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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-17 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 Objections
The objection to claim 7 has been withdrawn due to the amendment filed 12/18/2025.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Regarding claim 1, the second recitation of “a sealing housing” found in line 5 should be amended to read –the sealing housing--. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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(s) 1-4, 7-10, and 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoover (US 22193198) in view of Ozawa (EP 0735274).
1. Hoover teaches:
A sealing system (32) for protection of an electrical machine (figs 1 and 1a) but does not teach a sealing system having rotating components the sealing system comprising:
a seal housing rotatably mounted on a rotor of an electrical machine; one or more seal members including a lip for creating a sealing joint, wherein the lip at a distal end is enclosed in the seal housing and a proximal end of the lip is mounted in contact with a surface of a stator end bell of the electrical machine; and wherein the one or more seal members rotates with the rotor while maintaining contact with the stator end bell, thereby preventing leakage of fluids from an external environment into rotating components of the electrical machine.
Ozawa teaches that a sealing system/sealing mechanism 124 having rotating components 132, 133, 140, 131, 124a-124c the sealing system comprising:
a seal housing/peripheral portion 140 rotatably mounted on a rotor (shaft 15 in this example but rotor 1 and 3 of Hoover) of an electrical machine (of Hoover); one or more seal members 124 including a lip 124b for creating a sealing joint (with cylindrical extension 142 of the end bell/pump housing 11, figs 1 & 3), wherein the lip at a distal end (see figs 3 & 4) is enclosed in the seal housing and a proximal end of the lip is mounted in contact with a surface of a stator end bell/pump housing 11 of the electrical machine (in this example, the electric machine is a pump which is electric but it is meant to be applied to the electric machine of Hoover); and wherein the one or more seal members rotates with the rotor while maintaining contact with the stator end bell (there are no gaps between the lip of the seal and the cylindrical extension of the end bell while the seal itself is fixed to the shaft, see figs 3 & 4), thereby preventing leakage of fluids from an external environment into rotating components of the electrical machine (since the fluids L1 are sealed inside of the pump/electrical machine, it would be intuitive that this seal when applied to the electric machine of Hoover would prevent fluids from leaking inside the electric machine) which prolongs the service life of the electrical machine.
Consequently, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to modify it with a sealing system having rotating components the sealing system comprising: a seal housing rotatably mounted on a rotor of an electrical machine; one or more seal members including a lip for creating a sealing joint, wherein the lip at a distal end is enclosed in the seal housing and a proximal end of the lip is mounted in contact with a surface of a stator end bell of the electrical machine; and wherein the one or more seal members rotates with the rotor while maintaining contact with the stator end bell, thereby preventing leakage of fluids from an external environment into rotating components of the electrical machine, as taught by Ozawa so as to prolong the service life of the electrical machine of Treibel et al..
2. Hoover in view of Ozawa teach:
The sealing system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the one or more seal member (of Ozawa) are arranged in a radial direction of a shaft of the rotor (of Hoover in view of Ozawa, figs 3 & 4).
3. Hoover in view of Ozawa teach:
The sealing system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the one or more seal members (of Ozawa) are arranged in an axial direction of the shaft of the rotor (of Hoover in view of Ozawa, figs 3 & 4).
4. Hoover in view of Ozawa teach:
The sealing system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the electrical machine is one of a motor (Hoover figs 1 and 1a), a gearbox, a generator, or a miniaturized motor (Hoover figs 1 and 1a).
7. Hoover in view of Ozawa teach:
The sealing system as claimed in claim 4, wherein the one or more seal members (of Ozawa) are mounted adjacent to ball bearings (by ref no 12 of Hoover, figs 1 & 1a) and the one or more seal members (of Ozawa) rotate at a speed of rotation of the ball bearings (by ref no 12 of Hoover, figs 1 & 1a) and/or at a speed of rotation of a cannulated shaft engaged with the gearhead output shaft.
8. Hoover in view of Ozawa teach:
The sealing system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the seal housing (of Ozawa) is mounted over the rotor by one or more of a press-fitting technique, welding, gluing, or screw fastening (examiner note: the examiner is taking official notice that the aforementioned methods of mounting a seal housing to a rotor are known and therefore do not carry patentable weight).
9. Hoover in view of Ozawa teach:
The sealing system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the one or more seal members is made of one or more of metallic, non-metallic material, polymeric, and rubber material (examiner note: the examiner is taking official notice that the aforementioned materials that make the seal are known and therefore do not carry patentable weigh…in essence, the seal of Ozawa has to be made of some material and the claim names essentially all materials).
11. Hoover has been discussed above, re claim 1; but does not teach that the proximal end of the lip is mounted in contact with a radially outer surface of the stator end bell of the electrical machine.
However, it has been held that a mere reversal of parts, as is the case when compared with seal mounted in contact with a radially inner surface of the stator end bell, is an obvious modification (see In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960)) which would improve the versatility of the seal.
12. Hoover in view of Ozawa teach:
The sealing system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the proximal end of the lip (of Ozawa) is mounted in contact with a surface of the stator end bell (of Hoover in view of Ozawa, Hoover figs 1 & 1a; Ozawa figs 3 & 4) of the electrical machine (of Hoover in view of Ozawa, Hoover figs 1 & 1a; Ozawa figs 3 & 4) that extends in a radial direction relative to an axial direction of the shaft (of Ozawa) of the rotor (of Hoover in view of Ozawa, Hoover figs 1 & 1a; Ozawa figs 3 & 4).
13. Hoover in view of Ozawa teach:
The sealing system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the proximal end of the lip (of Ozawa) is aligned with a ball bearing (of Hoover in view of Ozawa, Hoover figs 1 & 1a; Ozawa figs 3 & 4) in an axial direction of the shaft of the rotor (of Hoover in view of Ozawa, Hoover figs 1 & 1a; Ozawa figs 3 & 4), the ball bearing (of Hoover in view of Ozawa, Hoover figs 1 & 1a; Ozawa figs 3 & 4) supporting the rotor for rotation relative to the stator end bell (of Hoover in view of Ozawa, Hoover figs 1 & 1a; Ozawa figs 3 & 4).
14. Hoover in view of Ozawa teach:
The sealing system (of Hoover in view of Ozawa, Hoover figs 1 & 1a; Ozawa figs 3 & 4) as claimed in claim 1, wherein an extension (142 of Ozawa) of the stator end bell (of Hoover in view of Ozawa, Hoover figs 1 & 1a; Ozawa figs 3 & 4) is disposed between the seal housing (of Hoover in view of Ozawa, Hoover figs 1 & 1a; Ozawa figs 3 & 4) and a cable (87 of Hoover, fig 1) for the electrical machine (of Hoover in view of Ozawa, Hoover figs 1 & 1a; Ozawa figs 3 & 4).
Claim(s) 5, 6 & 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoover in view of Ozawa and in further view of Eric et al. (US 6791219).
5 and 6. Hoover has been discussed above, re claim 4; but does not teach that the seal housing is mounted over/integrated with a cannulated shaft of the rotor.
Eric et al. teaches that a cannulated shaft 2A reduces the weight of the shaft system which preserves the functionality of the bearings and motor which prolongs the service life of the motor. So the person having ordinary skill in the art would readily mount the sealing housing of Hoover over the cannulated shaft of Eric et al. to prolong the service life of the motor of Hoover since Andrea et al. sealing housing is mounted over/integrated the shaft.
As a result, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the invention of Hoover being effectively filed to modify it so that the seal housing is mounted over/integrated a cannulated shaft of the rotor, as taught by Eric et al. so as to prolong the service life of the motor.
16. Hoover in view of Ozawa and in further view of Eric et al. teach:
The sealing system (of Ozawa) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the rotor (of Hoover in view of Ozawa and in further view of Eric et al.) includes a motor shaft (2A of Eric et al.) configured for rotation at a first speed (since the system of Eric et al. has planetary gears, it has more than one speed, MPEP 2112 and fig 5), a gearhead output shaft (rod 24 and sun gear 22, see Eric et al. fig 5) driven by the motor shaft (2A of Eric et al.) and configured for rotation at a second speed different than the first speed (since Eric et al. discloses that there is a speed control, it is inherent that there is a 1st speed and at least a 2nd speed greater than the 1st speed, MPEP 2112 and Eric et al. col 9 1s and 2nd paras) and a cannulated shaft (2A of Eric et al.) coupled to the gearhead output shaft (of Eric et al.), the seal housing (of Ozawa) supported on the cannulated shaft (of Eric et al.) for rotation at the second speed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10, 15 & 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
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 TERRANCE L KENERLY whose telephone number is (571)270-7851. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-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, Christopher Koehler can be reached at 5712723560. 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.
/TERRANCE L KENERLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834