DETAILED ACTION
1. Claims 1-12 of U.S. Application 18/384375 filed on January 24, 2024 are presented for examination.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
3. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on October 26, 2023 and January 29, 2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
5. 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.
6. Claims 1, 2 and 4-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takada (WO 2020246408, see U.S. Patent equivalent US 20220320937).
Regarding claim 1, Takada teaches (see figs. 5 and 6 below) a method for manufacturing a bus bar unit (50) for a motor (1, fig. 1) (title, Abstract, ¶ 7; ¶ 27), comprising the following steps of:
molding a connection terminal member (61) integrally with a resin plate (62, 52) by insert molding (¶ 105 to ¶ 107; ¶ 72),
said connection terminal member (61) having a connection terminal (65u, 65v, 65w) for connecting to an external device and an attachment portion (64u, 64v, 64w) for attaching to a bus bar (51) electrically connected to coils (26, fig. 3) of a stator (2, fig. 3) (¶ 81 to ¶ 83; ¶ 92; ¶ 97; ¶ 60 to ¶ 65),
wherein said connection terminal (65u, 65v, 65w) and said attachment portion (64u, 64v, 64w) each protrude from said resin plate (62, 52) individually (figs. 5 and 6; ¶ 105 to ¶ 107; ¶ 117 to ¶ 119; ¶ 72);
attaching said bus bar (51) to said resin plate (62, 52) (figs. 5 and 6; ¶ 105 to ¶ 107; ¶ 117 to ¶ 119; ¶ 72); and
attaching said bus bar (51) to said attachment portion (64u, 64v, 64w) of said connection terminal member (61) so as to electrically connect each other (¶ 105 to ¶ 107; ¶ 120).
Regarding claim 2/1, Takada teaches (see figs. 5 and 6 below) welding said bus bar (51) to said attachment portion (64u, 64v, 64w) of said connection terminal member (61), in the step of attaching said bus bar (51) to said attachment portion (64u, 64v, 64w) of said connection terminal member (61) (¶ 105 to ¶ 107; ¶ 120).
PNG
media_image1.png
708
704
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
694
694
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Takada teaches (see figs. 5 and 6 above) a bus bar unit (50) for a motor (1) (title, Abstract, ¶ 27; ¶ 29), comprising:
a resin plate (52, 62); a connection terminal member (61) molded integrally with said resin plate (52, 62), for connecting to an external device (¶ 72; ¶ 76); and
a bus bar (51) attached to said resin plate (52, 62), for electrically connecting to coils (26, fig. 3) of a stator (2, fig. 3) (¶ 72 to ¶ 76; ¶ 81 to ¶ 83; ¶ 92; ¶ 97; ¶ 60 to ¶ 65);
wherein said connection terminal member (61) has a connection terminal (65u, 65v, 65w) for connecting to an external device, and an attachment portion (64u, 64v, 64w) for attaching to said bus bar (51) (¶ 81 to ¶ 83; ¶ 92; ¶ 97; ¶ 60 to ¶ 65),
wherein said connection terminal (65u, 65v, 65w) and said attachment portion (64u, 64v, 64w) each protrude from said resin plate (52, 62) individually (figs. 5 and 6; ¶ 105 to ¶ 107; ¶ 117 to ¶ 119; ¶ 72); and
wherein said bus bar (51) is for attaching to said attachment portion (64u, 64v, 64w) of said connection terminal member (61) so as to electrically connect each other (¶ 105 to ¶ 107; ¶ 120).
Regarding claim 5, Takada teaches (see figs. 5 and 6 above) a motor (1), comprising a bus bar unit (50) (title, Abstract, ¶ 27; ¶ 29),
the bus bar unit (50) including: a resin plate (52, 62); a connection terminal member (61) molded integrally with said resin plate (52, 62), for connecting to an external device (¶ 72; ¶ 76); and
a bus bar (51) attached to said resin plate (52, 62), for electrically connecting to coils (26, fig. 3) of a stator (2, fig. 3) (¶ 72 to ¶ 76; ¶ 81 to ¶ 83; ¶ 92; ¶ 97; ¶ 60 to ¶ 65);
wherein said connection terminal member (61) has a connection terminal (65u, 65v, 65w) for connecting to an external device, and an attachment portion (64u, 64v, 64w) for attaching to said bus bar (51) (¶ 81 to ¶ 83; ¶ 92; ¶ 97; ¶ 60 to ¶ 65),
wherein said connection terminal (65u, 65v, 65w) and said attachment portion (64u, 64v, 64w) each protrude from said resin plate (52, 62) individually (figs. 5 and 6; ¶ 105 to ¶ 107; ¶ 117 to ¶ 119; ¶ 72); and
wherein said bus bar (51) is for attaching to said attachment portion (64u, 64v, 64w) of said connection terminal member (61) so as to electrically connect each other (¶ 105 to ¶ 107; ¶ 120).
Regarding claim 6/5, Takada teaches (see figs. 5 and 6 above) the bus bar (51) is welded (product by process limitation not given patentable weight, see below) to the attachment portion (64u, 64v, 64w) of the connection terminal member (61) (¶ 105 to ¶ 107; ¶ 120).
The Examiner points out the limitation of “the bus bar is welded” is considered as a product-by-process limitation. “Even 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.” In re Thorpe, 777F, 2d 659, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985); see also MPEP 2113.
Regarding claim 7/5, Takada teaches (see figs. 5 and 6 above) the bus bar (51) is press-fitted (product by process limitation not given patentable weight, see below) to the resin plate (52, 62) (¶ 72 to ¶ 76; ¶ 81 to ¶ 83; ¶ 92; ¶ 97; ¶ 60 to ¶ 65).
The Examiner points out the limitation of “the bus bar is press-fitted” is considered as a product-by-process limitation. “Even 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.” In re Thorpe, 777F, 2d 659, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985); see also MPEP 2113.
Regarding claim 8/4, Takada teaches (see figs. 5 and 6 above) the bus bar (51) is welded (product by process limitation not given patentable weight, see below) to the attachment portion (64u, 64v, 64w) of the connection terminal member (61) (¶ 105 to ¶ 107; ¶ 120).
The Examiner points out the limitation of “the bus bar is welded” is considered as a product-by-process limitation. “Even 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.” In re Thorpe, 777F, 2d 659, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985); see also MPEP 2113.
Regarding claim 9/4, Takada teaches (see figs. 5 and 6 above) the bus bar (51) is press-fitted (product by process limitation not given patentable weight, see below) to the resin plate (52, 62) (¶ 72 to ¶ 76; ¶ 81 to ¶ 83; ¶ 92; ¶ 97; ¶ 60 to ¶ 65).
The Examiner points out the limitation of “the bus bar is press-fitted” is considered as a product-by-process limitation. “Even 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.” In re Thorpe, 777F, 2d 659, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985); see also MPEP 2113.
Regarding claim 10/1, Takada teaches (see figs. 5 and 6 above) welding the bus bar (51) to the attachment portion (64u, 64v, 64w) of the connection terminal member (61) (¶ 105 to ¶ 107; ¶ 120).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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.
8. Claims 3, 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takada in view of Yamada (US 20240171029).
Regarding claim 3/1, Takada teaches the method of claim 1 but does not explicitly teach press-fitting said bus bar to said resin plate, in the step of attaching said bus bar to said resin plate.
However, Yamada teaches (see fig. 3 below) press-fitting said bus bar (71) to said resin plate (61), in the step of attaching said bus bar (71) to said resin plate (61) (¶ 32; ¶ 28) in order to reduce material cost of the bus bar unit (Yamada, ¶ 15; ¶ 19).
PNG
media_image3.png
584
644
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device Takada and provide press-fitting said bus bar to said resin plate, in the step of attaching said bus bar to said resin plate as taught by Yamada in order to reduce material cost of the bus bar unit (Yamada, ¶ 15; ¶ 19).
Regarding claim 11/1, Takada teaches the method of claim 1 but does not explicitly teach press-fitting the bus bar to the resin plate.
However, Yamada teaches (see fig. 3 above) press-fitting said bus bar (71) to said resin plate (61) (¶ 32; ¶ 28) in order to reduce material cost of the bus bar unit (Yamada, ¶ 15; ¶ 19).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device Takada and provide press-fitting said bus bar to said resin plate as taught by Yamada in order to reduce material cost of the bus bar unit (Yamada, ¶ 15; ¶ 19).
Regarding claim 12/2/1, Takada teaches the method of claim 2 but does not explicitly teach attaching the bus bar to the resin plate includes press-fitting the bus bar to the resin plate.
However, Yamada teaches (see fig. 3 above) attaching the bus bar (71) to the resin plate (61) includes press-fitting the bus bar (71) to the resin plate (61) (¶ 32; ¶ 28) in order to reduce material cost of the bus bar unit (Yamada, ¶ 15; ¶ 19).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device Takada and provide attaching the bus bar to the resin plate includes press-fitting the bus bar to the resin plate as taught by Yamada in order to reduce material cost of the bus bar unit (Yamada, ¶ 15; ¶ 19).
Conclusion
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER A SINGH whose telephone number is (571)270-0243. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5pm.
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, Seye 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.
/ALEXANDER A SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834