DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This Office Action is responsive to the Applicant's communication filed 31 January 2024. In view of this communication, claims 1-14 are now pending in the application.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) submitted on 31 January 2024 was/were filed before mailing of the first action on the merits. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Disclosure
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION. — The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 6, 10-11, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 6 recites the limitations “the casing” in line 4 and “the rotor” in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claims.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “the groove” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim 11 recites the limitation “the motor” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the insulation ring” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
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 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) 1-5, 7, 9, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Weber (US 2019/0149023 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Weber”.
Regarding claim 1, Weber discloses a rotating electrical machine [10] (fig. 1-2; ¶ 0032-0033, comprising:
a part [14] made of electrically insulating material housed within each slot [12] of a stator core [11] (fig. 1, 2b; ¶ 0032),
said part [14] is configured to establish a separation between each of the conductors [17] of the stator winding that pass through said slot [12] (fig. 1, 2b; ¶ 0033-0034; the conductors are separated from one another by teeth/ribs [15]), and
PNG
media_image1.png
347
653
media_image1.png
Greyscale
to establish a channel [18] for the passage of a coolant fluid corresponding to each conductor [17] allowing direct contact of the coolant fluid with each conductor [17] of the stator winding (fig. 1, 2b; ¶ 0034).
Regarding claim 2, Weber discloses the rotating electrical machine [10] according to claim 1, as stated above, wherein the part [14] transversely encloses the conductors [17] of the slot [12] of the stator {core} [11] (fig. 1-2b; the part completely surrounds the conductors, creating a wall between the conductors and the stator core).
Regarding claim 3, Weber discloses the rotating electrical machine [10] according to claim 1, as stated above, wherein the part [14] comprises an outer geometry corresponding to the slot [12] of the stator core [11] (fig. 1-2b; the outer surface of the part follows and directly contacts the inner surface of the slot).
Regarding claim 4, Weber discloses the rotating electrical machine [10] according to claim 1, as stated above, wherein the part [14] comprises a plurality of inner ribs [15] for a seat and separation of the conductors [17] of the stator winding (fig. 1, 2b; ¶ 0033).
Regarding claim 5, Weber discloses the rotating electrical machine [10] according to claim 1, as stated above, wherein the part [14] transversely encloses each conductor [17] of the slot [12] (fig. 1-2b; the part completely surrounds the conductors, creating a wall between the conductors and the stator core).
Regarding claim 7, Weber discloses the rotating electrical machine [10] according to claim 1, as stated above, wherein the conductors [17] have a rectangular cross section (fig. 2b; ¶ 0037).
Regarding claim 9, Weber discloses the rotating electrical machine [10] according to claim 1, as stated above, wherein the part [14] is insertable into the slot [12] radially to the axis of the machine [10] (fig. 1-2b; the part completely surrounds the conductors, creating a wall between the conductors and the stator core; paragraph 0019 of the specification of the present invention discloses that “each conductor {being} transversely enclosed allows for a radial insertion”).
Regarding claim 11, Weber discloses the rotating electrical machine [10] according to claim 1, as stated above, wherein the part [14] is insertable into the slot [12] axially to the axis of the motor [10] (fig. 1, 2b; ¶ 0033; paragraphs 0013-0014 of the specification of the present invention discloses that the arrangement of the conductors, being separated by the ribs, allows the part to be “introduced axially into the slot”).
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, 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) 6 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weber in view of Oechslen et al. (US 2018/0212493 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Oechslen”.
Regarding claim 6, Weber discloses the rotating electrical machine [10] according to claim 1, as stated above. Weber does not disclose an insulation ring that establishes a leak-tight reservoir between {a} casing and said ring, which prevents the passage of the coolant fluid from the stator {core} [11] to the rotor.
Oechslen discloses a rotating electrical machine, comprising an insulation ring [300] that establishes a leak-tight reservoir between a casing [100] and said ring [300], which prevents the passage of the coolant fluid from the stator to the rotor (fig. 3; ¶ 0002, 0025-0029).
PNG
media_image2.png
258
504
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the plurality of parts of Weber having an integral insulation ring as taught by Oechslen, in order to improve heat transfer to the cooling liquid (¶ 0028 of Oechslen).
Regarding claim 13, Weber discloses the rotating electrical machine [10] according to claim 11, as stated above.
Weber does not disclose that the plurality of parts [14] that are housed in the slots [12] of the stator {core} [11] form a single part together with {an} insulation ring.
Oechslen discloses a rotating electrical machine, comprising an insulation ring [300] which prevents the passage of the coolant fluid from the stator to the rotor (fig. 3; ¶ 0002, 0025-0029), wherein the plurality of parts [300p] that are housed in the slots [101] of the stator [100] form a single part [300p] together with the insulation ring [300] (fig. 3; ¶ 0007, 0025-0026).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the plurality of parts of Weber having an integral insulation ring as taught by Oechslen, in order to improve heat transfer to the cooling liquid (¶ 0028 of Oechslen).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weber in view of Marvin (US 2014/0300220 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Marvin”.
Regarding claim 8, Weber discloses the rotating electrical machine [10] according to claim 5, as stated above.
Weber does not disclose that the conductors [17] have a circular cross section.
Marvin discloses a rotating electrical machine comprising a stator [1] with a winding formed from a plurality of conductors [2,3] (fig. 1-2; ¶ 0029), wherein the conductors [2,3] have a circular cross section (¶ 0012-0014).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the round wires of Marvin for the rectangular wires of Weber, in order to reduce eddy current losses due to slot leakage (¶ 0014 of Marvin). Further, it has been held that a mere change in shape of a particular component of a device is a matter of design choice involving only routine skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weber in view of Bethge et al. (US 2019/0109513 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Bethge”.
Regarding claim 10, Weber discloses the rotating electrical machine [10] according to claim 1, as stated above.
Weber does not disclose a wedge capable of fitting into the groove of the slot [12] of the stator {core} [11] for radial retention of the part [14] in said slot [12].
Bethge discloses a rotating electrical machine comprising a stator [1] with windings [3] insulated by a part [5] disposed within a slot [2] (fig. 1; ¶ 0085-0086), comprising a wedge [36] capable of fitting into a groove of the slot [2] of the stator [1] for radial retention of the part [5] in said slot [2] (fig. 4; ¶ 0076, claim 16; “closure element”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to close the slots of Weber using wedges as taught by Bethge, in order to provide tolerance compensation allowing manufacturing tolerances to be roughly adhered to, thereby reducing costs (¶ 0056 of Bethge).
PNG
media_image3.png
427
468
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 12 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weber in view of Chamberlin et al. (US 2015/0280526 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Chamberlin”.
Regarding claim 12, Weber discloses the rotating electrical machine [10] according to claim 1, as stated above.
Weber does not disclose that the plurality of parts [14] that are housed in the slots [12] of the stator {core} [11] are attached at one of the ends thereof to form a single part.
Chamberlin discloses a rotating electrical machine comprising a stator [12] with slots [38] housing a plurality of parts [18p1,18p2], wherein the plurality of parts [18p1,18p2] that are housed in the slots [38] of the stator [12] are attached at one of the ends thereof to form a single part [18a,18b] (fig. 2; ¶ 0004; each of the upper and lower insulators comprises a single piece of material formed from both the parts extending into the slots, i.e. 18p1 and 18p2, and a ring, i.e. 18r1 and 18r2, connecting all the parts of the respective insulator).
PNG
media_image4.png
521
316
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to connect the individual parts of Weber using an integral ring as taught by Chamberlin, in order to allow for simultaneous insertion of each part into the slots (¶ 0004 of Chamberlin) thereby simplifying and reducing the cost of assembly.
Regarding claim 14, Weber discloses the rotating electrical machine [10] according to claim 1, as stated above.
Weber does not disclose that the part [14] is divided into two parts and each part comprises an insulation ring section attached to the end of the part by which the plurality of parts [14] are attached.
Chamberlin discloses a rotating electrical machine comprising a stator [12] with slots [38] housing a plurality of parts [18p1,18p2], wherein the part [18] is divided into two parts [18a,18b] and each part [18a,18b] comprises an insulation ring section [18r1,18r2] attached to the end of the part [18a,18b] by which the plurality of parts [18p1,18p2] are attached (fig. 2; ¶ 0004; each of the upper and lower insulators comprises a single piece of material formed from both the parts extending into the slots, i.e. 18p1 and 18p2, and a ring, i.e. 18r1 and 18r2, connecting all the parts of the respective insulator).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to connect the individual parts of Weber using an integral ring as taught by Chamberlin, in order to allow for simultaneous insertion of each part into the slots (¶ 0004 of Chamberlin) thereby simplifying and reducing the cost of assembly.
Citation of Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Prior art:
Leonardi et al. (US 2022/0216743 A1) discloses a stator comprising conductors within a slot that are insulated from the stator by a part having ribs to separate the individual conductors from one another while providing space for coolant to flow within the slots.
Garrard et al. (US 2014/0056721 A1) discloses a stator comprising an insulation ring that establishes a leak-tight reservoir between a casing and said ring, which prevents the passage of a coolant fluid from the stator to a rotor.
Sivasubramaniam et al. (US 2005/0162025 A1) discloses a stator comprising conductors within a slot that are insulated from the stator by a part separating the individual conductors from one another, and a wedge closing the slot.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Andrews whose telephone number is (571)270-7554. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday, 8:30am-3:00pm.
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, Oluseye 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 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.
/Michael Andrews/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834