DETAILED ACTION
1. Claims 1-20 of U.S. Application 18/406477 filed on December 3, 2025 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 .
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-6, filed December 3, 2025, with respect to amended claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in further view of Kawasaki (US 20020153794) in which Kawasaki teaches (see fig. 3 below) the rotor (10) is external to the stator (20) (¶ 117 to ¶ 120) in order to provide greater output torque without increasing the overall size of the device (Kawasaki, ¶ 119) (see below for complete rejection).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. Claims 1, 3-9, 11-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamasaki (US 20160181885) in view of Kawasaki (US 20020153794).
Regarding claim 1, Yamasaki teaches (see figs. 2-3 below) an electric motor arrangement comprising an electric motor (10) (¶ 22),
which comprises a rotor (15), having a sensor arrangement (18, 55) for detecting an angular position of the rotor (15), which comprises a magnet (18) and a magnetic field sensor apparatus (55) (¶ 38), and
comprising a housing (11), which has a rotor region (see annotated fig. 3 below), in which the rotor (15) is arranged, and a circuit region (see annotated fig. 3 below), which is spatially separated from the rotor region (see annotated fig. 3 below) by a housing wall (20) and in which the magnetic field sensor apparatus (55) is arranged (¶ 54 to ¶ 57; ¶ 96),
wherein the rotor (15) comprises an end region (see annotated fig. 3 below), facing the housing wall (20), containing the magnet (18), and wherein the magnetic field sensor apparatus (55) is configured to detect a magnetic field of the magnet (18) that penetrates the housing wall (20) and to provide angular position information about the angular position of the rotor (15) (¶ 38; ¶ 48).
PNG
media_image1.png
822
821
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
844
620
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Yamasaki does not explicitly teach the rotor is external to the stator.
However, Kawasaki teaches (see fig. 3 below) the rotor (10) is external to the stator (20) (¶ 117 to ¶ 120) in order to provide greater output torque without increasing the overall size of the device (Kawasaki, ¶ 119).
PNG
media_image3.png
767
503
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 Yamasaki and provide the rotor is external to the stator as taught by Kawasaki in order to provide greater output torque without increasing the overall size of the device (Kawasaki, ¶ 119).
Regarding claim 3/1, Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki teaches the device of claim 1, Yamasaki further teaches (see figs. 2-3 above) the rotor (15) comprises a rotor shaft (16), on the end face of which the magnet (18) is arranged, and wherein the magnet (18) is connected to the rotor shaft (16) in a rotationally fixed manner (¶ 65; ¶ 69; ¶ 70).
Regarding claim 4/1, Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki teaches the device of claim 1, Yamasaki further teaches (see figs. 2-3 above) the housing wall (20) comprises aluminum (¶ 71).
Regarding claim 5/1, Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki teaches the device of claim 1, Yamasaki further teaches (see figs. 2-3 above) the circuit region (see annotated fig. 3 above) is separated from the rotor region (see annotated fig. 3 above) in a liquid-tight manner (¶ 10; ¶ 79; ¶ 102; ¶ 124).
Regarding claim 6/1, Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki teaches the device of claim 1, Yamasaki further teaches (see figs. 2-3 above) the magnetic field sensor apparatus (55) and the magnet (18) are spatially separated from one another by the housing wall (20) and arranged adjacently to opposite sides of the housing wall (20) (fig. 3; ¶ 73; ¶ 74).
Regarding claim 7/1, Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki teaches the device of claim 1, Yamasaki further teaches (see figs. 2-3 above) wherein at least one of the magnetic field sensor apparatus (55) and the magnet (18) is arranged on a rotation axis (O) of the rotor (15) (fig. 3; ¶ 95).
Regarding claim 8/1, Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki teaches the device of claim 1, Yamasaki further teaches (see figs. 2-3 above) a supply of electrical power to and control of the sensor arrangement (18, 55) merely comprises a supply of power to and control of the magnetic field sensor apparatus (55), and is effected in particular by the circuit region (see annotated fig. 3 above) (¶ 30; ¶ 38; ¶ 43; ¶ 48; ¶ 115).
Regarding claim 9/1, Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki teaches the device of claim 1, Yamasaki further teaches (see figs. 2-3 above) a control circuit (41) for the electric motor, which is configured to control a commutation of the electric motor on the basis of the angular position information (¶ 30; ¶ 38; ¶ 42; ¶ 43).
Regarding claim 11/9/1, Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki teaches the device of claim 9, Yamasaki further teaches (see figs. 2 and 3 above and fig. 6 below) the control circuit (40) comprises a high-voltage region and/or a high-current region (see annotated fig. 3 above), the distance of which from the magnet (18) is greater than the distance of the magnetic field sensor apparatus (55) from the magnet (18) (figs. 3 and 6; ¶ 35 to ¶ 38).
PNG
media_image4.png
583
504
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12/11/9/1, Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki teaches the device of claim 11, Yamasaki further teaches (see figs. 2, 3 and 6 above) the magnetic field sensor apparatus (55) is at a shorter distance from a rotation axis (O) of the rotor (15) than the high-voltage region and/or the high-current region (see annotated fig. 3 above) (figs. 3 and 6; ¶ 35 to ¶ 38).
Regarding claim 13/1, Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki teaches the device of claim 1, Yamasaki further teaches (see figs. 2-3 above) electrical contacts (inside connectors 76 and 77) for externally supplying power to the electric motor arrangement (¶ 101; ¶ 104; ¶ 105)
and/or for externally controlling the electric motor arrangement, to which electrical contacts the magnetic field sensor apparatus (55) is electrically conductively coupled (¶ 26; ¶ 87; ¶ 101; ¶ 104 to ¶ 107).
Regarding claim 15/1, Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki teaches the device of claim 1 but does not explicitly teach the rotor is a bell-shaped rotor surrounding the stator.
However, Kawasaki further teaches (see fig. 3 above) the rotor (10) is a bell-shaped rotor (10) surrounding the stator (20) (fig. 3; ¶ 117 to ¶ 120) in order to provide greater output torque without increasing the overall size of the device (Kawasaki, ¶ 119).
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 Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki and provide the rotor is a bell-shaped rotor surrounding the stator as further taught by Kawasaki in order to provide greater output torque without increasing the overall size of the device (Kawasaki, ¶ 119).
6. Claims 2, 10 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Migita (US 20130026888).
Regarding claim 2/1, Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki teaches the device of claim 1 but does not explicitly teach the magnetic field sensor apparatus comprises at least two Hall sensors.
However, Migita teaches (see fig. 3 below) the magnetic field sensor apparatus (24) comprises at least two Hall sensors (621, 622) (¶ 34) in order to improve detection accuracy (Migita, ¶ 48; ¶ 52).
PNG
media_image5.png
371
510
media_image5.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 Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki and provide the magnetic field sensor apparatus comprises at least two Hall sensors as taught by Migita in order to improve detection accuracy (Migita, ¶ 48; ¶ 52).
Regarding claim 10/9/1, Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki teaches the device of claim 9, Yamasaki further teaches (see figs. 2 and 3 above) the sensor of the magnetic field sensor apparatus (55) is arranged on a printed circuit board (41), and wherein the control circuit (40) is arranged on the same printed circuit board (41) in the circuit region (see annotated fig. 3 above) and is electrically conductively connected to the magnetic field sensor apparatus (55) (¶ 22; ¶ 30; ¶ 85; ¶ 89).
Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki do not explicitly teach at least two Hall sensors of the magnetic field sensor apparatus.
However, Migita teaches (see fig. 3 above) at least two Hall sensors (621, 622) of the magnetic field sensor apparatus (24) (¶ 34) in order to improve detection accuracy (Migita, ¶ 48; ¶ 52).
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 Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki and provide at least two Hall sensors of the magnetic field sensor apparatus as taught by Migita in order to improve detection accuracy (Migita, ¶ 48; ¶ 52).
Regarding claim 16/2/1, Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki and Migita teaches the device of claim 2, Yamasaki further teaches (see figs. 2, 3 and 6 above) the rotor (15) comprises a rotor shaft (16), on the end face of which the magnet (18) is arranged, and wherein the magnet (18) is connected to the rotor shaft (16) in a rotationally fixed manner (¶ 65; ¶ 69; ¶ 70).
Regarding claim 17/16/2/1, Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki and Migita teaches the device of claim 16, Yamasaki further teaches (see figs. 2, 3 and 6 above) the magnetic field sensor apparatus (55) and the magnet (18) are spatially separated from one another by the housing wall (20) and arranged adjacently to opposite sides of the housing wall (20) (fig. 3; ¶ 73; ¶ 74).
Regarding claim 18/16/2/1, Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki and Migita teaches the device of claim 16, Yamasaki further teaches (see figs. 2-3 above) wherein at least one of the magnetic field sensor apparatus (55) and the magnet (18) is arranged on a rotation axis (O) of the rotor (15) (fig. 3; ¶ 95).
Regarding claim 19/10/9/1, Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki and Migita teaches the device of claim 10, Yamasaki further teaches (see figs. 2, 3 and 6 above) the control circuit (40) comprises a high-voltage region and/or a high-current region (see annotated fig. 3 above), the distance of which from the magnet (18) is greater than the distance of the magnetic field sensor apparatus (55) from the magnet (18) (figs. 3 and 6; ¶ 35 to ¶ 38).
Regarding claim 20/19/10/9/1, Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki and Migita teaches the device of claim 10, Yamasaki further teaches (see figs. 2, 3 and 6 above) the magnetic field sensor apparatus (55) is at a shorter distance from a rotation axis (O) of the rotor (15) than the high-voltage region and/or the high-current region (see annotated fig. 3 above) (figs. 3 and 6; ¶ 35 to ¶ 38).
7. Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki and Migita as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Kim (US 20230261544).
Regarding claim 14/10/9/1, Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki and Migita teaches the device of claim 10 but does not explicitly teach the electrically conductive connection to the magnetic field sensor apparatus comprises a cable connection.
However, Kim teaches the electrically conductive connection to the magnetic field sensor apparatus comprises a cable connection (¶ 40) in order to provide ease of assembly and maintenance (Kim, ¶ 40).
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 Yamasaki in view of Kawasaki and Migita and provide the electrically conductive connection to the magnetic field sensor apparatus comprises a cable connection as taught by Kim in order to provide ease of assembly and maintenance (Kim, ¶ 40).
Conclusion
8. 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 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