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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/05/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
(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.
Claim(s) 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Cai et al. (US 20030214196).
Regarding claim 21, Cai et al. teaches:
A stator for an electrical machine (abstract, para 5) comprising:
a stator core defining an active length (Fig 3b); and
an electrical winding member (24, Fig 3a) having a first solid conductive end extending from the stator core (Fig 3b),
a second solid conductive end extending from the stator core (Fig 3b), and
an active section between the first solid conductive end and the second solid conductive end (middle portion of 24, Fig 3a, see annotated Fig below),
wherein the active section comprises an elongate transposed conductive section at least substantially along a length of the active length of the stator core (by 16, Fig 3b, see annotated Figs 3a,b below).
PNG
media_image1.png
534
738
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 22/21, Cai et al. teaches wherein the first solid conductive end defines a joining end portion for joining to an adjacent joining end portion of an adjacent electrical winding member, and wherein the second solid conductive end defines an end turn portion (see Figs 3a,b, above).
Regarding claim 23/22, Cai et al. teaches wherein the electrical winding member is a hairpin member (title) comprising a first leg, a second leg, and the end turn portion between the first leg and the second leg, wherein the elongate transposed conductive section is on the first leg (see annotated Figs 3a,b above).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1,9-11,17,20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kleen (US 20030040215) in view of Lee et al. (US 20200099279).
Regarding claim 1, Kleen teaches:
An electrical winding element for an electrical machine (para 2) comprising:
a first end portion (120, Fig 2) comprising a first single conductive member (Fig 2 shows 120 as a single piece);
a second end portion (130) comprising a second single conductive member (Fig 2 shows 130 as a single piece); and
an intermediate portion (110) conductively connected between the first end portion (120) and the second end portion (130) comprising
a plurality of intermediate conductive members arranged in an electrically parallel arrangement (paras 2,22, Fig 2 shows them as segments in parallel).
Kleen does not teach wherein the first end portion, the second end portion, and the intermediate portion are formed as a one piece arrangement.
Lee et al. teaches an apparatus (Figs 3-4) wherein the first end portion, the second end portion (102), and the intermediate portion are formed as a one piece arrangement (see annotated Fig 3 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
690
598
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify Kleen wherein the first end portion, the second end portion, and the intermediate portion are formed as a one piece arrangement, as taught by Lee et al.
The motivation to do so is the coil can be manufactured with lower production costs and higher production speeds (para 30 of Lee et al.)
Kleen et al. discloses the claimed invention except for the first end portion, the second end portion, and the intermediate portion are formed as a one piece arrangement. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing of the invention was made to combine the first end portion, the second end portion, and the intermediate portion are formed as a one piece arrangement, since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S 164 (1893).
The motivation to do so is the coil can be manufactured with lower production costs and higher production speeds (para 30 of Lee et al.)
Regarding claim 9/1, Kleen teaches wherein the first end portion, the second end portion, and the intermediate portion together define a conductive arrangement (Fig 2), and the electrical winding element comprises an insulative arrangement (Fig 5, para 25).
Regarding claim 10/9, Kleen teaches wherein the insulative arrangement electrically insulates between the plurality of intermediate conductive members (Fig 5, para 25).
Regarding claim 11/1, Kleen teaches wherein the intermediate portion comprises a transposed arrangement (since it is braided, para 22).
Regarding claim 17/1, Kleen teaches wherein the electrical winding element has a substantially constant cross-sectional area along a length of the electrical winding element (Fig 2).
Regarding claim 20/1, Kleen teaches the invention as discussed above, except a stator for an electrical machine comprising a plurality of the electrical winding elements of claim 1.
Lee et al. teaches a stator for an electrical machine comprising a plurality of the electrical winding elements of claim 1 (para 68).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify Kleen wherein a stator for an electrical machine comprising a plurality of the electrical winding elements of claim 1, as Lee et al. teaches.
The motivation to do so would be that it would prevent the occurrence of continuous fracture on the coupling structure due to the compressing force generated during the coupling process, and ensures sufficiently a working space from the intervals between the unit coil layers (para 68) and that the coil can be manufactured with lower production costs and higher production speeds (para 30 of Lee et al.).
Claim(s) 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Cai et al. (US 20030214196) in view of Lee et al. (US 20200099279).
Regarding claim 25, Cai et al. teaches:
An electrical winding element for an electrical machine (abstract, Figs 3a,b) comprising:
a first solid conductive end section (see annotated Figs 3a,b above);
a second solid conductive end section (see annotated Figs 3a,b above); and
a transposed conductive intermediate elongate section (Fig 3a) conductively connected between the first solid conductive end section and the second solid conductive end section (see annotated Figs 3a,b above).
Cai et al. does not teach wherein the first end portion, the second end portion, and the intermediate portion are formed as a one piece arrangement.
Lee et al. teaches an apparatus (Figs 3-4) wherein the first end portion, the second end portion (102), and the intermediate portion are formed as a one piece arrangement (see annotated Fig 3 above).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify Kleen wherein the first end portion, the second end portion, and the intermediate portion are formed as a one piece arrangement, as taught by Lee et al.
The motivation to do so is the coil can be manufactured with lower production costs and higher production speeds (para 30 of Lee et al.)
Kleen et al. discloses the claimed invention except for the first end portion, the second end portion, and the intermediate portion are formed as a one piece arrangement. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing of the invention was made to combine the first end portion, the second end portion, and the intermediate portion are formed as a one piece arrangement, since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S 164 (1893).
The motivation to do so is the coil can be manufactured with lower production costs and higher production speeds (para 30 of Lee et al.)
Claim(s) 2-4, 6, 18-19,24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kleen (US 20030040215) in view of Lee et al. (US 20200099279), further in view of Cai et al. (US 20030214196).
Regarding claim 2/1, Kleen in view of Lee et al. teaches the invention as discussed above, except for further comprising: a first leg with the first end portion; a second leg with the second end portion; and an end turn portion between the first leg and the second leg.
Cai et al. teaches an apparatus further comprising: a first leg (38, Fig 7a-c) with the first end portion (36); a second leg (the other 38) with the second end portion (36); and an end turn portion (32) between the first leg and the second leg.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify Kleen in view of Lee et al. to further comprising: a first leg with the first end portion; a second leg with the second end portion; and an end turn portion between the first leg and the second leg, as Cai et al. teaches.
The motivation to do so would be that it would provide an electric machine having side-by-side windings that provide for low manufacturing costs and low maintenance costs, provide for winding arrangements that further reduce skin effects (para 24 of Cai et al.).
Regarding claim 3/2, Kleen in view of Lee et al., further in view of Cai et al. teaches the invention as discussed above. Kleen in view of Lee et al. does not teach wherein the intermediate portion is defined in the first leg between the first end portion and the end turn portion
Cai et al. teaches wherein the intermediate portion (by 30, Fig 7a-c) is defined in the first leg (38) between the first end portion (36) and the end turn portion (32).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify Kleen in view of Lee et al., further in view of Cai et al. wherein the intermediate portion is defined in the first leg between the first end portion and the end turn portion, as Cai et al. teaches.
The motivation to do so would be that it would provide an electric machine having side-by-side windings that provide for low manufacturing costs and low maintenance costs, provide for winding arrangements that further reduce skin effects (para 24 of Cai et al.).
Regarding claim 4/3, Kleen in view of Lee et al., further in view of Cai et al. teaches the invention as discussed above. Kleen in view of Lee et al. does not teach wherein the end turn portion comprises a single elongate conductive member
Cai et al. teaches wherein the end turn portion (32, Fig 7b) comprises a single elongate conductive member.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify Kleen in view of Lee et al, further in view of Cai et al. wherein the end turn portion comprises a single elongate conductive member, as Cai et al. teaches.
The motivation to do so would be that it would provide an electric machine having side-by-side windings that provide for low manufacturing costs and low maintenance costs, provide for winding arrangements that further reduce skin effects (para 24 of Cai et al.).
Regarding claim 6/2, Kleen in view of Lee et al., further in view of Cai et al. teaches the invention as discussed above. Kleen in view of Lee et al. does not teach wherein the second leg extends at least substantially parallel to the first leg.
Cai et al. teaches wherein the second leg (38, Fig 7b) extends at least substantially parallel to the first leg (the other 38).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify Kleen in view of Lee et al., further in view of Cai et al. wherein the second leg extends at least substantially parallel to the first leg, as Cai et al. teaches.
The motivation to do so would be that it would provide an electric machine having side-by-side windings that provide for low manufacturing costs and low maintenance costs, provide for winding arrangements that further reduce skin effects (para 24 of Cai et al.).
Regarding claim 18/1, Kleen in view of Lee et al. teaches the invention as discussed above, except wherein the electrical winding element is a hairpin winding element.
Cai et al. teaches wherein the electrical winding element is a hairpin winding element (abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify Kleen in view of Lee et al. wherein the electrical winding element is a hairpin winding element, as Cai et al. teaches.
The motivation to do so would be that it would provide an electric machine having side-by-side windings that provide for low manufacturing costs and low maintenance costs, provide for winding arrangements that further reduce skin effects (para 24 of Cai et al.).
Regarding claim 19/1, Kleen in view of Lee et al. teaches the invention as discussed above, except wherein each of the first single conductive member and the second single conductive member comprises a rectangular profile.
Cai et al. teaches wherein each of the first single conductive member and the second single conductive member comprises a rectangular profile (Fig 4a).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify Kleen in view of Lee et al. wherein each of the first single conductive member and the second single conductive member comprises a rectangular profile, as Cai et al. teaches.
The motivation to do so would be that it would provide an electric machine having side-by-side windings that provide for low manufacturing costs and low maintenance costs, provide for winding arrangements that further reduce skin effects (para 24 of Cai et al.).
Regarding claim 24/1, Regarding claim 20/1, Kleen in view of Lee et al teaches the invention as discussed above, except an electrical machine comprising: at least one of the electrical winding element of claim 1, and a stator comprising: a stator core defining an active length, and an electrical winding member having a first solid conductive end extending from the stator core, a second solid conductive end extending from the stator core, and an active section between the first solid conductive end and the second solid conductive end, wherein the active section comprises an elongate transposed conductive section at least substantially along a length of the active length of the stator core.
Cai et al. teaches an electrical machine comprising: at least one of the electrical winding element of claim 1, and a stator (abstract) comprising: a stator core (Fig 3b) defining an active length, and an electrical winding member (24, Fig 3a) having a first solid conductive end extending from the stator core, a second solid conductive end extending from the stator core, and an active section between the first solid conductive end and the second solid conductive end, wherein the active section comprises an elongate transposed conductive section at least substantially along a length of the active length of the stator core (see annotated Figs 3a,b above).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify Kleen in view of Lee et al. wherein an electrical machine comprising: at least one of the electrical winding element of claim 1, and a stator comprising: a stator core defining an active length, and an electrical winding member having a first solid conductive end extending from the stator core, a second solid conductive end extending from the stator core, and an active section between the first solid conductive end and the second solid conductive end, wherein the active section comprises an elongate transposed conductive section at least substantially along a length of the active length of the stator core, as Cai et al. teaches.
The motivation to do so would be that it would provide an electric machine having side-by-side windings that provide for low manufacturing costs and low maintenance costs, provide for winding arrangements that further reduce skin effects (para 24 of Cai et al.).
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kleen (US 20030040215) in view of Lee et al, in view of Cai et al., further in view of Shirokov (EP 3829033).
Regarding claim 5/2, Kleen in view of Lee et al. and in view of Cai et al. teaches the invention as discussed above, except wherein the intermediate portion is a first intermediate portion, and the electrical winding element comprises a second intermediate portion defined in the second leg comprising a plurality of second intermediate conductive members arranged in an electrically parallel arrangement.
Shirokov teaches an apparatus wherein the intermediate portion is a first intermediate portion (309,310, Fig 3), and the electrical winding element comprises a second intermediate portion (302,303) defined in the second leg comprising a plurality of second intermediate conductive members (by 308) arranged in an electrically parallel arrangement.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify Kleen in view of Lee et a. and in view of Cai et al. wherein the intermediate portion is a first intermediate portion, and the electrical winding element comprises a second intermediate portion defined in the second leg comprising a plurality of second intermediate conductive members arranged in an electrically parallel arrangement, as Shirokov teaches.
The motivation to do so would be that it would allow for improvements relating to interconnecting coils such as reduced consumed volume, weight and losses due to input and output terminals of the coil being on a common end of a tooth (para 2 of “summary of disclosure” of Shirokov).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over over Kleen (US 20030040215) in view of Lee et al. (US 20200099279), further in view of Joho (US 20050168096).
Regarding claim 12/1, Kleen in view of Lee et al. in view teaches the invention as discussed above, except wherein the plurality of intermediate conductive members comprise a helical arrangement.
Joho teaches wherein the plurality of intermediate conductive members comprise a helical arrangement (paras 10-11)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify Kleen in view of Lee et al. wherein the plurality of intermediate conductive members comprise a helical arrangement, as Joho teaches.
The motivation to do so would be that it would allow one to provide a strengthened conductor bar (para 8 of Joho).
Claim(s) 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kleen (US 20030040215) in view of Lee et al. (US 20200099279), further in view of Son (KR 102220700).
Regarding claim 13/1, Kleen in view of Lee et al. teaches the invention as discussed above, except wherein the intermediate portion comprises at least two intermediate segments.
Son teaches wherein the intermediate portion comprises at least two intermediate segments (41,43,Fig 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing of the invention to modify Kleen in view of Lee et al. wherein the intermediate portion comprises at least two intermediate segments, as Son teaches.
The motivation to do so would be that it would permit simplifying manufacturing, reducing manufacturing cost, and increasing production speed to enable mass production (para 1 of “description” of Son).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: In claim 14/13 inter alia, the specific limitations of “…wherein the intermediate portion comprises a baffle segment between adjacent intermediate segments of the at least two intermediate segments.”, in the combination as claimed are neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
In claim 15/13 inter alia, the specific limitations of “…wherein at least one intermediate segment comprises a different geometry than at least one other intermediate segment.”, in the combination as claimed are neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
Claim 16/15 is also allowable for depending on claim 15.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6,9-25 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination fo references 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see PTO-892 for details.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAISHADH N DESAI whose telephone number is (571)270-3038. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5.
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, Christopher M Koehler can be reached at 571-272-3560. 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.
NAISHADH N. DESAI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2834
/NAISHADH N DESAI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834