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 .
Drawings
Figures 6 and 7 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). In this case, the specification describes the embodiments illustrated in Figures 6 and 7 as comparative example but then describes such as the prior problem and solution, described in the background section as prior art. Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1-3 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the segment coils" in line 13. It is ambiguous which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation refers to “lead-side segment coils” in line 2, “lead-opposite-side segment coils” in line 3, or both. For the same reason, dependent claims 2-3 are rejected as well.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the insulating film" in line 2. It is ambiguous which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation refers to “an insulating film” in claim 1, line 2 or “an insulating film” in claim 1, line 3.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizushima et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0204028), hereinafter Mizushima in view of Bettelini (E.P. Application Publication 0892481).
Regarding claim 1, Mizushima discloses a stator manufacturing method (Title: “STATOR, METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING STATOR, COIL, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING COIL”), comprising
an inserting step of inserting lead-side segment coils (segment coil 30 in upper side FIG. 1, ¶74, “In the remaining segment coils 30, the legs 31 and 32 are inserted into different slots 2s from the other end face, that is, a lead-side end face of the stator core”; FIG. 12-14 illustrate how coil segments 30 are inserted) covered with an insulating film (insulating film IL in FIG. 5, ¶73, “Each of the segment coils 30, 30i, and 30o is formed such that a flat rectangular wire (conductor) having an insulating film IL formed on its surface from, for example, an enamel resin is bent substantially into a U-shape”) and lead-opposite-side segment coils (segment coil 30 in lower side FIG. 1, ¶74) covered with an insulating film into a plurality of slots (plurality of slots 2s in FIG. 2, ¶77, “legs 31, 31i, 32, and 32o adjoin each other in the radial direction in each of the plurality of slots”) formed between a plurality of teeth (teeth 2t in FIG. 2, ¶69, “The teeth 2t extend in a radial direction from an annular outer peripheral portion (yoke) toward an axis (center of the stator core 2), and adjoin each other at predetermined intervals in a circumferential direction”) radially protruding from an annular yoke, along an axial direction of the yoke, and electrically connecting ends of the lead-side segment coils and ends of the lead-opposite-side segment coils by using connecting members (coupling member 35 in FIG.1, ¶83, “The tips T that face each other are electrically connected by a coupling member 35 in the slot 2s”),
PNG
media_image1.png
488
714
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
290
417
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
264
375
media_image3.png
Greyscale
in the inserting step, the lead-side segment coils and the lead-opposite-side segment coils being collectively inserted into the slots (see annotated FIG. 14 below illustrating an arrow to depict the inserting segment coil, i.e., coil assemblies A12, A34, A56, and A78; see also ¶95: “The lowering members P12, P34, P56, and P78 are annular members having different bore diameters and different outside diameters, and are concentrically and coaxially arranged so as to push the corresponding coil assemblies A12, A34, A56, and A78.”),
PNG
media_image4.png
1298
924
media_image4.png
Greyscale
the stator manufacturing method further comprising
an exposing step of forming the lead-side segment coils and the lead-opposite-side segment coils with exposed conductor portions while the segment coils are inserted in the slots (tips T in FIG. 1; ¶83: “The tips T that face each other” expose their conductor portions to be “electrically connected by a coupling member 35 in the slot 2s.”).
However, Mizushima fails to teach or suggest the exposing step further comprises forming holes penetrating the insulating film at coil ends.
Bettelini teaches a coil manufacturing method (Title: “COIL FOR AN ELECTRIC TIMEPIECE”) comprising forming holes (p. 3, ll. 1-2, “a measuring probe 26 which cuts locally the plate 10 then comes into contact with the wire 11”, though it does not explicitly mention holes, the act of cutting with the probe to come into contact with the wire 11 creates the hole) penetrating (cuts, p. 3, ll. 1-2) the insulating film (plate 10 in FIG. 5, p. 2, ll. 10-12, “plate, made in one piece with one of the flanges and arranged to come and rest on one of the ears of the core serves as an anchor for the lead wires of winding”) at coil ends (ear in FIG. 4, p. 1, ll. 12-13, “the ears is affixed a printed circuit of two tracks each receiving a winding lead to the coil.”) .
PNG
media_image5.png
348
719
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
502
667
media_image6.png
Greyscale
1
Thus, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that applying the electrical measurement technique taught by Bettelini to the stator manufacturing method of Mizushima would have yielded predictable results, allowing for immediate control of the coil during and after the manufacturing of the stator and of proceeding assemblies including the stator (p. 3, ll. 4-6).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Mizushima and Bettelini further teaches that the holes (p. 3, ll. 1-2) are formed in the insulating film (plate 10 in FIG. 5, p. 2, ll. 10-12) by sticking a probe (probe 26, p. 3, ll. 1-2) for resistance measurement (p. 3, ll. 2-3, “The electrical resistance of the winding is measured between the two probes 26.”) into the insulating film. see supra rejection of claim 1.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizushima and Bettelini as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nishimura et al (J.P. Application Publication 2019068565), hereinafter Nishimura.
Regarding claim 3, the Mizushima and Bettelini, further teaches that a plurality of holes (p. 3, ll. 1-2) are formed at the coil ends (Bettelini, ear, p. 1, ll. 12-13) of the lead-side segment coils (Mizushima, segment coil 30 upper side, ¶74) and the coil ends of the lead-opposite-side segment coils (Mizushima, segment coil 30 lower side, ¶74). see supra rejection of claim 1
However, Both Mizushima and Bettelini fail to teach or suggest the plurality of the holes are arranged such that distances between adjacent holes secure electric insulation between the lead-side segment coils and the lead-opposite-side segment coils.
Nishimura teaches a manufacturing method of a stator (Title: “Stator of Rotary Electric Machine”) that arranges the holes (exposed conductor, p. 5, ll. 1, “The exposed conduction is the bonding end 40”) such that the distances (distance ds and da in FIG. 6, p. 7, ll. 21-22, “A sufficient distance is secured between another segment coil extending in the direction close to one segment coil 62.”) between adjacent holes (pg. 7, ll. 28-29, “since the distance between the corner of the joint and 40 and the other joint end 40 adjacent thereto”) secure electric insulation (p. 1, ll. 1, “To secure electrical insulation between joint end sections).
PNG
media_image7.png
481
441
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
437
425
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
384
418
media_image9.png
Greyscale
To one of ordinary skill, it would be understandable that the conductor exposed portions explained in Nishimura’s disclosure can serve as the holes explained in Bettelini’s disclosure. Thus, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that applying the known ideology of securing electric insulation via distance between exposed portions taught by Nishimura to the stator manufacturing method of Mizushima, in further view of Bettelini, would have yielded predictable results, allowing for the stator coils to secure electrical insulation between joint end sections that adjoin each other and downsize a coil end section in a stator of an electric machine (Nishimura abstract).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EUGENE REY D LEGASPI whose telephone number is (571)272-2956. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-4PM.
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, Thomas Hong can be reached at (571) 272-0993. 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.
/E.D.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3729 /THOMAS J HONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3729