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 Species A and claims 1-13 an d15-20 in the reply filed on 05/05/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 14 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 05/05/2025. Restriction Is final.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments overcome the USC 112b rejection.
Applicant's arguments filed 02/05/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that “saito and Fukushima does not teach lap and wave winding, and do no disclose or teach the number =3, nor L, or layers”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees and points out that “lap and wave” winding is a method, or product by process, Use of different winding such as lap and wave winding is within the common knowledge in the art and Fukushima uses different style of winding method to ease arrangement of connection to star or delta connection, series or parallel and ease or arrangement of leads (P[0013-0014]), furthermore lap winding or wave winding is a “PRODUCT by Process” Examiner points out this limitation is considered a product-by-process limitation. “Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777F, 2d 659, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985); see also MPEP 2113.
Fukushima teach the paths each form a combined lap and wave winding (P[0013], each winding phase is made of at least lap and wave winding).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the winding structure of Saito where the paths each form a combined lap and wave winding as suggested by Fukushima to ease arrangement of connection to star or delta connection, series or parallel and ease or arrangement of leads (P[0013-0014]), furthermore, the primary reference and different configurations of windings and zones are subjective to grouping of one or more winding and can be grouped as zones base on claim language, since specify zone or layer language is not defining what is meant by zone or layer explicitly, therefore, any zone or layer in figure or different configurations would be considered a zone or layer, arrangement of layers of windings is also variant, as shown in the prior art of record and is known in the motor, winding art to vary from one layer plus, they winding layers can be radial or axial or however method is used to lay windings is known in the motor art, Hence, Saito discloses a stator for an electric machine (Abstract, Line 1), wherein
the stator has a number N of phases (3 Phase, U,V,W), a number P (2) of pole pairs and a number of holes q, wherein N≥3 (Three Phase, U,V,W, see P[0066, Fig.8) and P≥2 (Pair 1-U11, U12, see Fig.8and q=3, wherein
the stator comprises a stator core (232) having a plurality slots (237) and a plurality shaped conductors (233a), which are arranged in the slots (237) so as to be radially layered in a first to Lth layer (L1-L4, L6), wherein L=6 (Fig.6 shows at least 6 of each phase, stretch to 72 layers) and the layers are numbered in their order in the radial direction (See fig.10, L1 thru L6), wherein
the shaped conductors of each phase form a first path and second path (annotated Fig.8), which can be or are interconnected in series or in parallel (see P[0068,parallel is star connection) with each other and are arranged in P first winding zones and P second winding zones (2xp winding zones, labeled in fig. 10 ,dotted lines) , wherein the first and second winding zones (annotated Fig.10) alternate in the circumferential direction and each winding zone extends over the L layers (there are at least 72 slots, therefore zones could be designed, shown to be any 6 connected wires of 6 are zones), wherein a first orientation and a second orientation (annotated Fig.8 and Fig.10) which is opposed to the first orientation of the circumferential directions are defined (see annotated Fig.10), wherein
the shaped conductors (233a) of a respective path (U1-U6, Np-=7, or more or less) are interconnected to form a series connection having a first outer shaped conductor in terms of the series connection and a second outer shaped conductor (annotated fig.8 and Fig.5) in terms of the series connection, by connectors (shaped connectors at ends of winding) , which connect shaped conductors in adjacent winding zones of the same phase in an alternating manner at a first end side and a second end side opposite the first end side of the stator core (annotated Fig.8 and Fig.5 and Fig.10), wherein
the first and second layer of a respective winding zone (annotate dFig.10) are offset with respect to the third and fourth layer of the respective winding zone (annotated Fig.10) by one slot in the circumferential direction (annotate dFig.10), therefore, prior art Saito combined with Fukushima and other prior art still teach and suggest the combined limitations of argued claim 1.
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 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 of this title, 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 factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claim 1-8,15-22,24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito (US 20130113330 hereinafter “Saito”) in view of Fukushima (US PG Pub 20040061400 hereinafter “Fukushima”)
Re-claim 1, Saito discloses a stator for an electric machine (Abstract, Line 1), wherein
the stator has a number N of phases (3 Phase, U,V,W), a number P (2) of pole pairs and a number of holes q, wherein N≥3 (Three Phase, U,V,W, see P[0066, Fig.8) and P≥2 (Pair 1-U11, U12, see Fig.8and q=3, wherein
the stator comprises a stator core (232) having a plurality slots (237) and a plurality shaped conductors (233a), which are arranged in the slots (237) so as to be radially layered in a first to Lth layer (L1-L4, L6), wherein L=6 (Fig.6 shows at least 6 of each phase, stretch to 72 layers) and the layers are numbered in their order in the radial direction (See fig.10, L1 thru L6), wherein
the shaped conductors of each phase form a first path and second path (annotated Fig.8), which can be or are interconnected in series or in parallel (see P[0068,parallel is star connection) with each other and are arranged in P first winding zones and P second winding zones (2xp winding zones, labeled in fig. 10 ,dotted lines) , wherein the first and second winding zones (annotated Fig.10) alternate in the circumferential direction and each winding zone extends over the L layers (there are at least 72 slots, therefore zones could be designed, shown to be any 6 connected wires of 6 are zones), wherein a first orientation and a second orientation (annotated Fig.8 and Fig.10) which is opposed to the first orientation of the circumferential directions are defined (see annotated Fig.10), wherein
the shaped conductors (233a) of a respective path (U1-U6, Np-=7, or more or less) are interconnected to form a series connection having a first outer shaped conductor in terms of the series connection and a second outer shaped conductor (annotated fig.8 and Fig.5) in terms of the series connection, by connectors (shaped connectors at ends of winding) , which connect shaped conductors in adjacent winding zones of the same phase in an alternating manner at a first end side and a second end side opposite the first end side of the stator core (annotated Fig.8 and Fig.5 and Fig.10), wherein
the first and second layer of a respective winding zone (annotate dFig.10) are offset with respect to the third and fourth layer of the respective winding zone (annotated Fig.10) by one slot in the circumferential direction (annotate dFig.10)
Saito fails to explicitly teach the paths each form a combined lap and wave winding.
However, Fukushima teach the paths each form a combined lap and wave winding (P[0013], each winding phase is made of at least lap and wave winding).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the winding structure of Saito where the paths each form a combined lap and wave winding as suggested by Fukushima to ease arrangement of connection to star or delta connection, series or parallel and ease or arrangement of leads (P[0013-0014]).
PNG
media_image1.png
410
591
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
228
613
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
371
717
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
403
569
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
420
652
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
503
678
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Re-claim 2, Saito as modified discloses the stator as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first outer shaped conductor of the first path (annotated fig.10) is arranged in one of the first winding zones and the first outer shaped conductor of the second path (annotated Fig.10) is arranged in one of the first winding zones (annotated fig.10, fig.8), in particular in the same first winding zone in which the first outer shaped conductor of the first path is arranged.
Re-claim 3, Saito as modified discloses the stator as claimed in claim 1, wherein each winding zone (annotated fig.10) is subdivided into a first to the sub-winding zone (U11-U21), each sub-winding zone extends over the L layers (L-L4,L6) and the sub-winding zones of a respective winding zone (first receiving space, U11-U24,U13,U22 etc.) are numbered in their order in the circumferential direction (see annotated Fig.10, they are U11,U12,U23, U24, circumferential order).
Re-claim 4, Saito as modified discloses the stator as claimed in claim 3, wherein each path (annotated Fig.8) is subdivided into q series-connected arrangements of series-connected shaped conductors (annotated Fig* and each arrangement occupies all winding zones of the phase q-times (see fig.10 annotation), wherein the shaped conductors of a respective arrangement are arranged in the same sub-winding zone (annotated Fig.10).
Re-claim 5, Saito as modified discloses the stator as claimed in claim 3, wherein
the first outer shaped conductor of a respective path is arranged in the first sub-winding zone (annotated Fig.10) and/or the second outer shaped conductor of a respective path is arranged in the third sub-winding zone.
Re-claim 6, Saito as modified discloses the stator as claimed in claim 1, wherein
the first path (annotated fig.8) extends from its first outer shaped conductor to its second outer shaped conductor along the first orientation and the second path extends from its first outer shaped conductor to its second outer shaped conductor along the second orientation (annotated fig.8, and fig.10 annotations).
Re-claim 7, Saito as modified discloses the stator as claimed in claim 1, wherein
the first and second layer of a respective winding zone (ZONES IN FIG.10) is offset with respect to the third and fourth layer along the first orientation (annotated Fig.10).
Re-claim 8, as best understood, Saito as modified discloses the stator as claimed in claim 1, wherein
the fifth and sixth layer of a respective winding zone are offset with respect to the third and fourth layer of the respective winding zone by one slot (by any one slot, shown in fig.10) in the circumferential direction (ANNOTATED FIG.10), in particular in the contrary orientation to the offset of the first and second layer.
Re-claim 15, Saito as modified discloses the electric machine for driving a vehicle (vehicle in fig.1, 100), comprising a stator as claimed in claim 1 and a rotor (252) rotatably mounted within the stator (see Fig.3, 2383,232).
Re-claim 16, Saito as modified discloses the stator as claimed in claim 2, wherein each winding zone (annotated fig.10) is subdivided into a first to qth sub-winding zone (U11-U21), each sub-winding zone extends over the L layers (L-L4,L6) and the sub-winding zones of a respective winding zone (first receiving space, U11-U24,U13,U22 etc.) are numbered in their order in the circumferential direction (see annotated Fig.10, they are U11,U12,U23, U24, circumferential order).
Re-claim 17, Saito as modified discloses the stator as claimed in claim 4, wherein
the first outer shaped conductor of a respective path is arranged in the first sub-winding zone (annotated Fig.10) and/or the second outer shaped conductor of a respective path is arranged in the third sub-winding zone.
Re-claim 18, Saito as modified discloses the stator as claimed in claim 2, wherein
the first path (annotated fig.8) extends from its first outer shaped conductor to its second outer shaped conductor along the first orientation and the second path extends from its first outer shaped conductor to its second outer shaped conductor along the second orientation (annotated fig.8, and fig.10 annotations).
Re-claim 19, Saito as modified discloses the stator as claimed in claim 2, wherein
the first and second layer of a respective winding zone (ZONES IN FIG.10) is offset with respect to the third and fourth layer along the first orientation (annotated Fig.10).
Re-claim 20, as best understood, Saito as modified discloses the stator as claimed in claim 2, wherein
the fifth and sixth layer of a respective winding zone are offset with respect to the third and fourth layer of the respective winding zone by one slot (by any one slot, shown in fig.10) in the circumferential direction (ANNOTATED FIG.10), in particular in the contrary orientation to the offset of the first and second layer.
Re-claim 21, Saito as modified discloses the stator as claimed in claim 2, wherein
The first outer shaped conductor of the second path (annotated fig.10) is arranged in the same in which the first outer shaped conductor of the first path (annotated Fig.10) is arranged
Re-claim 22, Saito as modified discloses the stator as claimed in claim 8, wherein
the fifth and sixth layer are offset (annotated fig.10) the contrary orientation to the offset of the first and second layer (by any one slot, shown in fig.10).
Re-claim 24, Saito as modified discloses the stator as claimed in claim 20, wherein
the fifth and sixth layer are offset (annotated fig.10) the contrary orientation to the offset of the first and second layer (by any one slot, shown in fig.10).
Claim 11-13,23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of Fukushima in further view of Utaka (US Patent 20110260563 hereinafter “Utaka”).
Re-claim 11, Saito as modified disclosed the stator as claimed in claim 1, wherein
Saito fails to explicitly teach the connectors (at 36, 35) are designed alternately as connectors of a first type (35), which are arranged on a first end side of the stator core, and as connectors of a second type, which are arranged on a second end side opposite the first end side of the stator core.
However, Utaka teach the connectors (at 36, 35) are designed alternately as connectors of a first type (35), which are arranged on a first end side of the stator core (bottom in fig.2, at 20), and as connectors of a second type (36), which are arranged on a second end side opposite the first end side of the stator core (see Fig.2, at top, 22).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the winding structure of Saito where the connectors (at 36, 35) are designed alternately as connectors of a first type (35), which are arranged on a first end side of the stator core, and as connectors of a second type, which are arranged on a second end side opposite the first end side of the stator core as suggested by Utaka to decrease heigh of stator coil end, decrease size of motor (Utaka, P[0008]).
PNG
media_image7.png
604
614
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Re-claim 12, as best understood, Saito as modified disclosed the stator as claimed in claim 11, wherein
Saito fails to explicitly teach the connectors of the first type are formed in one piece with the shaped conductors connected by them and extend out of the stator core at the first end side and/or
the connectors of the second type comprise two connecting elements, which, at the second end side, extending out of the stator core, adjoin the shaped conductors connected by the connector of the second type and are electrically conductively connected to each other, in particular in an integrally bonded manner.
However, Utaka the connectors of the first type (35) are formed in one piece with the shaped conductors (conductors of 35, see Fig.2, and Fig.1) connected by them and extend out of the stator core at the first end side (annotated fig.1, shows 31 with connections, where ends extend up, seefig) and/or
the connectors of the second type comprise two connecting elements, which, at the second end side, extending out of the stator core, adjoin the shaped conductors connected by the connector of the second type and are electrically conductively connected to each other, in particular in an integrally bonded manner.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the winding structure of Saito the connectors of the first type are formed in one piece with the shaped conductors connected by them and extend out of the stator core at the first end side and/or
the connectors of the second type comprise two connecting elements, which, at the second end side, extending out of the stator core, adjoin the shaped conductors connected by the connector of the second type and are electrically conductively connected to each other, in particular in an integrally bonded manners suggested by Utaka to decrease heigh of stator coil end, decrease size of motor (Utaka, P[0008]).
Re-claim 13, Saito as modified disclosed the stator as claimed in claim 11, wherein
Saito fails to explicitly teach the connectors of the second type connect pairs of directly successive shaped conductors, in terms of the series connection, in the first layer and the second layer and/or in the third layer and the fourth layer and/or in the fifth layer and the sixth layer.
However, Utaka the connectors of the second type connect pairs of directly successive shaped conductors (see Fig.2, 36), in terms of the series connection, in the first layer and the second layer (see Fig.2, any 2 layers are first and second layers, which are successive layers) and/or in the third layer and the fourth layer and/or in the fifth layer and the sixth layer.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the winding structure of Saito the connectors of the second type connect pairs of directly successive shaped conductors, in terms of the series connection, in the first layer and the second layer and/or in the third layer and the fourth layer and/or in the fifth layer and the sixth layer as suggested by Utaka to decrease heigh of stator coil end, decrease size of motor (Utaka, P[0008]).
Re-claim 23, as best understood, Saito as modified disclosed the stator as claimed in claim 12, wherein
Saito fails to explicitly teach the two connecting elements are electrically conductively connected to each other in an integrally bonded manner.
However, Utaka shows the two connecting elements are electrically conductively connected (annotated fig.1, shows 31 with connections, where ends extend up, see fig 1-3) to each other in an integrally bonded manner (to be integrally formed, to be part of a whole, as part of the motor is integrally bonded, product by process limitation).annotated fig.1, shows 31 with connections, where ends extend up, seefig)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the winding structure of the two connecting elements are electrically conductively connected to each other in an integrally bonded manner. suggested by Utaka to decrease heigh of stator coil end, decrease size of motor (Utaka, P[0008]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9-10 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Re-claim 9, recites inter alia” “9. The stator as claimed in claim 1, wherein
the first path is formed from a plurality of series-connected groups of six successive shaped conductors, in terms of the series connection, which are arranged in one of the first winding zones and a second winding zone adjacent thereto along the first orientation, wherein
a first shaped conductor of a respective one of the groups is arranged in the fifth layer of the first winding zones,
a second shaped conductor of a respective one of the groups is arranged in the sixth layer of the second winding zone,
a third shaped conductor of a respective one of the groups is arranged in the fourth layer of the first winding zone,
a fourth shaped conductor of a respective one of the groups is arranged in the third layer of the second winding zone,
a fifth shaped conductor of a respective one of the groups is arranged in the first layer of the first winding zone, and
a sixth shaped conductor of a respective one of the groups is arranged in the second layer of the second winding zone,
wherein the first shaped conductor to sixth shaped conductor are numbered in their order in terms of the series connection, wherein
the first shaped conductor of such groups, which directly follows a sixth shaped conductor of another group in terms of the series connection, is arranged in that first winding zone which follows the sixth shaped conductor of the other of the groups along the first orientation.”
The combination of claim 9 with claim 1, is unique, the prior art of record, ip.com search and other prior art alone or combined fail to teach or suggest the combinations of limitations of claims 9 and 1together. The combination is unique.
Reasons of allowance for claim 10, are same as claim 9.
Claim 10 recites inter alia “10. The stator as claimed in claim 1, wherein
the second path is formed from a plurality of series-connected groups of six successive shaped conductors, in terms of the series connection, which are arranged in four successive winding zones,
a first shaped conductor of a respective one of the groups is arranged in the sixth layer of one of the first winding zones,
a second shaped conductor of a respective one of the groups is arranged in the fifth layer a following second winding zone along the second orientation,
a third shaped conductor of a respective one of the groups is arranged in the second layer of a following first winding zone along the second orientation,
a fourth shaped conductor of a respective one of the groups is arranged in the first layer of a following second winding zone along the second orientation,
a fifth shaped conductor of a respective one of the groups is arranged in the third layer in the same first winding zone as the third shaped conductor and
a sixth shaped conductor of a respective group is arranged in the fourth layer in the same second winding zone as the fourth shaped conductor,
wherein the first shaped conductor to sixth shaped conductor are numbered in their order in terms of the series connection,
wherein the first shaped conductor of such groups, which directly follow a sixth shaped conductor of another of the groups in terms of the series connection, is arranged in the same first winding zone as the fifth shaped conductor of the other of the groups.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure in PTO892.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAGED M ALMAWRI whose telephone number is (313)446-6565. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christopher M. Koehler can be reached on 5712723560. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MAGED M ALMAWRI/ Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights