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 .
Response by Applicant
Acknowledgement is made of Response filed November 18, 2025.
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sten et al. (US Patent No.: 9306433) in view of Manabe et al. (US Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2018/0205294 A1).
For claim 1, Sten et al. disclose the claimed invention comprising: a stator (reference numeral 340) including: a stator core (reference numeral 340) having a first end and a second end opposite the first end (see figure 3), the stator core (reference numeral 340) defining a stator bore (i.e. bore in which rotor 312 is disposed) extending between the first end and the second end and a rotational axis (i.e. axis on which shaft 90 is disposed) concentric with the stator bore (see figure 3), and a plurality of windings (reference numeral 342) operatively attached to the stator core (reference numeral 340) and having end turns (reference numeral 344) extending beyond the first end and the second end of the stator core (see figure 3); and a rotor (reference numeral 312) configured for rotation about the rotational axis in response to the plurality of windings (reference numeral 342, figure 3) being energized, the rotor including: a central region (i.e. center region of rotor 312 axially positioned in between winding ends 344) disposed in the stator bore (see figure 3), a first end region (i.e. region of rotor 312 near reference numeral 326) extending from the central region and beyond the stator bore such that the first end region (i.e. region of rotor 312 near reference numeral 326) is aligned with the end turns (reference numeral 344) extending beyond the first end of the stator core (see figure 3), a second end region (i.e. region of rotor 312 near reference numeral 314) extending from the central region and beyond the stator bore such that the second end region (i.e. region of rotor 312 near reference numeral 314) is aligned with the end turns (reference numeral 344) extending beyond the second end of the stator core (see figure 3), wherein the first end region (i.e. region of rotor 312 near reference numeral 326), the central region (i.e. center region of rotor 312 axially positioned in between winding ends 344), and the second end region (i.e. region of rotor 312 near reference numeral 314) cumulatively define a cooling bore (reference numerals 304) extending along the rotational axis between a fluid inlet (reference numeral 308) defined by the first end region (see figure 3) and a terminal end (i.e. end of cooling bore 304 near end 314) defined by the second end region (see figure 3), the fluid inlet (reference numeral 308) in fluid communication with a low-pressure cooling fluid source (reference numeral 310) and configured to receive cooling fluid from the low-pressure cooling fluid source (see figure 3), a first cooling jet (reference numeral 306) disposed in the first end region (i.e. region of rotor 312 near reference numeral 326) of the rotor and in fluid communication with the cooling bore and extending radially outward (see figure 3), the first cooling jet (reference numeral 306) configured to pull cooling fluid through the cooling bore (reference numeral 304) and eject cooling fluid toward the end turns (reference numeral 344) extending beyond the first end of the stator core (reference numeral 340) in response to centrifugal force caused by rotation of the rotor about the rotational axis (see figure 3), and a second cooling jet (reference numeral 306) disposed in the second end region of the rotor (i.e. end of rotor 312 near reference numeral 314) and in fluid communication with the cooling bore (reference numeral 304) and extending radially outward (see figure 3), the second cooling jet (reference numeral 306) configured to pull cooling fluid through the cooling bore (reference numeral 304) and eject cooling fluid toward the end turns (reference numeral 344) extending beyond the second end of the stator core (reference numeral 340) in response to centrifugal force caused by rotation of the rotor about the rotational axis (see figure 3). Sten et al. however do not specifically disclose a plurality of first cooling jets and a plurality of second cooling jets.
Manabe et al. disclose a plurality of first cooling jets (multiple jets 941a on a first end of shaft 921, see figures 11, 12) and a plurality of second cooling jets (multiple jets 941a on a second end of shaft 921, see figures 11, 12).
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 plurality of first and second cooling jets as disclosed by Manabe et al. for the first and second cooling jet of Sten et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating optimal cooling characteristics for the device.
Claim(s) 2-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yargici (US Patent No.: 4786111).
For claim 2, Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. disclose the claimed invention except for each first cooling jet having a first diameter (D1), each second cooling jet having a second diameter (D2), and D2 being greater than D1. Having a particular size for the diameter of the cooling jets would merely involve changing the diameter of the jet components which is a known skill as exhibited by Yargici (i.e. different diameters for channels 75, 76, 77, see figures 5-7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have different diameters as disclosed by Yargici so that the second diameter would be greater than the first diameter for the cooling jets of Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating optimal cooling characteristics for the device.
For claim 3, Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici disclose the claimed invention except for each first cooling jet having a first length (L1), each second cooling jet having a second length (L2), and (L1/D1) being less than (L2/D2). Yargici already discloses the different diameters for the jets (i.e. different diameters for channels 75, 76, 77, see figures 5-7), and adjusting the diameters would enable the ratio of the length of the cooling jet to the diameter of the cooling jet to satisfy the expression (L1/D1) being less than (L2/D2). 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 different diameters as disclosed by Yargici so that particular ratio comparisons can be satisfied between the length of the cooling jet and the diameter of the cooling jet for Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating optimal cooling characteristics for the device.
For claim 4, Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici disclose the claimed invention except for the cooling bore being defined by a cooling bore diameter (DCB), and wherein (DCB/D1) is greater than 3.3, and (DCB/D2) is greater than 2.8. Yargici already discloses the different diameters for the jets (i.e. different diameters for channels 75, 76, 77, see figures 5-7), and adjusting the diameters would enable the ratio of the cooling bore diameter to the diameter of the cooling jet to satisfy the expressions of (DCB/D1) being greater than 3.3 and (DCB/D2) being greater than 2.8. 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 different diameters as disclosed by Yargici so that particular ratio comparisons can be satisfied between the cooling bore diameter and the diameter of the cooling jet for Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating optimal cooling characteristics for the device.
For claim 5, Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici disclose the claimed invention except for the plurality of first cooling jets being configured to eject cooling fluid at a first flowrate in response to centrifugal force caused by rotation of the rotor about the rotational axis, and wherein the plurality of second cooling jets is configured to eject cooling fluid at a second flowrate, equal to the first flowrate, in response to centrifugal force caused by rotation of the rotor about the rotational axis. Yargici already discloses the different diameters for the cooling jets (i.e. different diameters for channels 75, 76, 77, see figures 5-7), and such configurations would also affect the flowrate such that a person of ordinary skill would be able to have the first flowrate be equal to the second flowrate. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have different diameters as disclosed by Yargici so that the ejection of fluid would have particular flowrates for Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating optimal cooling characteristics for the device.
For claim 6, Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici disclose the claimed invention except for the plurality of first cooling jets being configured to reach a choke flow condition before the plurality of second cooling jets in response to centrifugal force caused by rotation of the rotor about the rotational axis. Yargici already discloses the different diameters and lengths for the cooling jet (i.e. different diameters for channels 75, 76, 77, see figures 5-7), which would enable the particular choke flow condition to be reached for the cooling jets by rotation of the rotor. 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 different lengths and diameters as disclosed by Yargici for reaching particular choke flow conditions for the cooling jets of Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating optimal cooling characteristics for the device.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gauthier et al. (US Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2016/0164378 A1).
For claim 7, Sten et al. disclose the first cooling jet (reference numeral 306) extending between a first jet inlet in fluid communication with the cooling bore (i.e. cooling jet extending from the cooling bore 304, see figure 3) and a first jet outlet arranged on a first radial surface of the first end region (i.e. the outlet of cooling jet 306 arranged on the radial surface of the end region of rotor as illustrated in figure 3), wherein the second cooling jet (reference numeral 306) extends between a second jet inlet in fluid communication with the cooling bore (i.e. cooling jet extending from the cooling bore 304, see figure 3) and a second jet outlet arranged on a second radial surface of the second end region (i.e. the outlet of cooling jet 306 arranged on the radial surface of the end region of rotor as illustrated in figure 3), and wherein the first jet inlet and the second jet inlet include a transition between the cooling bore and the respective cooling jet (i.e. the inlets of the cooling jets 306 arranged on the cooling bore 304, see figure 3). Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. however do not specifically disclose each transition having one of a chamfered profile and a rounded profile. Having a transition with a chamfered or rounded profile is a known skill as exhibited by Gauthier et al. (i.e. jet 401 can be considered chamfered, see figure 4), 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 the chamfered or rounded profile as disclosed by Gauthier et al. for the transition of Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating optimal cooling characteristics for the device.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Barker et al. (US Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2015/0288255 A1).
For claim 8, Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the low-pressure cooling fluid source being configured to provide cooling fluid to the fluid inlet at a pressure from about 2 bar to about 5 bar. Having a particular pressure for the fluid is a known skill as exhibited by Barker et al. (see paragraph [0185]), 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 the pressure as disclosed by Barker et al. for the cooling fluid provided by the low-pressure cooling fluid source for Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating optimal cooling characteristics for the device.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ronning et al. (US Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2020/0227964 A1).
For claim 9, Sten et al. disclose one or more bearings supporting the rotor for rotation about the rotational axis (i.e. bearings illustrated near the ends of shaft 90, see figure 3), but Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. do not specifically disclose the rotor further including a plurality of third cooling jets in fluid communication with the cooling bore and extending radially outward, each third cooling jet configured to pull cooling fluid through the cooling bore and eject cooling fluid toward the one or more bearings in response to centrifugal force caused by rotation of the rotor about the rotational axis. Ronning et al. disclose third cooling jets (i.e. jets represented by arrows directed toward the bearings 62, 64, see figure 1) that eject fluid toward the bearings (reference numerals 62, 64, see figure 1), and when applied to the bearings of Sten et al. this would disclose the rotor further including a plurality of third cooling jets in fluid communication with the cooling bore and extending radially outward, each third cooling jet configured to pull cooling fluid through the cooling bore and eject cooling fluid toward the one or more bearings in response to centrifugal force caused by rotation of the rotor about the rotational axis. 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 third cooling jets as disclosed by Ronning et al. for the bearings of Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating optimal cooling characteristics for the device.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Seidl (US Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2019/0312475 A1).
For claim 10, Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the second end region further including a coupling region configured to be coupled with an external component; and the coupling region defining a fluid outlet in fluid communication with the cooling bore, the fluid outlet configured to supply cooling fluid from the cooling bore to the external component. Seidl discloses an end of the shaft (reference numeral 4) which has a fluid outlet (reference numeral 35, see figure 3), and this end with the fluid outlet can be considered a coupling region that can be coupled with an external component. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have this coupling region as disclosed by Seidl for the end region of the shaft of Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating optimal cooling characteristics for the device.
Claim(s) 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sten et al. (US Patent No.: 9306433) in view of Manabe et al. (US Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2018/0205294 A1) and Yargici (US Patent No.: 4786111).
For claim 11, Sten et al. disclose the claimed invention comprising: a central region (i.e. center region of rotor 312 axially positioned in between winding ends 344) having a first end and a second end opposite the first end (see figure 3); a first end region (i.e. region of rotor 312 near reference numeral 326) extending from the first end of the central region (see figure 3); a second end region (i.e. region of rotor 312 near reference numeral 314) extending from second end of the central region (see figure 3), wherein the first end region (i.e. region of rotor 312 near reference numeral 326), the central region (i.e. center region of rotor 312 axially positioned in between winding ends 344), and the second end region (i.e. region of rotor 312 near reference numeral 314) cumulatively define a cooling bore (reference numeral 304) extending along the rotational axis between a fluid inlet (reference numeral 308) defined by the first end region and a terminal end (i.e. end of cooling bore 304 near end 314) defined by the second end region (see figure 3), the fluid inlet (reference numeral 308) configured to be arranged in fluid communication with a low-pressure cooling fluid source (reference numeral 310) to receive cooling fluid from the low-pressure cooling fluid source (reference numeral 310); a first cooling jet (reference numeral 306) disposed in the first end region (i.e. region of rotor 312 near reference numeral 326) and in fluid communication with the cooling bore (reference numeral 304) and extending radially outward (see figure 3), the first cooling jet having a first diameter (D1) (i.e. diameter of cooling jet 306, see figure 3) and configured to pull cooling fluid through the cooling bore (reference numeral 304) and eject cooling fluid radially outward at a first flowrate in response to centrifugal force caused by rotation of the rotor about the rotational axis (see figure 3), and a second cooling jet (reference numeral 306) disposed in the second end region (i.e. end of rotor 312 near reference numeral 314) and in fluid communication with the cooling bore (reference numeral 304) and extending radially outward (see figure 3), the second cooling jet having a second diameter (D2) (i.e. diameter of cooling jet 306, see figure 3), and configured to pull cooling fluid through the cooling bore (reference numeral 304) and eject cooling fluid radially at a second flowrate (see figure 3), in response to centrifugal force caused by rotation of the rotor about the rotational axis (see figure 3). Sten et al. however do not specifically disclose a plurality of first cooling jets and a plurality of second cooling jets, the second diameter D2 being greater than first diameter D1, and the second flowrate being equal to the first flowrate.
Manabe et al. disclose a plurality of first cooling jets (multiple jets 941a on a first end of shaft 921, see figures 11, 12) and a plurality of second cooling jets (multiple jets 941a on a second end of shaft 921, see figures 11, 12). Having a particular size for the diameter of the cooling jets would merely involve changing the diameter of the jet components which is a known skill as exhibited by Yargici (i.e. different diameters for channels 75, 76, 77, see figures 5-7), and such configurations would also affect the flowrate such that a person of ordinary skill would be able to have the first flowrate be equal to the second flowrate.
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 plurality of first and second cooling jets as disclosed by Manabe et al. for the first and second cooling jet of Sten et al., and also to have different diameters as disclosed by Yargici so that the second diameter would be greater than the first diameter and also have the particular flowrates within the cooling jets of Sten et al., for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating optimal cooling characteristics for the device.
For claim 12, Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici disclose the claimed invention except for the plurality of first cooling jets being configured to reach a choke flow condition before the plurality of second cooling jets in response to centrifugal force caused by rotation of the rotor about the rotational axis. Yargici already discloses the different diameters and lengths for the cooling jet (i.e. different diameters for channels 75, 76, 77, see figures 5-7), which would enable the particular choke flow condition to be reached for the cooling jets by rotation of the rotor. 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 different lengths and diameters as disclosed by Yargici for reaching particular choke flow conditions for the cooling jets of Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating optimal cooling characteristics for the device.
For claim 13, Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici disclose the claimed invention except for each first cooling jet having a first length (L1), each second cooling jet having a second length (L2), and (L1/D1) being less than (L2/D2). Yargici already discloses the different diameters for the jets (i.e. different diameters for channels 75, 76, 77, see figures 5-7), and adjusting the diameters would enable the ratio of the length of the cooling jet to the diameter of the cooling jet to satisfy the expression (L1/D1) being less than (L2/D2). 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 different diameters as disclosed by Yargici so that particular ratio comparisons can be satisfied between the length of the cooling jet and the diameter of the cooling jet for Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating optimal cooling characteristics for the device.
For claim 14, Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici disclose the claimed invention except for the cooling bore having a cooling bore diameter (DCB), and wherein (DCB/D1) is greater than 3.3, and (DCB/D2) is greater than 2.8. Yargici already discloses the different diameters for the jets (i.e. different diameters for channels 75, 76, 77, see figures 5-7), and adjusting the diameters would enable the ratio of the cooling bore diameter to the diameter of the cooling jet to satisfy the expressions of (DCB/D1) being greater than 3.3 and (DCB/D2) being greater than 2.8. 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 different diameters as disclosed by Yargici so that particular ratio comparisons can be satisfied between the cooling bore diameter and the diameter of the cooling jet for Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating optimal cooling characteristics for the device.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Gauthier et al. (US Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2016/0164378 A1).
For claim 15, Sten et al. disclose the first cooling jet (reference numeral 306) extending between a first jet inlet in fluid communication with the cooling bore (i.e. cooling jet extending from the cooling bore 304, see figure 3) and a first jet outlet arranged on a first radial surface of the first end region (i.e. the outlet of cooling jet 306 arranged on the radial surface of the end region of rotor as illustrated in figure 3), wherein the second cooling jet (reference numeral 306) extends between a second jet inlet in fluid communication with the cooling bore (i.e. cooling jet extending from the cooling bore 304, see figure 3) and a second jet outlet arranged on a second radial surface of the second end region (i.e. the outlet of cooling jet 306 arranged on the radial surface of the end region of rotor as illustrated in figure 3), and wherein the first jet inlet and the second jet inlet include a transition between the cooling bore and the respective cooling jet (i.e. the inlets of the cooling jets 306 arranged on the cooling bore 304, see figure 3). Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici however do not specifically disclose each transition having one of a chamfered profile and a rounded profile. Having a transition with a chamfered or rounded profile is a known skill as exhibited by Gauthier et al. (i.e. jet 401 can be considered chamfered, see figure 4), 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 the chamfered or rounded profile as disclosed by Gauthier et al. for the transition of Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating optimal cooling characteristics for the device.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al., Yargici, and Gauthier et al. as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Liu et al. (Foreign Patent Document No.: CN 108127547 A).
For claim 16, Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al., Yargici, and Gauthier et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the transition being formed by extrusion honing. Extrusion honing is a known skill as exhibited by Liu et al. (see English translation, Abstract), 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 extrusion honing as disclosed by Liu et al. for forming the transition of Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al., Yargici, and Gauthier et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating optimal cooling characteristics for the device.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al., Yargici, and Gauthier et al. as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Kastinger et al. (US Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2012/0275733 A1).
For claim 17, Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al., Yargici, and Gauthier et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the transition being defined by a bushing insert disposed in the respective cooling jet. Having a bushing insert is a known skill as exhibited by Kastinger et al. (reference numeral 30, see figure 2), 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 the bushing insert as disclosed by Kastinger et al. for the transition of Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al., Yargici, and Gauthier et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating optimal cooling characteristics for the device.
Claim(s) 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Dedrich (US Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2014/0117795 A1).
For claim 18, Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici disclose the claimed invention except for the plurality of first cooling jets including two opposing first cooling jets extending radially outward from the cooling bore, and wherein the plurality of second cooling jets includes two opposing second cooling jets extending radially outward from the cooling bore. Having two opposing jets extending radially outward is a known skill as exhibited by Dedrich (reference numeral 102, see figure 6), 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 the two opposing jets as disclosed by Dedrich for the first cooling jets and the second cooling jets of Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating optimal cooling characteristics for the device.
For claim 19, Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici disclose the claimed invention except for the plurality of first cooling jets including six first cooling jets spaced equally about the rotational axis and extending radially outward from the cooling bore, and wherein the plurality of second cooling jets includes six second cooling jets spaced equally about the rotational axis and extending radially outward from the cooling bore. Having a plurality of cooling jets spaced equally about the axis is a known skill as exhibited by Dedrich (reference numeral 102, see figure 6), 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 the plurality of cooling jets spaced equally about the axis as disclosed by Dedrich for the first cooling jets and the second cooling jets of Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating optimal cooling characteristics for the device.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Seidl (US Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2019/0312475 A1).
For claim 20, Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici disclose the claimed invention except for the second end region further including a coupling region configured to be coupled with an external component; and the coupling region defining a fluid outlet in fluid communication with the cooling bore, the fluid outlet configured to supply cooling fluid from the cooling bore to the external component. Seidl discloses an end of the shaft (reference numeral 4) which has a fluid outlet (reference numeral 35, see figure 3), and this end with the fluid outlet can be considered a coupling region that can be coupled with an external component. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have this coupling region as disclosed by Seidl for the end region of the shaft of Sten et al. in view of Manabe et al. and Yargici for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating optimal cooling characteristics for the device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 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
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