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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/25/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishigami et al. (US 2019/0027989).
In claim 1, Ishigami teaches (Fig. 1-16) a stator (130E; Fig. 14) for an e-motor, the stator (130E) comprising: a body (132) with a first end and a second end (respective axial ends); a first plate (700) mounted to the first end of the body (132); a second plate (respective 700) mounted to the second end of the body (132); and a plurality of wires (138) extending through the first plate, the body of the stator and the second plate, wherein the first plate and the second plate inhibit relative movement between individual wires of the plurality of wires and the body of the stator.
Ishigami does not teach in the embodiment insulation also extending through the first plate, the body of the stator and the second plate.
However, Ishigami teaches in an alternative embodiment (Fig. 8) insulation (300) extending past the first and second ends of a stator body (132), and further teaches that such modifications may be combined ([0099]).
Therefore in view of Ishigami, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to help prevent short circuiting between coils ([0006]).
In claim 2, Ishigami as modified teaches wherein the first plate (700) and the second plate (respective 700) are made of a plastic material ([0091]).
In claim 3, Ishigami as modified teaches wherein the plastic material is a polyamidepimide, a polyphenylene sulfide, or a polyphenylene oxide ([0091]).
In claim 6, Ishigami as modified teaches wherein the first plate (700) and the second plate (respective 700) are formed from two separate molded pieces ([0091]).
In claim 8, Ishigami as modified teaches wherein bending of the plurality of wires (138) applies a force to the first plate (700) and the second plate (respective 700) to inhibit relative movement between the stator (130E) and individual wires of the plurality of wires (138).
Claim(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishigami et al. (US 2019/0027989) in view of Choi et al. (US 2023/0179034).
In claim 4, Ishigami as modified teaches the stator of claim 1, with the exception of wherein the first plate and the second plate are made of a ceramic material.
However, Choi teaches a stator wherein a first and second plate (130) are made of ceramic.
Therefore in view of Choi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to provide heat insulation to the coils (Choi; [0030]).
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishigami et al. (US 2019/0027989) in view of Enomoto et al. (US 2021/0249926).
In claim 5, Ishigami as modified teaches the stator of claim 1, with the exception of wherein the first plate and the second plate are molded as a single integrated piece.
However, Enomoto teaches (Fig. 8B-8C) a stator (56) having a first plate (91) and the second (respective 91) plate molded as a single integrated piece.
Therefore in view of Enomoto, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to have a firmly integrated teeth and yoke of the stator (Enomoto; [0071]).
Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishigami et al. (US 2019/0027989) in view of Hunstable et al. (US 2021/0066984).
In claim 7, Ishigami teaches the stator of claim 1, with the exception of wherein the plurality of wires comprises a copper material.
However, Hunstable teaches wherein the plurality of wires comprises a copper material ([0132]).
Therefore in view of Hunstable, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to provide a plurality of turns with higher packing factor (Hunstable; [0132]).
Claim(s) 9-14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishigami et al. (US 2019/0027989) in view of Randall et al. (US 2002/0167232).
In claim 9, Ishigami teaches stator for an e-motor, the stator comprising: a body with a plurality of slots; a plurality of wires and insulation extending through the body;
Ishigami does not teach at least one insert that extends from an outer diameter to an inner diameter of a slot of the body and through at least a portion of the plurality of wires, wherein the at least one insert inhibits relative movement between individual wires of the plurality of wires.
However, Randall teaches (Fig. 3-5c) a stator (20) having at least one insert (28) that extends from an outer diameter to an inner diameter of a slot ([0007]) of the body (20) and through at least a portion of the plurality of wires (26), wherein the at least one insert (28) inhibits relative movement between individual wires (26) of the plurality of wires (26).
Therefore in view of Randall, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to draw heat generated by the sides of the wires (Randall; [0031]).
In claim 10, Ishigami as modified teaches the stator of claim 9, with the exception of wherein the at least one insert comprises a T-shaped portion and a wedge-shaped portion.
However, Randall teaches wherein the at least one insert (28) comprises a T-shaped portion (34, 36) and a wedge-shaped portion (32).
Therefore further in view of Randall, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to draw heat generated by the sides of the wires (Randall; [0031]).
In claim 11, Ishigami as modified teaches the stator of claim 10, with the exception of wherein the T-shaped portion comprises an elongated segment.
However, Randall teaches wherein the T-shaped portion comprises an elongated segment (34).
Therefore further in view of Randall, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to draw heat generated by the sides of the wires (Randall; [0031]).
In claim 12, Ishigami as modified teaches the stator of claim 11, with the exception of wherein the elongated segment is tapered.
However, Randall teaches wherein the elongated segment (34) is tapered.
Therefore further in view of Randall, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to draw heat generated by the sides of the wires (Randall; [0031]).
In claim 13, Ishigami as modified teaches the stator of claim 9, with the exception of wherein the at least one insert is made of a plastic material.
However, Randall teaches wherein the at least one insert (28) is made of a plastic material ([0040]).
Therefore further in view of Randall, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to draw heat generated by the sides of the wires (Randall; [0031]).
In claim 14, Ishigami as modified teaches the stator of claim 14, with the exception of wherein the plastic material is a polyamidepimide, a polyphenylene sulfide, or a polyphenylene oxide.
However, Ishigami further teaches that the plastic materials used for insulation can be made of a polyamidepimide, a polyphenylene sulfide, or a polyphenylene oxide ([0091]).
Therefore in view of Ishigami, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to help prevent short circuiting between coils ([0006]).
In claim 16, Ishigami as modified teaches wherein the at least one insert (28) comprises a plurality of inserts (28) that are spaced apart.
Claim(s) 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishigami et al. (US 2019/0027989) in view of Randall et al. (US 2002/0167232), and further in view of Choi et al. (US 2023/0179034).
In claim 15 Ishigami as modified teaches the stator of claim 9, with the exception of wherein the at least one insert is made of a ceramic material.
However, Choi teaches a stator wherein an insulating plate material (130) is made of ceramic.
As the wedge is also intended for heat insulation, therefore in view of Choi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to provide heat insulation to the coils (Choi; [0030]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The cited prior art taken singularly or in combination fails to anticipate or fairly suggest the limitation of the independent claim(s), in such a manner that a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103 would be proper. The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the features as presented in the independent claim(s) with the allowable feature being:
Claim 17: “at least another insert that extends from the inner diameter to a mid-point between the outer diameter and the inner diameter of the slot of the body and through the sub portion of the plurality of wires, wherein the at least one insert and the at least another insert inhibit relative movement between individual wires of the plurality of wires.”.
Randall et al. (US 2002/0167232) has been cited as prior art most closely related to the claimed invention.
Randall teaches (Fig. 3-5c) a stator (20) having a body with a plurality of slots; a plurality of wires (26); at least one insert (28) that extends from an outer diameter to an inner diameter of a slot ([0007]) of the body (20) and through at least a portion of the plurality of wires (26), wherein the at least one insert (28) inhibits relative movement between individual wires (26) of the plurality of wires (26).
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Umeda et al. (US 2011/0012472) teaches a stator including a stator core and a stator coil comprised of a plurality of electric wires.
Umeda et al. (US 2011/0012450) teaches a stator including a stator core and a multi-phase stator coil comprised of a plurality of electric wires.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RASHAD H JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1231. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am-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 571-272-3560. 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.
RASHAD H. JOHNSON
Examiner
Art Unit 2834
/RASHAD H JOHNSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2834