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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 6, filed 03/27/2026, with respect to rejections of the claims under 35 USC 112 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections under 35 USC 112 of claims 1-17 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-17 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 § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-6 and 9-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by TUCKER (US-20210075278; previously cited).
Regarding claim 1, TUCKER discloses an electric motor 11 comprising:
a stator (para [0027]); and
a rotor 10 supported for rotation within the stator (para [0027]);
wherein the rotor 10 includes a rotor body 14 having a plurality of radially extending magnet receiving slots 24 opening to an outer circumference of the rotor body 14, and a plurality of magnets 16 received in the magnet receiving slots 24; and
wherein radially outer surfaces of the rotor body 14 between the slots 24 and radially outer surfaces of the magnets 16 are aligned along a common outer circumference of the rotor 10 (see Figs. 1 and 2 and para [0039]).
PNG
media_image1.png
624
594
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
743
586
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, TUCKER discloses the electric motor according to claim 1, wherein each magnet receiving slot 24 and each magnet have interlocking profiles that restrict radial movement of the magnet (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3, TUCKER discloses the electric motor according to claim 2, wherein the interlocking profiles include a first structure of each magnet receiving slot 24 and a second structure of each magnet (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4, TUCKER discloses the electric motor according to claim 3, wherein the first structure includes a recess or protrusion and the second structure includes a corresponding protrusion or recess (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, TUCKER discloses the electric motor according to claim 4, wherein the magnet receiving slots 24 include first and second radially extending sidewalls 30/32, and wherein the first structure is defined by one of the sidewalls 30/32 (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 6, TUCKER discloses the electric motor according to claim 5, wherein the recess or protrusion of the first structure has a rectangular cross-section (see Figs. 2 and 5).
PNG
media_image3.png
782
513
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, TUCKER discloses the electric motor according to claim 1, further comprising an air gap between outer circumference of the rotor 10 and the stator, wherein the magnets 16 are in contact with the air gap (see Fig. 2, para [0027]).
Regarding claim 10, TUCKER discloses a rotor 10 for an electric motor comprising:
a rotor body 14 having a plurality of radially extending magnet receiving slots 24 opening to an outer circumference of the rotor 10; and
a plurality of magnets 16 received in the magnet receiving slots 24;
wherein radially outer surfaces of the rotor body 14 between the slots 24 and radially outer surfaces of the magnets 16 are aligned along a common outer circumference of the rotor 10 (see Figs. 1 and 2 and para [0039]).
Regarding claim 11, TUCKER discloses the rotor according to claim 10, wherein each magnet receiving slot 24 and each magnet include interlocking profiles that restrict radial movement of the magnet (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 12, TUCKER discloses the rotor according to claim 11, wherein the interlocking profiles include a first structure of each magnet receiving slot 24 and a second structure of each magnet (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 13, TUCKER discloses the rotor according to claim 12, wherein the first structure includes a recess or protrusion and the second structure includes a corresponding protrusion or recess (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 14, TUCKER discloses the rotor according to claim 13, wherein the magnet receiving slots 24 include first and second radially extending sidewall 30/32, and wherein the first structure is defined by one of the sidewalls 30/32.
Regarding claim 15, TUCKER discloses the rotor according to claim 14, wherein the recess or protrusion of the first structure has a rectangular cross-section (see Figs. 2 and 5).
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 7-8 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TUCKER in view of LEY (previously cited).
Regarding claim 7, TUCKER discloses the electric motor according to claim 6.
However, TUCKER does not disclose the second structure includes an overmolded material, and wherein the overmolded material defines the second structure.
LEY teaches an electric motor rotor magnet retention system wherein the second structure includes an overmolded material (132), and wherein the overmolded material (132) defines the second structure.
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 TUCKER with the second structure includes an overmolded material, and wherein the overmolded material defines the second structure, similar to LEY.
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 aid in securement of the magnets and facilitate reducing windage losses, as taught by LEY (para [0073])
Regarding claim 8, TUCKER in view of LEY teaches the electric motor according to claim 7, wherein LEY teaches the overmolded material (132) includes a plastic material (see para [0073]).
Regarding claim 16, TUCKER discloses the rotor according to claim 15.
However, TUCKER does not disclose wherein the second structure includes an overmolded material, and wherein the overmolded material defines the second structure.
LEY teaches an electric motor rotor magnet retention system wherein the second structure includes an overmolded material (132), and wherein the overmolded material (132) defines the second structure.
Regarding claim 17, TUCKER in view of LEY teaches the rotor according to claim 16 wherein LEY teaches the overmolded material is includes a plastic material (see para [0073]).
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 TUCKER with the second structure includes an overmolded material, and wherein the overmolded material defines the second structure, similar to LEY.
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 aid in securement of the magnets and facilitate reducing windage losses, as taught by LEY (para [0073])
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. HAGA US 20170033625 discloses a rotor with radially outer surfaces of the rotor body between magnet retention slots and radially outer surfaces of the magnets are aligned along a common outer circumference of the rotor. YU US 20080169719 discloses a rotor with radially outer surfaces of the rotor body between magnet retention slots and radially outer surfaces of the magnets are aligned along a common outer circumference of the rotor. PFETZER US 20020105243 discloses a rotor with radially outer surfaces of the rotor body between magnet retention slots and radially outer surfaces of the magnets are aligned along a common outer circumference of the rotor.
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