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 .
Response to Amendment
Regarding rejections of the claims under §103:
Claims 1, 4-5, and 12 were rejected as being obvious over Verbridge in view of Feier and Rawlinson. Claims 2-3 were rejected as being obvious over Verbridge in view of Feier, Rawlinson, and Nakano. Claims 6-8 were rejected as being obvious over Verbridge in view of Feier, Rawlinson, and Nguy. Claims 9-10 were rejected as being obvious over Verbridge in view of Feier, Rawlinson, and Rupport. Claim 11 was rejected as being obvious over Verbridge in view of Feier, Rawlinson, and Buchinger. No claims were amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant argued that Verbridge in view of Feier and Rawlinson does not teach the claim limitation of “wherein the end shield carrying the sensor board is arranged between the transmission and the rotor, and the sensor board is electrically conductively connected to the inverter.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Feier teaches a sensor board on an end shield arranged on an axial end of an electric motor and connected to a control circuit comprising a power supply (Paragraph [0028]). When combined with the teachings of Rawlinson which places the transmission axially between the inverter and the motor, this claim limitation is met. Therefore, the claims remain rejected over the prior art of reference.
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.
Claims 1, 4-5, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0190348 to Verbridge (cited by Applicant on 8/3/2023) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0031215 to Feier (cited by Applicant on 8/3/2023) and U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0224884 to Rawlinson.
Regarding claim 1, Verbridge teaches an integrated axle drive for an at least partially electrically driven motor vehicle (FIG. 7, 710; Paragraph [0092]), comprising:
an electric machine (FIG. 7, 711) further comprising:
a rotor which is mounted so as to be rotatable about a rotor axis (Paragraph [0002]);
a transmission (FIG. 7, 712) which is coupled to the electric machine;
an inverter (FIG. 7, 713) which is arranged on the transmission and is electrically conductively connected to the electric machine (Paragraph [0084]).
Verbridge does not teach the transmission being arranged between the electric machine and the inverter;
a multi-part rotor position sensor, further comprising:
a sensor target which is arranged and/or formed on the rotor in a rotationally fixed manner;
an end shield; and
a sensor board which is arranged, with an air gap to the sensor target, on the end shield of the electric machine;
wherein the end shield carrying the sensor board is arranged between the transmission and the rotor, and the sensor board is electrically conductively connected to the inverter.
However, Feier teaches a multi-part rotor position sensor (FIG. 1, 35), further comprising:
a sensor target (FIG. 1, 26) which is arranged on the rotor in a rotationally fixed manner;
an end shield (FIG. 1, 43); and
a sensor board (FIG. 1, 37) which is arranged, with an air gap to the sensor target, on the end shield of the electric machine;
wherein the end shield carrying the sensor board is arranged spaced from the rotor, and the sensor board is electrically conductively connected to the inverter (FIG. 1, 57; Paragraph [0028]).
Therefore, 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 integrated axle drive of Verbridge with the position sensor of Feier to provide a feedback system for more responsively controlling the electric machine.
Verbridge in view of Feier does not teach the end shield arranged between the transmission and the rotor and the transmission being arranged between the electric machine and the inverter.
However, Rawlinson teaches a transmission (FIG. 1, 103) being arranged between an electric machine (FIG. 1, 101) and an inverter (FIG. 1, 105) which would place the end shield between the rotor and the transmission.
Therefore, 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 integrated axle drive of Verbridge in view of Feier with the transmission positioning of Rawlinson as it shortens electrical connections, simplifies system cooling, and helps absorb rotational oscillations (Paragraph [0014]).
Regarding claim 4, Verbridge in view of Feier and Rawlinson teaches the integrated axle drive of claim 1, wherein Feier further teaches the sensor board being arranged on the end shield in a materially bonded manner (Paragraph [0023]).
Regarding claim 5, Verbridge in view of Feier and Rawlinson teaches the integrated axle drive of claim 1, wherein Feier further teaches the rotor further comprising a rotor shaft (FIG. 1, 21), wherein the sensor target is arranged on the rotor shaft in a rotationally fixed manner (Paragraph [0021]).
Regarding claim 12, Verbridge teaches a motor vehicle (Paragraph [0092]) comprising:
an integrated axle drive (FIG. 7, 710), further comprising:
an electric machine (FIG. 7, 711) further comprising:
a rotor which is mounted so as to be rotatable about a rotor axis (Paragraph [0002]);
a transmission (FIG. 7, 712) which is coupled to the electric machine;
an inverter (FIG. 7, 713) which is arranged on the transmission and is electrically conductively connected to the electric machine, and the transmission is arranged between the electric machine and the inverter (Paragraph [0084]).
Verbridge does not teach the transmission being arranged between the electric machine and the inverter;
a multi-part rotor position sensor, further comprising:
a sensor target which is arranged and/or formed on the rotor in a rotationally fixed manner;
an end shield; and
a sensor board which is arranged, with an air gap to the sensor target, on the end shield of the electric machine;
wherein the end shield carrying the sensor board is arranged between the transmission and the rotor, and the sensor board is electrically conductively connected to the inverter.
However, Feier teaches a multi-part rotor position sensor (FIG. 1, 35), further comprising:
a sensor target (FIG. 1, 26) which is arranged on the rotor in a rotationally fixed manner;
an end shield (FIG. 1, 43); and
a sensor board (FIG. 1, 37) which is arranged, with an air gap to the sensor target, on the end shield of the electric machine;
wherein the end shield carrying the sensor board is arranged spaced from the rotor, and the sensor board is electrically conductively connected to the inverter (FIG. 1, 57; Paragraph [0028]).
Therefore, 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 vehicle of Verbridge with the position sensor of Feier to provide a feedback system for more responsively controlling the electric machine.
Verbridge in view of Feier does not teach the end shield arranged between the transmission and the rotor and the transmission being arranged between the electric machine and the inverter.
However, Rawlinson teaches a transmission (FIG. 1, 103) being arranged between an electric machine (FIG. 1, 101) and an inverter (FIG. 1, 105) which would place the end shield between the rotor and the transmission.
Therefore, 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 integrated axle drive of Verbridge in view of Feier with the transmission positioning of Rawlinson as it shortens electrical connections, simplifies system cooling, and helps absorb rotational oscillations (Paragraph [0014]).
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Verbridge in view of Feier and Rawlinson and in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0333600 to Nakano et al. (hereinafter Nakano).
Regarding claim 2, Verbridge in view of Feier and Rawlinson teaches the integrated axle drive of claim 1, wherein Feier further teaches a cable (FIG. 1, 57) for the electrically conductive connection of the inverter to the sensor board.
Verbridge in view of Feier and Rawlinson does not teach the cable being guided through a transmission housing of the transmission.
However, Nakano teaches a cable (FIG. 1, 21) for an electrically conductive connection of an inverter (FIG. 1, 200) to a sensor board (FIG. 1, 20) guided through a housing (FIG. 1, 16).
Therefore, 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 integrated axle drive of Verbridge in view of Feier and Rawlinson with the cable routing of Nakano to achieve a more compact connection design and better support the cable.
Regarding claim 3, Verbridge in view of Feier, Rawlinson, and Nakano teaches the integrated axle drive of claim 2, wherein Nakano further teaches a cable leadthrough (FIG. 1, 22) formed within the housing such that the cable leadthrough is separated from a transmission chamber of the transmission in a media-tight manner (Paragraph [0044]); wherein the cable is guided through the cable leadthrough between the inverter and the sensor board (Paragraph [0044]).
Claims 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Verbridge in view of Feier and Rawlinson and in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0072864 to Nguy et al. (hereinafter Nguy).
Regarding claim 6, Verbridge in view of Feier and Rawlinson teaches the integrated axle drive of claim 1.
Verbridge in view of Feier and Rawlinson does not teach the rotor having at least one end disk, and the sensor target being arranged on the end disk or being an integral part of the end disk.
However, Nguy teaches a rotor having an end disk (FIG. 2, 22) with a sensor target (FIG. 2, 10) arranged on the end disk.
Therefore, 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 integrated axle drive of Verbridge in view of Feier and Rawlinson with the end disk of Nguy as it provides a more secure connection of the sensor target to the rotor.
Regarding claim 7, Verbridge in view of Feier, Rawlinson, and Nguy teaches the integrated axle drive of claim 6, wherein Nguy further teaches the end disk being formed from a metal (Paragraph [0014]).
Regarding claim 8, Verbridge in view of Feier, Rawlinson, and Nguy teaches the integrated axle drive of claim 7, wherein Nguy further teaches the end disk being formed from aluminum (Paragraph [0014]).
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Verbridge in view of Feier and Rawlinson and in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0345008 to Ruppert et al. (hereinafter Ruppert).
Regarding claim 9, Verbridge in view of Feier and Rawlinson teaches the integrated axle drive of claim 1, wherein Feier further teaches the electric machine further comprising a stator (FIG. 1, 17), the stator arranged spaced apart from the rotor.
Verbridge in view of Feier and Rawlinson does not teach a stator winding head; a temperature sensor arranged on the sensor board and/or electrically conductively connected thereto; wherein the temperature sensor is in thermal contact with the stator winding head.
However, Ruppert teaches a temperature sensor (FIG. 7, 13) electrically connected to a sensor board (FIG. 1, 6); wherein the temperature sensor is in thermal contact with a stator winding head (FIG. 1, 5; Paragraph [0033]).
Therefore, 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 integrated axle drive of Verbridge in view of Feier and Rawlinson with the temperature sensor of Ruppert as it would allow for safer and more efficient operation of the electric machine.
Regarding claim 10, Verbridge in view of Feier, Rawlinson, and Ruppert teaches the integrated axle drive of claim 9, wherein Ruppert further teaches the temperature sensor being pressed onto the stator winding head (Paragraph [0041]) by way of a spring element (FIG. 7, 27).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Verbridge in view of Feier and Rawlinson and in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0252950 to Buchinger.
Regarding claim 11, Verbridge in view of Feier and Rawlinson teaches the integrated axle drive of claim 1.
Verbridge in view of Feier and Rawlinson does not teach the multi-part rotor position sensor further comprising an inductive sensor.
However, Buchinger teaches a rotor position sensor (FIG. 1C, 106) having an inductive sensor (FIG. 1D, 140).
Therefore, 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 integrated axle drive of Verbridge in view of Feier and Rawlinson with the inductive sensor of Buchinger as the inductive sensor can provided more accurate rotor position sensing.
Conclusion
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 JOSHUA KIEL MIGUEL RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-9881. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30am - 7:00pm ET.
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.
/JOSHUA KIEL M RODRIGUEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/TULSIDAS C PATEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights