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 filed 9 January 2026 have been fully considered but the amendment required the new grounds of rejection shown below.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 2 should recite “an exterior of the housing”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hokanson (US 6,188,153)., in view of Bharani et al. (“Bharani”; US 2010/0079946).
Regarding claim 1: Hokanson discloses a cooling system for an electric machine (Fig. 1-4), comprising:
an air inlet (inlet to 40, Fig. 4) at a first end of the electric machine configured to provide an air flow (33) through a housing of the electric machine;
one or more baffles (10) removably (via bolt 28) coupled to a stator (22, via 40) of the electric machine, the one or more baffles being positioned proximate to a second end of the electric machine (24), and the one or more baffles being configured to direct the air flow toward one or more windings of the electric machine at the second end (column 2, lines 1-3); and
one or more openings (of passage 40, exact location where the arrow 33 is leaving the passage 40 in Fig. 4) in the housing of the electric machine proximate to the second end of the electric machine configured to enable the air flow to pass into or out of the housing.
While the air inherently needs to enter the housing of the electric machine, Hokanson does not explicitly teach an air inlet in a housing of the electric machine open to an exterior of the housing to introduce air from outside of the housing of the electric machine into the housing.
However, Bharani discloses an air inlet (left side of 58, shown by the arrow in Fig. 3 being directed by baffle 124) in a housing (58) of the electric machine open to an exterior of the housing to introduce air from outside of the housing of the electric machine into the housing (shown by the arrows in Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the housing of Hokanson to include the air inlet of Bharani in order to ensure that there can be consistent cooling airflow.
Regarding claim 2: Hokanson discloses the one or more baffles, but does not explicitly disclose the one or more baffles extend toward the first end of the electric machine.
However, Bharani discloses the one or more baffles (124, Fig. 3) extend toward the first end of the electric machine (the right side of Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the baffles of Hokanson to have the angled design of Bharani in order to better deflect the air.
Regarding claim 3: Hokanson discloses the one or more baffles, but does not explicitly disclose an angle between each of the one or more baffles and the stator is less than 90 degrees.
However, Bharani discloses an angle between each of the one or more baffles and the stator is less than 90 degrees (as baffles 124 are curved).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the baffles of Hokanson to have the angled design of Bharani in order to better deflect the air.
Regarding claim 4: Hokanson discloses the stator has a cylindrical body (Fig. 2), and wherein the one or more baffles are configured around a circumference of the cylindrical body (see the shape of the baffles in Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 5: Hokanson discloses the one or more baffles are multiple baffles spaced around the circumference of the cylindrical body (Fig. 1 shows one single baffle).
Regarding claim 6: Hokanson discloses the one or more baffles (10, Fig. 4) extend between the stator (22) and an inner surface of the housing (inner surface of 24).
Regarding claim 7: Hokanson discloses the one or more baffles are configured behind the one or more openings relative to the first end of the electric machine (as shown in Fig. 4, the bracket 44 extends from the point where the openings are).
Regarding claim 8: Hokanson discloses the one or more openings are multiple openings that are spaced around a periphery of the housing (as there are multiple passages 40, column 2, line 65).
Claims 9-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hokanson, in view of Bharani and Robin et al. (“Robin”; US 2008/0048511).
Regarding claim 9: Hokanson disclose an electric machine, comprising:
a housing including an air inlet (inlet to 40, Fig. 4);
a stator (22);
one or more windings configured within the stator, the one or more windings from a first end of the electric machine to a second end of the electric machine (column 2, line 66 – column 3, line 2), the first end being proximate to the air inlet (opposite end than that shown in Fig. 4, right side looking at the figure); and
one or more baffles (10, 30) comprising a first portion (30), extending along a first plane (horizontal), and a second portion (10), extending along a second plane (vertical), the second plane being different from the first plane (horizontal vs vertical, and shown by the turning of the airflow arrows in Fig. 4).
Hokanson does not explicitly disclose the one or more baffles, each comprising a unitary structure, wherein the first portion and the second portion together form a continuous airflow-deflecting surface, and wherein the second portion extends away from the one or more windings and toward the first end.
However, Robin discloses the one or more baffles (24, Fig. 3), each comprising a unitary structure (paragraph 0017) that includes a first portion (30), extending along a first plane (vertical), and a second portion (36) extending along a second plane (angled, see Fig. 3), different from the first plane, wherein the first portion and the second portion together form a continuous airflow-deflecting surface (as paragraph 0017 refers to the first and second portions of a single baffle).
And, Bharani discloses one or more baffles (124) extending away from the one or more windings and toward the first end (as shown in Fig. 3, the curve of the baffle is akin to that of the instant invention).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the baffles of Hokanson to have the unitary structure and two portions of Robin in order to have a stronger baffle and to have the angled design of Bharani in order to better deflect the air.
Regarding claim 10: Hokanson discloses the air inlet is configured to provide an air flow into the housing (as this is the purpose of a channel), and wherein the one or more baffles are configured to direct the air flow toward the one or more windings at the second end (column 2, line 66 – column 3, line 2).
Regarding claim 11: Hokanson discloses one or more openings proximate to the second end (outlet of 40, Fig. 4).
the one or more baffles (10 are positioned behind the one or more openings relative to the first end (shown in Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 12: Hokanson discloses the one or more baffles are positioned behind the one or more openings relative to the first end (as the baffles are interior to the openings, ‘behind’ is relative).
Regarding claim 13: Hokanson discloses the one or more openings are multiple openings that are equally spaced around a periphery of the housing (Fig. 3, all elements are evenly spaced around the periphery of the housing, inherently including the openings).
Regarding claim 14: Hokanson discloses the one or more baffles are removably coupled to the stator or to a rotor of the electric machine (via bolt 28).
Regarding claim 15: Hokanson discloses the one or more baffles, but does not explicitly disclose an angle between each of the one or more baffles and the stator is less than 90 degrees.
However, Bharani discloses an angle between each of the one or more baffles and the stator is less than 90 degrees (as baffles 124 are curved towards the stator).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the baffles of Hokanson to have the angled design of Bharani in order to better deflect the air.
Claims 16-19 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hokanson, in view of Bharani and Armor et al. (“Armor”; US 4,051,400).
Regarding claim 16: Hokanson discloses a cooling system for an electric machine, comprising:
an air inlet at a first end of the electric machine configured to provide an air flow through a housing of the electric machine (inlet to 40); and
one or more baffles (10, 30, 32, 34, 44) comprising a bracket (44) removably (via 28) coupled to a stator of the electric machine, and a deflector (10) extending from the bracket, the one or more baffles being positioned proximate to a second end of the electric machine (24), and
the deflector being configured to direct the air flow toward one or more windings of the electric machine at the second end (column 2, line 66 – column 3, line 2).
Hokanson does not explicitly disclose the bracket removably coupled directly to the stator and the one or more baffles extending away from the stator and having an angle towards the first end that is greater than 90 degrees and less than 180 degrees.
However, Armor discloses a bracket (85) removably coupled directly to the stator (at 72, via 80, Fig. 2-3).
And, Bharani discloses deflector (124) extending away from the stator and having an angle towards the first end (as shown in Fig. 3, while the baffle is curved, it is curved to an angle).
And regarding the angle being between 90 and 180 degrees, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, In re Antonie, 195 USPQ 6 (C.C.P.A. 1977).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the bracket of Hokanson to be removably directly coupled to the stator in order to allow for easier bracket maintenance and to modify the baffles of Hokanson to have the angled design of Bharani in order to better deflect the air and to have the angle be between 90 and 180 degrees in order to ensure the air is effectively directed.
Regarding claim 17: Hokanson discloses one or more openings (outlet of 40) in the housing of the electric machine proximate to the second end of the electric machine configured to enable the air flow to pass into or out of the housing (shown by arrow 33).
Regarding claim 18: Hokanson discloses the stator has a cylindrical body, and wherein the one or more baffles (10) are configured around a circumference of the cylindrical body (shown in Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 19: Hokanson discloses the one or more baffles extend between the stator (22) and an inner surface of the housing (inner surface of 24).
Regarding claim 21: Hokanson discloses the housing and an air inlet, but does not explicitly disclose the housing comprises the air inlet.
However, Bharani discloses a housing (54) comprises an air inlet (66, Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the housing of Hokanson to include the air inlet of Bharani in order to ensure that there can be consistent cooling airflow.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN GUGGER whose telephone number is (571)272-5343. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9:00am - 5:00pm EST.
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, T.C. Patel can be reached at 571 272 2098. 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.
/SEAN GUGGER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834