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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wada et al. (WO 2019/150718 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Wada discloses a linear motor (100) comprising:
a plurality of multi-phase coil groups (24) that are arranged linearly and generate linear power in an arrangement direction depending on flowing multi-phase ACs (FIG 1; mover 50); and
inter-coil reinforcing members (22) that are provided between the plurality of multi-phase coil groups (20).
Regarding claim 5/1, Wada was discussed above in claim 1. Wada further discloses end portion-reinforcing members (casing 22 also reinforces both ends of the stator 10) that are provided at both end portions in the arrangement direction of the plurality of multi-phase coil groups (24; FIG. 5).
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.
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wada et al. (WO 2019/150718 A1) in view of Ouyang et al. (CN 111769714 A).
Regarding claim 2/1, Wada was discussed above in claim 1. Wada does not disclose a width of a space, in which the inter-coil reinforcing member is provided, in the arrangement direction is equal to a natural number multiple of 60° in terms of an electrical angle of the multi-phase AC.
Ouyang discloses a width of a space (in FIG. 1), in which the inter-coil reinforcing member (of Wada) is provided, in the arrangement direction is equal to a natural number multiple of 60° in terms of an electrical angle of the multi-phase AC (see below).
PNG
media_image1.png
402
1098
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to have modified Wada in view of Ouyang to disclose a width of a space, in which the inter-coil reinforcing member is provided, in the arrangement direction is equal to a natural number multiple of 60° in terms of an electrical angle of the multi-phase AC, for the advantages of symmetrical distribution in space, eliminating the inductance asymmetry phenomenon.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wada et al. (WO 2019/150718 A1) in view of Ouyang et al. (CN 111769714 A) and Miyata et al. (US 2009/0230806 A1).
Regarding claim 3/1, Wada was discussed above in claim 1. Wada further discloses herein each of the multi-phase coil groups (24) is a three-phase coil group (see below) that includes a U-phase coil, a V-phase coil, and a W-phase coil arranged linearly and generates linear power in the arrangement direction depending on flowing three-phase ACs (FIG 1; mover 50), and
two three-phase coil groups (24) which are adjacent to each other in the arrangement direction via the inter-coil reinforcing member (22).
PNG
media_image2.png
250
1090
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Wada does not disclose an arrangement order of the U-phase coil, the V-phase coil, and the W-phase coil is different in two three-phase coil groups which are adjacent to each other in the arrangement direction and through which the three-phase ACs having phases opposite to each other flow.
Ouyang discloses an arrangement order of the U-phase coil (C phase), the V-phase coil (A phase), and the W-phase coil (B phase) is different in two three-phase coil groups (first module 1, second module 2, third module 3) which are adjacent to each other in the arrangement direction (horizontal direction; FIG. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to have modified Wada in view of Ouyang to disclose an arrangement order of the U-phase coil, the V-phase coil, and the W-phase coil is different in two three-phase coil groups which are adjacent to each other in the arrangement direction, for the advantages of symmetrical distribution in space, eliminating the inductance asymmetry phenomenon.
Miyata discloses through which the three-phase ACs having phases opposite to each other flow (FIG. 28A, 28B; ¶ [0109]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to have modified Wada in view of Miyata to disclose through which the three-phase ACs having phases opposite to each other flow, for the advantages of no useless coil end portions are formed, increasing coil utility factor (¶ [0109]).
Regarding claim 4/3, Wada in view of Ouyang and Miyata was discussed above in claim 3. Ouyang further discloses wherein a width of a space, in which the inter-coil reinforcing member is provided, in the arrangement direction is equal to 60° in terms of an electrical angle of the three-phase AC (above annotation discloses the primary modules are 60 electrical degrees apart, and
regarding the two three-phase coil groups (1-3) which are adjacent to each other in the arrangement direction via the inter-coil reinforcing member (disclosed by Wada) and through which the three-phase ACs having phases opposite to each other flow (disclosed by Miyata), the U-phase coil (C phase), the V-phase coil (A phase), and the W-phase coil (B phase) are arranged in order in a first three-phase coil group (2), and the V-phase coil (A phase), the W-phase coil (B phase), and the U-phase coil (C phase) are arranged in order in a second three-phase coil group (1).
Claims 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wada et al. (WO 2019/150718 A1) in view of Da Conceicao Rosa (US 2016/0102928 A1; hereinafter Rosa).
Regarding claim 6/1, Wada was discussed above in claim 1. Wada does not disclose a cooling member that is provided on one end surfaces of the plurality of multi-phase coil groups and cools the plurality of multi-phase coil groups.
Rosa discloses a cooling member (1) that is provided on one end surfaces of the plurality of multi-phase coil groups (S) and cools the plurality of multi-phase coil groups (S1-S3; ¶ [0031], [0033]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to have modified Wada in view of Rosa to disclose a cooling member that is provided on one end surfaces of the plurality of multi-phase coil groups and cools the plurality of multi-phase coil groups, for the advantages of a heat sink for effective cooling with lowest possible effort (¶ [0005]).
Regarding claim 7/6, Wada in view of Rosa was discussed above in claim 6. Rosa further discloses wherein the plurality of multi-phase coil groups (S1-S3) are provided on both surfaces of the cooling member (1; ¶ [0031] coil can be on one or both side of the heat sink).
Regarding claim 8/7, Wada in view of Rosa was discussed above in claim 7. Wada further discloses a supported portion (20) that further extends to an outer peripheral side that the plurality of multi-phase coil groups (24), and
a support member (30, 31) that supports both surfaces of the supported portion (20).
Wada does not disclose the cooling member and the plurality of multi-phase coil groups provided on the both surfaces of the cooling member.
Rosa discloses the cooling member (1) and the plurality of multi-phase coil groups (S1-S3) provided on the both surfaces of the cooling member (1; ¶ [0031]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to have modified Wada in view of Rosa to disclose the cooling member and the plurality of multi-phase coil groups provided on the both surfaces of the cooling member, for the advantages of a heat sink for effective cooling with lowest possible effort (¶ [0005]).
Claims 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wada et al. (WO 2019/150718 A1) in view of Shinohira et al. (US 2007/0056958 A1).
Regarding claim 9/1, Wada was discussed above in claim 1. Wada does not disclose a positioning device that uses the linear motor according to claim 1 as a power source.
Shinohira discloses a positioning device (10) that uses the linear motor (20) according to claim 1 as a power source (FIG. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to have modified Wada in view of Shinohira to disclose a positioning device that uses the linear motor according to claim 1 as a power source, as the use of linear motors for use on a semiconductor manufacturing device is very well known within the art.
Regarding claim 10/9, Wada in view of Shinohira was discussed above in claim 9. Shinohira further discloses a processing apparatus (FIG. 1) that processes a workpiece positioned by the positioning device (10) according to claim 9 (¶ [0005] discloses the positioning device is used for manufacturing workpieces like semiconductors, liquid crystals etc.).
Regarding claim 11/10, Wada in view of Shinohira was discussed above in claim 10. Shinohira further discloses a device manufacturing method of manufacturing a device (semiconductor, liquid crystal) through processing of the workpiece performed by the processing apparatus (FIG. 1) according to claim 10 (¶ [0016] discloses the method of operating the apparatus).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MINKI CHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-0521. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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.
/MINKI CHANG/ Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/OLUSEYE IWARERE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834