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 filed 12/31/2025 is being considered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 10, filed 12/31/2025, with respect to objections to the specification have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objections of the specification have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 10-11, filed 12/31/2025, with respect to rejections under 35 USC 112 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of claims 5 and 15 under 35 USC 112 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 as rejected under 35 USC 102 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BEYERL (US 20170288499; previously cited) in view of HESSENBERGER (US 20140124231).
Regarding claim 1, BEYERL discloses a brushless direct-current (BLDC) motor (para [0067]) comprising:
a stator 2100 including a stator core 2125 and a plurality of windings (para [0099] and [0110]);
a rotor shaft 2300 disposed within the stator 2100 and extending along a longitudinal axis;
a rotor 2200 comprising a rotor core 2210 fixedly mounted on the rotor shaft 2300 and at least one permanent magnet (para [0111]) mounted on the rotor core 2210;
PNG
media_image1.png
528
454
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
418
460
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a sleeve including a substantially cylindrical body (the cylindrical section between end cap 2230 and fan 2400; Fig. 53) mounted on the at least one permanent magnet and a flange 2222 that engages a first axial end of the at least one permanent magnet to constrain the at least one permanent magnet radially and along a first axial direction (Fig. 53); and
a fan 2400 mounted on the rotor shaft 2300 and engaging a second axial end of the at least one permanent magnet to constrain the at least one permanent magnet along a second axial direction (para [0111] and Fig. 53).
However, BEYERL does not disclose the permanent magnet is surface mounted on an outer surface of the rotor core.
HESSENBERGER teaches an electric motor for a power tool wherein a permanent magnet is surface mounted on an outer surface of the rotor core: “magnets 46 may be glued or otherwise affixed onto an outer surface of a rotor body 50 such that the magnets 46 are surface permanent magnets (SPM)” (para [0025]).
It 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 to provide the motor of BEYERL with the permanent magnet surface mounted on an outer surface of the rotor core, similar to HESSENBERGER.
A person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains would have been motivated to make such modification in order to provide a well-known alternative assembly to an IPM rotor, with simple assembly by use of adhesives, as taught by HESSENBERGER (para [0025]).
Regarding claim 2, BEYERL in view of HESSENBERGER teaches the BLDC motor of claim 1, wherein
BEYERL teaches the at least one permanent magnet comprises a plurality of discrete magnets (see para [0079] disclosing four magnets) spaced apart on the outer surface of the rotor core 2210 (see Fig. 50).
Regarding claim 3, BEYERL in view of HESSENBERGER teaches the BLDC motor of claim 2, wherein
BEYERL teaches the rotor core 2210 includes a plurality of axial projections extending lengthwise along the outer surface of the rotor core 2210 between the plurality of discrete magnets to rotationally constrain the plurality of discrete magnets (see Fig. 50).
Regarding claim 4, BEYERL in view of HESSENBERGER teaches the BLDC motor of claim 1, wherein
BEYERL teaches the fan 2400 comprises a radial body having a plurality of blades (unlabeled; see Fig. 51) for generating airflow through the motor and an annular body 2226 disposed between the radial body and the rotor 2200, wherein the annular body 2226 is in contact with the second axial end of the at least one permanent magnet (see para [0111]).
PNG
media_image3.png
384
426
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, BEYERL in view of HESSENBERGER teaches the BLDC motor of claim 4, wherein
BEYERL teaches the annular body 2226 includes approximately the same diameter as [an outer diameter of the at least one permanent magnet] or an outer diameter of the cylindrical body of the sleeve (see Fig. 51).
Regarding claim 6, BEYERL in view of HESSENBERGER teaches the BLDC motor of claim 4, wherein
BEYERL teaches the annular body 2226 comes into contact with an end of the cylindrical body of the sleeve (see Fig. 51 and para [0111]).
Regarding claim 7, BEYERL in view of HESSENBERGER teaches the BLDC motor of claim 1, wherein
BEYERL teaches the flange 2222 of the sleeve is welded to the rotor core 2210. (The rotor core is monolithic and thereby discloses the same structure as ‘welded’; see para [0110]. See also MPEP 2113 Product-by-Process Claims. "[E]ven 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." Quoting In re Thorpe.)
Regarding claim 8, BEYERL in view of HESSENBERGER teaches the BLDC motor of claim 1, wherein
BEYERL teaches the rotor core 2210 includes a center cavity 2236,2238 on one side thereof that is configured to receive a bearing 2600 of the rotor shaft 2300 therein (see para [0112] and Fig. 53).
Regarding claim 9, BEYERL in view of HESSENBERGER teaches the BLDC motor of claim 1, wherein
BEYERL teaches a rear bearing 2700 of the rotor shaft 2300 is located proximate a rear of the fan 2400 (see Fig. 53).
Regarding claim 10, BEYERL in view of HESSENBERGER teaches the BLDC motor of claim 9, wherein
BEYERL teaches the rear bearing is at least partially nested within the fan 2400 so as to be
radially aligned with at least a portion of the fan 2400 (see Fig. 53).
Regarding claim 11, BEYERL discloses a power tool comprising:
a housing 102;
a trigger switch 112 mounted on the housing 102;
a battery receptacle 114 located on the housing 102 and configured to receive a removeable battery pack (see para [0068]); and
a brushless direct-current (BLDC) motor (see para [0067]) disposed within the housing 102 to be powered by the battery pack, the BLDC motor comprising:
a stator 2100 including a stator core 2125 and a plurality of windings (see para [0099] and [0110]);
a rotor shaft 2300 disposed within the stator 2100 and extending along a longitudinal axis;
a rotor 2200 comprising a rotor core 2210 fixedly mounted on the rotor shaft 2300 and at least one permanent magnet (see para [0111]) mounted on the rotor core 2210;
a sleeve including a substantially cylindrical body (the cylindrical section between end cap 2230 and fan 2400; see Fig. 53) mounted on the at least one permanent magnet (see Fig. 53) and a flange 2222 that engages a first axial end of the at least one permanent magnet to constrain the at least one permanent magnet radially and along a first axial direction (see Fig. 53); and
a fan 2400 mounted on the rotor shaft 2300 and engaging a second axial end of the at least one permanent magnet to constrain the at least one permanent magnet along a second axial direction (see para [0111] and Fig. 53).
However, BEYERL does not disclose the permanent magnet is surface mounted on an outer surface of the rotor core.
HESSENBERGER teaches an electric motor for a power tool wherein a permanent magnet is surface mounted on an outer surface of the rotor core: “magnets 46 may be glued or otherwise affixed onto an outer surface of a rotor body 50 such that the magnets 46 are surface permanent magnets (SPM)” (para [0025]).
It 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 to provide the motor of BEYERL with the permanent magnet surface mounted on an outer surface of the rotor core, similar to HESSENBERGER.
A person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains would have been motivated to make such modification in order to provide a well-known alternative assembly to an IPM rotor, with simple assembly by use of adhesives, as taught by HESSENBERGER (para [0025]).
Regarding claim 12, BEYERL in view of HESSENBERGER teaches the power tool of claim 11, wherein
BEYERL teaches the at least one permanent magnet comprises a plurality of discrete magnets (see para [0079] disclosing four magnets) spaced apart on the outer surface of the rotor core 2210 (see Fig. 50).
Regarding claim 13, BEYERL in view of HESSENBERGER teaches the power tool of claim 12, wherein BEYERL teaches the rotor core 2210 includes a plurality of axial projections extending lengthwise along the outer surface of the rotor core 2210 between the plurality of discrete magnets to rotationally constrain the plurality of discrete magnets (see Fig. 50).
Regarding claim 14, BEYERL in view of HESSENBERGER teaches the power tool of claim 11, wherein BEYERL teaches the fan 2400 comprises a radial body having a plurality of blades (unlabeled; see Fig. 51) for generating airflow through the motor and an annular body 2226 disposed between the radial body and the rotor 2200, wherein the annular body 2226 is in contact with the second axial end of the at least one permanent magnet (see para [0111]).
Regarding claim 15, BEYERL in view of HESSENBERGER teaches the power tool of claim 14, wherein BEYERL teaches the annular body 2226 includes approximately the same diameter as [an outer diameter of the at least one permanent magnet] or an outer diameter of the cylindrical body of the sleeve (see Fig. 51).
Regarding claim 16, BEYERL in view of HESSENBERGER teaches the power tool of claim 14, wherein BEYERL teaches the annular body 2226 comes into contact with an end of the cylindrical body of the sleeve (see Fig. 51 and para [0111]).
Regarding claim 17, BEYERL in view of HESSENBERGER teaches the power tool of claim 11, wherein BEYERL teaches the flange 2222 of the sleeve is welded to the rotor core 2210. (The rotor core is monolithic and thereby discloses the same structure as ‘welded’; see para [0110]. See also MPEP 2113 Product-by-Process Claims. "[E]ven 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." Quoting In re Thorpe.)
Regarding claim 18, BEYERL in view of HESSENBERGER teaches the power tool of claim 11, wherein BEYERL teaches the rotor core 2210 includes a center cavity 2236,2238 on one side thereof that is configured to receive a bearing 2600 of the rotor shaft 2300 therein (see para [0112] and Fig. 53).
Regarding claim 19, BEYERL in view of HESSENBERGER teaches the power tool of claim 11, wherein BEYERL teaches a rear bearing 2700 of the rotor shaft 2300 is located proximate a rear of the fan 2400 (see Fig. 53).
Regarding claim 20, BEYERL in view of HESSENBERGER teaches the power tool of claim 19, wherein BEYERL teaches the rear bearing 2700 is at least partially nested within the fan 2400 so as to be radially aligned with at least a portion of the fan 2400 (see Fig. 53).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US-20230231457-A1 KOUDA teaches an SPM rotor as a well-known alternative to an IPM rotor; US-20160336838-A1 KOUDA teaches an SPM rotor as a well-known alternative to an IPM rotor.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN STEFANON whose telephone number is (703)756-4648. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday and alternate Fridays 8AM - 5PM EDT.
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 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.
/JUSTIN STEFANON/ Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/OLUSEYE IWARERE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights