Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/242,436

REDUCTION OF COOLING GAS INDUCED RADIAL FORCES AND RECIRCULATION FLOWS IN ELECTRIC MOTOR OF INTEGRATED COMPRESSOR

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Sep 05, 2023
Examiner
MATES, ROBERT E
Art Unit
2834
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Solar Turbines Incorporated
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
55%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 55% of resolved cases
55%
Career Allow Rate
246 granted / 444 resolved
-12.6% vs TC avg
Strong +37% interview lift
Without
With
+37.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
480
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
57.9%
+17.9% vs TC avg
§102
25.2%
-14.8% vs TC avg
§112
13.0%
-27.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 444 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of the invention of Group I, claims 1-8, 18, 19 in the reply filed on 11/18/2025 is acknowledged. Applicant's election with traverse of Species A in the reply filed on 11/18/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the election of species requirement among species A-C which correspond the invention of Group I is improper. This argument is found persuasive and the election of species requirement among species A-C is withdrawn. The Applicant also argued that the election of species requirement among species D-G is improper because the claims directed to these species are not mutually exclusive. This argument is not persuasive because the election of species requirement is based on the figures, not the claims. The Applicant also argued that the Office has not established a serious search and/or examination burden among species D-G. This argument is not persuasive because the species D-G require a different field of search (e.g., employing different search strategies or search queries), for finding the specific nose portion geometries of FIG. 6-10 recited for apparatus Group II. The remaining requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-8, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kenjo et al. (US 2011/0018384 A1, hereinafter Kenjo). As to claim 1, Kenjo shows (FIG. 1, 10) A system comprising: a rotor 2 with a longitudinal axis J1; a stator 3 encircling the rotor 2 and concentric with the longitudinal axis J1; and an air gap between the stator 3 and the rotor 2, wherein a radially inward-facing surface of the stator 3, defining a radially outward boundary of the air gap, comprises a plurality of partial grooves 819 that are recessed into the radially inward-facing surface or a plurality of riblets 90a that protrude from the radially inward-facing surface (para [0067]). As to claim 2/1, Kenjo further shows (FIG. 1, 10) wherein the radially inward-facing surface of the stator 3 comprises the plurality of partial grooves 819. As to claim 3/2/1, Kenjo further shows (FIG. 1, 10) wherein the plurality of partial grooves 819 are arranged in a plurality of circumferential rings around the longitudinal axis J1, and the plurality of circumferential rings are spaced apart from each other along the longitudinal axis J1. As to claim 4/3/2/1, Kenjo further shows (FIG. 1, 10) wherein each of the plurality of circumferential rings comprises a plurality of partial grooves 819 that are spaced apart from each other by a circumferential distance (distance between the teeth 815). As to claim 5/1, Kenjo further shows (FIG. 1, 10) wherein the radially inward-facing surface of the stator 3 comprises the plurality of riblets 90a. As to claim 6/5/1, Kenjo further shows (FIG. 1, 10) wherein the plurality of riblets 90a are arranged as a plurality of ribs that are each oriented along an axial axis that is parallel to the longitudinal axis J1, and the plurality of riblets 90a are spaced apart from each other around the longitudinal axis J1 by a circumferential distance (distance between the teeth 815). As to claim 7/5/1, Kenjo further shows (FIG. 1, 10) wherein the plurality of riblets 90a are arranged in a plurality of circumferential rings around the longitudinal axis J1, and the plurality of circumferential rings are spaced apart from each other along the longitudinal axis J1. As to claim 8/7/5/1, Kenjo further shows (FIG. 1, 10) wherein each of the plurality of circumferential rings comprises a plurality of riblets 90a that are spaced apart from each other by a circumferential distance. As to claim 19, Kenjo shows (FIG. 1, 10) A motor 1 comprising: a motor rotor 2 with a longitudinal axis J1; a motor stator 3 encircling the motor rotor 2 and concentric with the longitudinal axis J1; an air gap between the motor stator 3 and the motor rotor 2; PNG media_image1.png 601 623 media_image1.png Greyscale at least one end-winding E extending from an end of the motor stator 3 into an end-winding cavity; and a support structure S that partially defines the end-winding cavity C, wherein the support structure S includes a main body S with a radially outward end and a radially inward end, and a nose portion N extending from the radially inward end and configured to disrupt a recirculation flow within the end-winding cavity C, wherein the nose portion N comprises a plurality of ribs N1, N2 that are each oriented along an axial axis that is parallel to the longitudinal axis J1, and wherein the plurality of ribs N1,N2 of the nose portion N are spaced apart from each other around the longitudinal axis J1 by a circumferential distance, wherein a radially inward-facing surface of the motor stator 3, defining a radially outward boundary of the air gap, comprises a plurality of riblets 90a that protrude from the radially inward-facing surface, wherein the plurality of riblets 90a are arranged as a plurality of ribs that are each aligned with the axial axis J1 of a respective one of the plurality of ribs N1,N2 of the nose portion N. 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kenjo et al. (US 2011/0018384 A1, hereinafter Kenjo) in view of Murakami et al. (US 20070205688 A1, hereinafter Murakami). As to claim 18/1, Kenjo was discussed above with respect to claim 1 and Kenjo further shows (FIG. 1) the system of Claim 1; a shaft 21 having the longitudinal axis J1; and a plurality of rotor assemblies 22, 23 attached to the shaft 21. Kenjo does not show an integrated compressor. Murakami shows an integrated compressor 32 (FIG. 21, para [0086]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the motor of Kenjo to have an integrated compressor 32 as taught by Murakami, for the advantageous benefit of providing refrigeration in a refrigerator as taught by Murakami (para [0093]). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Kadoya et al. (US 6984909 B2) shows axial ribs on a stator. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT E MATES whose telephone number is (571)270-5293. The examiner can normally be reached M to F 12:00pm to 8pm. 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, TULSIDAS PATEL can be reached at (571)272-2098. 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. /ROBERT E MATES/Examiner, Art Unit 2834 /TULSIDAS C PATEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 05, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Apr 13, 2026
Interview Requested

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603551
HYBRID LIQUID AND AIR COOLING OF HIGH-POWER PERMANENT MAGNET MACHINE ROTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597839
BUTTON MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592606
AXIAL FLUX MOTOR WITH AIR COOLING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12573930
VIBRATION GENERATOR AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE HAVING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12562612
END WINDING SUPPORT BRACKET
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
55%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+37.2%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 444 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