. and Kumano et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal torque characteristics for the device.
For claims 6 and 11, Blattler et al. in view of Nakamura et al. and Kumano et al. and Zaizen et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the stator being configured by a low-quality stack of electric steel sheets with the iron loss of 4 W/kg or more. Zaizen et al. already disclose the adjusting of the iron loss (see column 3, lines 28-55) which would enable the steel sheets to have an iron loss of 4 W/kg or more. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a particular iron loss as disclosed by Zaizen et al. for the steel sheets of Blattler et al. in view of Nakamura et al., Kumano et al., and Zaizen et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal torque characteristics for the device.
For claims 7 and 12, Blattler et al. in view of Nakamura et al., Kumano et al., and Zaizen et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the stator being configured by a low-quality stack of electric steel sheets with the iron loss within a range of 6 to 13 W/kg. Zaizen et al. already disclose the adjusting of the iron loss (see column 3, lines 28-55) which would enable the steel sheets to have an iron loss within a range of 6 to 13 W/kg. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a particular iron loss as disclosed by Zaizen et al. for the steel sheets of Blattler et al. in view of Nakamura et al., Kumano et al., and Zaizen et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal torque characteristics for the device.
Claim(s) 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blattler et al. (WIPO Document No.: WO 2021/089180 A1) in view of Zaizen et al. (US Patent No. 11136645) and Kumano et al. (US Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2004/0046632 A1).
For claim 13, Blattler et al. disclose the claimed invention comprising: a motor (reference numeral 6, figures 4, 5) configured to provide feedback torque to a steering wheel (see the Abstract), wherein the motor comprises: a rotor (reference numeral 62) configured to be rotated by supplied power (figures 4, 5); and a stator (reference numeral 61) configured to surround the rotor (see figures 4, 5). Blattler et al. however do not specifically disclose the stator being configured by stacking a plurality of electric steel sheets that is conductors, wherein when the steering feedback actuator is broken down, an iron loss of the stator is increased by adjusting quality of the electric steel sheet of the stator to generate residual frictional torque for ensuring traveling stability, wherein the stator is configured by stacking the plurality of electric steel sheets while insulating each of plurality of electric steel sheets with an insulator, and wherein the iron loss of the stator is further increased by adjusting the occupancy of the insulator in the stator in order to generate the residual frictional torque for ensuring traveling stability when the steering feedback actuator is broken down.
Producing a particular quality for the steel sheet is a known skill as exhibited by Zaizen et al. which disclose lamination of steel sheets and adjusting the iron loss (see column 3, lines 28-55) affecting the quality, and forming the stacking of electric steel sheets for the stator whose structure would generate residual frictional torque when the steering feedback actuator is broken down. Insulating each of the electric steel sheets with an insulator is a known skill as exhibited by Kumano et al. (see paragraph [0224]), and Kumano et al. also disclose improving the insulation for optimizing the iron loss (see paragraph [0014]), the structure of which would provide the iron loss of the stator being further increased by adjusting the occupancy of the insulator in the stator in order to generate the residual frictional torque for ensuring traveling stability when the steering feedback actuator is broken down.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust the iron loss as disclosed by Zaizen et al. and also providing insulation as disclosed by Kumano et al. for the electric steel sheets of Blattler et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal torque characteristics for the device.
For claim 14, Blattler et al. in view of Zaizen et al. and Kumano et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the stator being configured by a low-quality stack of electric steel sheets with the iron loss of 4 W/kg or more. Zaizen et al. already disclose the adjusting of the iron loss (see column 3, lines 28-55) which would enable the steel sheets to have an iron loss of 4 W/kg or more. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a particular iron loss as disclosed by Zaizen et al. for the steel sheets of Blattler et al. in view of Zaizen et al. and Kumano et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal torque characteristics for the device.
For claim 15, Blattler et al. in view of Zaizen et al. and Kumano et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the stator being configured by a low-quality stack of electric steel sheets with the iron loss within a range of 6 to 13 W/kg. Zaizen et al. already disclose the adjusting of the iron loss (see column 3, lines 28-55) which would enable the steel sheets to have an iron loss within a range of 6 to 13 W/kg. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a particular iron loss as disclosed by Zaizen et al. for the steel sheets of Blattler et al. in view of Zaizen et al. and Kumano et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal torque characteristics for the device.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blattler et al. in view of Zaizen et al. and Kumano et al. as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Nakamura et al. (Foreign Patent Document No.: TW I672891 B).
For claim 16, Blattler et al. in view of Zaizen et al. and Kumano et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the iron loss of the stator being further increased by adjusting a thickness of the electric steel sheet to generate residual frictional torque for ensuring traveling stability when the steering feedback actuator is broken down. Adjusting the thickness of the plurality of stator steel sheets is a known skill as exhibited by Nakamura et al. (see translation of Nakamura et al., thirteenth page, first paragraph), the structure of which when applied to the stator would provide an increase in iron loss to generate residual frictional torque when the steering feedback actuator is broken down. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the adjustment of thickness as disclosed by Nakamura et al. for the electric steel sheets of Blattler et al. in view of Zaizen et al. and Kumano et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal torque characteristics for the device.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blattler et al. in view of Zaizen et al., Kumano et al., and Nakamura et al. as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Okubo (US Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2017/0144693 A1).
For claim 17, Blattler et al. in view of Zaizen et al., Kumano et al., and Nakamura et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the thickness of the electric steel sheet being adjusted to be larger than 0.5 mm. Having a particular thickness such as 0.5 mm is a known skill as exhibited by Okubo (see paragraph [0097]), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a particular thickness as disclosed by Okubo for the electric steel sheet of Blattler et al. in view of Zaizen et al., Kumano et al., and Nakamura et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal torque characteristics for the device.
Claim(s) 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blattler et al. (WIPO Document No.: WO 2021/089180 A1) in view of Sasaki et al. (US Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2022/0399789 A1), Nakamura et al. (Foreign Patent Document No.: TW I672891 B), and Kumano et al. (US Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2004/0046632 A1).
For claim 18, Blattler et al. disclose the claimed invention comprising: a motor (reference numeral 6, figures 4, 5) configured to provide feedback torque to a steering wheel (see the Abstract), wherein the motor comprises: a rotor (reference numeral 62) configured to be rotated by supplied power (figures 4, 5); and a stator (reference numeral 61) configured to surround the rotor (see figures 4, 5). Blattler et al. however do not specifically disclose the stator being configured by a conductor, wherein when the steering feedback actuator is broken down, the stator is configured by a non-stacked rigid body to increase an iron loss of the stator to generate residual frictional torque for ensuring traveling stability, wherein the stator is configured by stacking the plurality of electric steel sheets while insulating each of plurality of electric steel sheets with an insulator, and wherein the iron loss of the stator is further increased by adjusting the occupancy of the insulator in the stator in order to generate the residual frictional torque for ensuring traveling stability when the steering feedback actuator is broken down.
Having a non-stacked stator core is a known skill as exhibited by Sasaki et al. (see paragraph [0130]), which would enable the stator to be configured by a non-stacked rigid body to increase an iron loss of the stator to generate residual frictional torque for ensuring traveling stability. Stacking a plurality of electric steel sheets is a known skill as exhibited by Nakamura et al. (i.e. electromagnetic steel plates, see translation of Nakamura et al., third page, fifth full paragraph), the structure of which when applied to the stator would provide the stator being configured by stacking a plurality of electric steel sheets. Insulating each of the electric steel sheets with an insulator is a known skill as exhibited by Kumano et al. (see paragraph [0224]), and Kumano et al. also disclose improving the insulation for optimizing the iron loss (see paragraph [0014]), the structure of which would provide the iron loss of the stator being further increased by adjusting the occupancy of the insulator in the stator in order to generate the residual frictional torque for ensuring traveling stability when the steering feedback actuator is broken down.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the non-stacked body as disclosed by Sasaki et al., the stacked electric steel sheets as disclosed by Nakamura et al., and also have the improvement of the insulation as disclosed by Kumano et al. for the stator of Blattler et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal torque characteristics for the device.
For claim 19, Blattler et al. in view of Sasaki et al., Nakamura et al., and Kumano et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the iron loss being further increased by adjusting quality of the rigid body. Having the body compression-molded or injection-molded as taught by Sasaki et al. (see paragraph [0130]) would adjust the quality of the rigid body, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have either the compression-molding or injection-molding as disclosed by Sasaki et al. for adjusting quality of the rigid body for Blattler et al. in view of Sasaki et al., Nakamura et al., and Kumano et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal torque characteristics for the device.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blattler et al. in view of Sasaki et al., Nakamura et al., and Kumano et al. as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Zaizen et al. (US Patent No. 11136645).
For claim 20, Blattler et al. in view of Sasaki et al., Nakamura et al., and Kumano et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the rigid body being configured by a low-quality stack of electric steel sheets with the iron loss within a range of 6 to 13 W/kg. Zaizen et al. disclose the electric steel sheets with a particular iron loss (see column 3, lines 28-55) which would enable the steel sheets to have an iron loss within a range of 6 to 13 W/kg. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the particular iron loss as disclosed by Zaizen et al. for the rigid body of Blattler et al. in view of Sasaki et al., Nakamura et al., and Kumano et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal torque characteristics for the device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 2, and 4-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 ALEX W MOK whose telephone number is (571)272-9084. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-4pm.
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.
/ALEX W MOK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834