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 .
Amendment
Acknowledgement is made of Amendment filed November 11, 2025.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 10, 11, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sano et al. (Japanese Patent Document No.: JP 2013110827 A) in view of Takahashi et al. (US Patent No.: 9484790).
For claim 1, Sano et al. disclose the claimed invention comprising: a rotor (reference numeral 30) rotating about an axial line (see figure 2); and a stator (see English translation of Sano et al., Claims, claim 1) disposed around an outer peripheral surface of the rotor (reference numeral 30, figure 2) to generate a rotating magnetic field for the rotor (i.e. "a stator having a stator core formed such that an inner diameter of the stator core is slightly larger than an outer diameter of the rotor core" as cited in English translation of Sano et al., claim 1), wherein the rotor includes: a rotor core (reference numeral 30) in which a plurality of magnet accommodation holes (reference numerals 32a, 32b, figure 2) in a circumferential direction and flux barriers (i.e. space on either side of magnet 40 in figure 4) are formed, each of the flux barriers (i.e. space on either side of magnet 40 in figure 4) being adjacent to each of the plurality of magnet accommodation holes (see figure 4); and a plurality of permanent magnets (reference numeral 40, figure 4), each having a width extending in a linear shape or an arc shape in a width direction (i.e. width direction along the long side of magnet 40, figure 4) and a thickness extending in a thickness direction perpendicular to the width direction (i.e. thickness direction along the short side of magnet 40, figure 4), in a vertical cross-section perpendicular to the axial line (i.e. cross-section shown in figure 2), and being accommodated in the each of the plurality of magnet accommodation holes (reference numerals 32a, 32b, figure 2), each of the plurality of permanent magnets (reference numeral 40) includes a first surface (i.e. surface of magnet 40 facing protrusions 34a, 34b, see figure 2) and a second surface (i.e. surface of magnet 40 that is opposite the first surface) extending in the width direction and opposed to each other (see figure 2), the each of the plurality of magnet accommodation holes (reference numerals 32a, 32b, figure 2) is formed with a first opposing surface (i.e. surface of magnet accommodation holes 32a, 32b that have protrusions 34a, 34b, see figure 2) opposing the first surface and a second opposing surface (i.e. surface of magnet accommodation holes 32a, 32b that is opposite the first opposing surface) opposing the second surface (see figure 2), the first opposing surface (i.e. surface of magnet accommodation holes 32a, 32b that have protrusions 34a, 34b, see figure 2) is located further on an outer peripheral surface side of the rotor than the second opposing surface (see figure 2), a gap (i.e. gap formed between magnet 40 and a surface of magnet accommodation hole having protrusions 34a, 34b, see figures 2, 4) is provided between the first opposing surface (i.e. surface of magnet accommodation holes 32a, 32b that have protrusions 34a, 34b, see figure 2) and the first surface along the width direction (see figures 2, 4), the rotor core includes a protrusion (reference numerals 34a, 34b, figure 2) protruded from the first opposing surface toward the first surface (see figures 2, 4), and the protrusion (reference numerals 34a, 34b) is protruded toward a predetermined portion on a side of an end portion (i.e. end being along the long side of magnet 40) between the end portion and a center portion in the width direction of the first surface (see figures 2, 4). Sano et al. however do not specifically disclose the protrusion protruding from only the first opposing surface of the first and second opposing surfaces.
Takahashi et al. disclose magnet holes (reference numerals 14G, 12H, see figures 14, 16) having opposing surfaces comprised of a radially outer side (reference numeral 12f, figure 14) and a radially inner side (reference numeral 12b, figure 14), the magnet holes having protrusions (reference numeral 12e, see figure 14) protruding from only the radially outer side (reference numeral 12f) of the opposing surfaces of the magnet holes (see figures 14, 16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the protrusion protruding from only the radially outer side as disclosed by Takahashi et al. so that the protrusions protrude from only the first opposing surface of the first and second opposing surfaces for Sano et al. for predictably providing desirable magnetic characteristics within the device.
For claim 10, Sano et al. disclose the rotor core including a pair of protrusions (reference numerals 34a, 34b, figures 2, 4) disposed symmetrically with respect to a center line passing through the center portion of the first surface (i.e. center of a long side of magnet 40, figure 4) and extending in the thickness direction (see figure 4), and each of the pair of protrusions corresponds to the protrusion (reference numerals 34a, 34b, see figures 2, 4).
For claim 11, Sano et al. disclose the pair of protrusions being a first protrusion and a second protrusion (reference numerals 34a, 34b, see figures 2, 4), the first surface including a first end portion and a second end portion in the width direction (i.e. the ends of a long side of magnet 40, see figure 4), the first protrusion (i.e. protrusion 34a, figure 4) being protruded toward a predetermined portion on a side of the first end portion between the first end portion and the center line (i.e. protrusion 34a being disposed on one side of the magnet along the width direction, see figure 4), and the second protrusion (i.e. protrusion 34b, figure 4) being protruded toward a predetermined portion on a side of the second end portion between the second end portion and the center line (i.e. protrusion 34b being disposed on another side of the magnet along the width direction, see figure 4).
For claim 14, Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the second opposing surface extending linearly in the width direction so that an entire area in the width direction of the second surface is in contact with the second opposing surface. Takahashi et al. disclose the radially inner side (reference numeral 12b, see figure 16) extending linearly so that an entire second surface of the magnet (i.e. surface of magnet 13G contacting the radially inner side 12b, see figure 16) is in contact with the radially inner side (see figure 16). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have an entire second surface of the magnet be in contact with the radially inner side of the magnet hole as disclosed by Takahashi et al. so that an entire area in the width direction of the second surface is in contact with the second opposing surface for Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al. for predictably providing desirable magnetic characteristics within the device.
Claim(s) 2 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kobayashi et al. (WIPO Document No.: WO 2019/087747 A1).
For claim 2, Sano et al. disclose the claimed invention including the each of the plurality of permanent magnets (reference numeral 40) being configured to extend in the linear shape in the width direction in the vertical cross-section (i.e. magnet 40 extending in the linear shape along the long side of magnet, see figures 2, 4), but Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al. however do not specifically disclose under a situation where a length in the width direction of the each of the plurality of permanent magnets is represented by X and a distance from the end portion to a center position in the width direction of the protrusion is represented by T, the protrusion being provided so as to satisfy a relation of 0<T≤0.2·X. Having a particular relationship satisfied regarding the length of the magnet and a position of the protrusion would merely involve adjusting the positioning of the protrusion which is a known skill as exhibited by Kobayashi et al. (i.e. protrusions 260, 261 having different positions along the long side of magnet 254a, see figure 6), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust the positioning of the protrusion as disclosed by Kobayashi et al. so that a particular relationship between the width direction of the magnet and the position of the protrusion is satisfied for Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating the optimization of magnetic flux characteristics of the device.
For claim 4, Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al. and Kobayashi et al. disclose the claimed invention except for a protrusion length of the protrusion being shorter than a length of the gap defined as a distance from the first opposing surface to the first surface. Kobayashi et al. further disclose the protrusion (reference numeral 260, figure 6) having a length shorter than the distance (i.e. distance of space 258 in a direction perpendicular to width w1 shown in figure 6) between the magnet and the surface of the core having the protrusion (see figure 6), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the protrusion length shorter than the gap as disclosed by Kobayashi et al. for the protrusion of Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al. and Kobayashi et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating the optimization of magnetic flux characteristics of the device.
Claim(s) 3 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kawasaki et al. (US Patent No.: 10404115) in view of Kobayashi et al. (WIPO Document No.: WO 2019/087747 A1).
For claim 3, Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the each of the plurality of permanent magnets being configured to extend in the arc shape in the width direction in the vertical cross-section, and under a situation where an angle formed by a first virtual line passing through a first end portion in the width direction of the first surface and extending perpendicular to the first surface and a second virtual line passing through a second end portion in the width direction of the first surface and extending perpendicular to the first surface is represented by θ and a distance from the first end portion to a center position in the width direction of the protrusion is represented by T, the protrusion is provided so as to satisfy a relation of 0<T≤0.13·θ. Having the permanent magnets extending in an arc shape is a known skill as exhibited by Kawasaki et al. (i.e. magnets 321 extending in an arc shape, see figure 4), and having a particular relationship satisfied regarding the angle formed by end portions of the magnet and a position of the protrusion would merely involve adjusting the positioning of the protrusion which is a known skill as exhibited by Kobayashi et al. (i.e. protrusions 260, 261 having different positions along the long side of magnet 254a, see figure 6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have magnets extending in an arc shape as disclosed by Kawasaki et al. and adjust the position of the protrusion as disclosed by Kobayashi et al. so that a relationship between the width direction of the magnet and the position of the protrusion is satisfied for Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating the optimization of magnetic flux characteristics of the device.
For claim 5, Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al., Kawasaki et al., and Kobayashi et al. disclose the claimed invention except for a protrusion length of the protrusion being shorter than a length of the gap defined as a distance from the first opposing surface to the first surface. Kobayashi et al. further disclose the protrusion (reference numeral 260, figure 6) having a length shorter than the distance (i.e. distance of space 258 in a direction perpendicular to width w1 shown in figure 6) between the magnet and the surface of the core having the protrusion (see figure 6), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the protrusion length shorter than the gap as disclosed by Kobayashi et al. for the protrusion of Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al., Kawasaki et al., and Kobayashi et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating the optimization of magnetic flux characteristics of the device.
Claim(s) 6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al. and Kobayashi et al. as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Nigo et al. (US Patent No.: 11018535).
For claim 6, Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al. and Kobayashi et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the protrusion having a substantially rectangular shape in the vertical cross-section. Having a rectangular shape for the protrusion is a known skill in the art as exhibited by Nigo et al. (reference numeral 31, see figure 16), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the rectangular shape as disclosed by Nigo et al. for the protrusion of Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al. and Kobayashi et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating the optimization of magnetic flux characteristics of the device.
For claim 8, Sano et al. disclose an entire area in the width direction of the protrusion (reference numerals 34a, 34b, figures 2, 4) being protruded to be opposed to an area between the end portion (i.e. an end of the long side of magnet 40, see figure 4) and the center portion in the width direction of the first surface (i.e. width direction being along the long side of magnet 40, see figure 4).
Claim(s) 7 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al., Kawasaki et al., and Kobayashi et al. as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Nigo et al. (US Patent No.: 11018535).
For claim 7, Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al., Kawasaki et al., and Kobayashi et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the protrusion having a substantially rectangular shape in the vertical cross-section. Having a rectangular shape for the protrusion is a known skill in the art as exhibited by Nigo et al. (reference numeral 31, see figure 16), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the rectangular shape as disclosed by Nigo et al. for the protrusion of Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al., Kawasaki et al., and Kobayashi et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating the optimization of magnetic flux characteristics of the device.
For claim 9, Sano et al. disclose an entire area in the width direction of the protrusion (reference numerals 34a, 34b, figures 2, 4) being protruded to be opposed to an area between the end portion (i.e. an end of the long side of magnet 40, see figure 4) and the center portion in the width direction of the first surface (i.e. width direction being along the long side of magnet 40, see figure 4).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Inoue et al. (US Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2022/0320926 A1).
For claim 12, Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the rotor including a plurality of magnetic pole portions in the circumferential direction, the plurality of magnet accommodation holes including a first magnet accommodation hole, a second magnet accommodation hole and a third magnet accommodation hole, formed in each of the plurality of magnetic pole portions, the each of the plurality of magnetic pole portions including a first permanent magnet accommodated in the first magnet accommodation hole, a second permanent magnet accommodated in the second magnet accommodation hole, and a third permanent magnet accommodated in the third magnet accommodation hole, the first magnet accommodation hole being extended in the circumferential direction so as to be substantially orthogonal to a d-axis passing through a center in the circumferential direction of the each of the plurality of magnetic pole portions and extending in a radial direction, and the second magnet accommodation hole and the third magnet accommodation hole being formed symmetrically with respect to the d-axis inside the first magnet accommodation hole in the radial direction. Inoue et al. disclose the rotor including a plurality of magnetic pole portions in the circumferential direction (i.e. magnetic pole portions defined by magnets 60 disposed between adjacent q-axis lines in the circumferential direction, see figure 1), the plurality of magnet accommodation holes including a first magnet accommodation hole (reference numeral 51, see figure 2), a second magnet accommodation hole (reference numeral 52, figure 2) and a third magnet accommodation hole (reference numeral 53, figure 2), formed in each of the plurality of magnetic pole portions (see figures 1, 2), the each of the plurality of magnetic pole portions including a first permanent magnet (reference numeral 61) accommodated in the first magnet accommodation hole (see figure 2), a second permanent magnet (reference numeral 62) accommodated in the second magnet accommodation hole (see figure 2), and a third permanent magnet (reference numeral 63) accommodated in the third magnet accommodation hole (see figure 2), the first magnet accommodation hole (reference numeral 51) being extended in the circumferential direction so as to be substantially orthogonal to a d-axis (see figure 2) passing through a center in the circumferential direction of the each of the plurality of magnetic pole portions and extending in a radial direction (d-axis extending in the radial direction as shown in figure 2), and the second magnet accommodation hole (reference numeral 52) and the third magnet accommodation hole (reference numeral 53) being formed symmetrically with respect to the d-axis inside the first magnet accommodation hole (reference numeral 51) in the radial direction (see figure 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the first, second, and third magnet accommodation holes along with the permanent magnets as disclosed by Inoue et al. for the rotor of Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating the optimization of magnetic flux characteristics of the device.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hattori (US Patent No.: 10530205).
For claim 13, Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the gap being filled with a resin material. Hattori discloses the gap being filled with a resin material (i.e. resin being filled to fix the magnets 50, 51, see column 7, lines 18-26, and also figures 1, 2), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the gap filled with resin as disclosed by Hattori for the gap of Sano et al. in view of Takahashi et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for facilitating the optimization of magnetic flux characteristics of the device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-14 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.
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 ALEX W MOK whose telephone number is (571)272-9084. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-4pm.
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.
/ALEX W MOK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834