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 . This Office Action is responsive to the Applicant's communication filed May 5, 2026. In view of this communication and the amendment concurrently filed: claims 1-28 were previously pending; claims 8, 11, and 19 were cancelled and no claims were added by amendment; and claims 3-4, 24, and 26-28 are withdrawn thus, claims 1-2, 5-7, 9-10, 12-18, 20-23 and 25 are now pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 5, 2026have been fully considered.
The Applicant's first point (page 10-12 of Remarks) amends the drawings to overcome the objections. The amendments are expectable to the Examiner and thus make the drawing objections moot.
The Applicant's second point (page 12 of Remarks) amends the claims to resolve the minor informalities. The amendments are expectable to the Examiner and thus make the claim objections moot.
The Applicant's third point (page 12-14 of Remarks) amends the specification and drawings to provide greater clarification to providing enablement for claim 1 without include new matter. This meets the enablement requirements for a coil assembly having a core of magnetic material and electrical windings.
Additionally, the Applicant also cancels claim 8 to overcome the enablement requirement.
Lastly, the Applicant argues that paragraph [0032] of the present invention discloses , “a series of three outer sensors 11a, 11 b, 11 c and a series of three inner sensors 12a, 12b, 12c distributed along a partial arc around the central opening,” and paragraph [0051] of the present invention discloses, “there are a series of inner sensors Hinner disposed along or adjacent the path of the inner magnets and there are a series of outer sensors, Houter, disposed along or adjacent the path of the outer magnets.” While this is true, the information given in paragraph [0032,0051] does not enable one skilled in the art to teach a first set of sensors arranged for detection of the inner magnet ring; a second set of sensors arranged for detection of the outer magnet ring. Paragraph [0032] of the present invention teaches that two series of sensors exist in a partial arc, and paragraph [0051] of the present invention teaches that they are structurally located adjacent to the inner and outer magnets. However, the specification is silent on the function of a first a second set of sensors. The disclosure of the present application is silent and therefor does not enable one skilled in the art to provide a first set of sensors arranged for detection of the inner magnet ring and a second set of sensors arranged for detection of the outer magnet ring. The Applicant can remedy this by using the structural language disclosed in paragraph [0032, 0051] of the present invention in claim 1 instead of the functional language of the currently presented claim 1. For the above reasons the 112(a) rejection stands/
The Applicant's fourth point (page 14-16 of Remarks) amends the claims to overcome the various 112(b) rejections. The amendments are expectable to the Examiner and thus make the 112(b) rejection moot.
The Applicant's fifth point (page 16-20 of Remarks) argues that the prior art BYEON does not disclose every aspect of newly amended claim 1. The Applicant goes on to list examples of how the present inventions specification differs from BYEON, but is silent on how the claim language differs from BYEON. The new limitations are also previous taught by PHAN as shown on page 17 of the Non-Final Office Action filed on February 5, 2026. For the above reasons the 102 rejection is withdrawn and replaces with an appropriate 103 rejection.
The Applicant's sixth point (page 20 of Remarks) argues that the various combinations would be non-obvious or leave the invention incompatible. However, since claim 1 has been amended a new set of rejections has become necessary, thus they 103 rejections have been reconsidered as follows.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for a DC electric motor wherein a set of sensors is arranged for detection of the inner magnet ring, does not reasonably provide enablement for a first set of sensors arranged for detection of the inner magnet ring, and a second set of sensors arranged for detection of the outer magnet ring. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make the invention commensurate in scope with these claims. The limitation a first and second set of sensors is shown in the drawings. However, it is not described or shown in the description as too which set of sensors is the “first” or “second” set, thus a person skilled in the art would have no way of telling which sensor corresponds to which function. Therefore, the disclosure does not clearly enable a person skilled in the art to make the present invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 1-2, 5-7, 9-10, 12-14, 16-17, 20-22 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BYEON (US 20210159765 A1) in view of PHAN (US 20170025974 A1).
Regarding claim 1, BYEON teaches:
A DC electric motor system [0042]comprising:
a stator (Fig 4; 200) mounted to a substrate(Fig 4; 600)[0048], the stator (Fig 4; 200) comprising a coil assembly having a core (Fig 2; 210)of magnetic material and electrical windings[0044];
a rotor (Fig 4; 300) mounted to the stator(Fig 4; 200)[0045], the rotor (Fig 4; 300) comprising:
an inner magnet ring (Fig 4; 400) having a first set of permanent magnets adjacent to the core (Fig 2; 210) of magnetic material, the first set of permanent magnets (Fig 4; 400)being arranged to facilitate rotation of the rotor[0046];
an outer magnet ring (Fig 4; 500)having a second set of permanent magnets, the second set of permanent magnets (Fig 4; 500)arranged to facilitate determination of a displacement of the rotor(Fig 4; 300) based on relative positions of the first and second set of permanent magnets(Fig 4; 400/500)[0047];
one or more sensors (Fig 4; 610/620)mounted on the substrate(Fig 4; 600) and disposed about the circumference of the rotor(Fig 4; 300)(shown in Fig 5 [0058]), wherein the one or more sensors (Fig 4; 610/620) are arranged to obtain voltage signals from the first and second set of magnets (Fig 4; 400/500)during rotation of the rotor(Fig 4; 300)[0058-0059], the voltage signals corresponding to positions of the first and second set of permanent magnets(Fig 4; 400/500)[0058].
wherein the one or more sensors (Fig 4; 610/620) comprise:
a first set (Fig 4; 610)of sensors arranged for detection of the inner magnet ring(Fig 4; 400)[0058], and
a second set of sensors (Fig 4; 620)arranged for detection of the outer magnet ring(Fig 4; 500) [0059].
a controller (Fig 6; 1000) configured for operation of the motor based on an absolute position of the rotor[0058-0059].
PNG
media_image1.png
469
498
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
461
479
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
305
392
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
454
348
media_image4.png
Greyscale
BYEON does not teach:
the controller is further configured to determine displacement by:
obtaining a first set of sinusoidal signals from the first set of sensors;
obtaining a second set of sinusoidal signals from the second set of sensors;
analyzing the first and second set of signals to determine an absolute position.
PHAN teaches:
a controller configured for operation of the motor based on an absolute position of the rotor(Fig 10[0051]), wherein the controller is further configured to determine displacement [0051] by:
obtaining a first set of sinusoidal signals from the first set of sensors(Fig 3A; 202a) ;
obtaining a second set of sinusoidal signals from the second set of sensors(Fig 3A; 202a);
analyzing the first and second set of signals to determine an absolute position[0050].
PNG
media_image5.png
436
531
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
452
372
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the control unit of BYEON by using the PID as taught by PHAN in order to advantageously connect the signals generated from the position sensor to the commutation circuitry of the motor (PAHN [0050]).
Regarding claim 2, BYEON in view of PHAN, teaches the system of claim 1:
wherein the rotor (Fig 4; 300)comprises a common ring(Fig 4; 310/320) wherein the first set of magnets (Fig 4; 400)are mounted on an inside surface of the common ring(Fig 4; 310/320) thereby defining the inner magnet ring(Fig 4; 400), and the second set of magnets(Fig 4; 500) are mounted on an outside surface of the common ring (Fig 4; 320)thereby defining the outer magnet ring(Fig 4; 500)[0055].
Regarding claim 5, BYEON in view of PHAN teaches the system of claim 1:
wherein the inner and outer magnets (Fig 4; 400/500)each comprise an even number of magnets(inner magnets 400 are shown to have 8 [0058]; outer magnets 500 are shown to have 72 magnets [0059]) (both sets of magnets 400/500 may also be in (any) plurality as stated [0046-0047]).
The Applicant should note that it been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art(both set of the magnets being a plurality [0046-0047], discovering the optimum or workable ranges (of number of magnets) involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 6, BYEON in view of PHAN teaches the system of claim 5:
wherein the inner magnet ring(Fig 4; 400) comprises a different number of magnets than the outer magnet(Fig 4; 500) (inner magnets 400 are shown to have 8 [0058]; outer magnets 500 are shown to have 72 magnets [0059]) (both sets of magnets 400/500 may also be in (any) plurality as stated [0046-0047]).
The Applicant should note that it been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art(both set of the magnets being a plurality [0046-0047], discovering the optimum or workable ranges (of number of magnets) involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 7, BYEON in view of PHAN teaches the system of claim 6:
wherein the inner magnet ring(Fig 4; 400) comprises fewer magnets than the outer magnet ring(Fig 4; 500) (inner magnets 400 are shown to have 8 [0058]; outer magnets 500 are shown to have 72 magnets [0059]) (both sets of magnets 400/500 may also be in (any) plurality as stated [0046-0047]).
The Applicant should note that it been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art(both set of the magnets being a plurality [0046-0047], discovering the optimum or workable ranges (of number of magnets) involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 9, BYEON in view of PHAN teaches the system of claim 1:
wherein each of the inner and outer magnet rings (Fig 4; 400/500) comprises one or more pole pairs, wherein the number of pole pairs of the inner and outer magnet rings do not share a common denominator greater than one(inner magnets 400 are shown to have 4 pole pairs [0058]; outer magnets 500 are shown to have 36 pole pairs [0059] )( the outer magnet 500 is mentioned by BYEON to be a plurality of (any) magnets[0047] that plurality could conceivably be 35 pole pairs, making the inner and outer magnets 400/500 not share a common factor).
The Applicant should note that it been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art(both set of the magnets being a plurality [0046-0047], discovering the optimum or workable ranges (of number of magnets) involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 10, BYEON in view of PHAN teaches the system of claim 1:
wherein the stator (Fig 4; 200) mounted on the substrate(Fig 4; 600)[0048], and the one or more sensors (Fig 4; 610/620) are mounted on the substrate (Fig 4; 600) and arranged along the path of the magnets of the inner and/or outer magnet ring(Fig 4; 400/500)[0058-0059].
Regarding claim 12, BYEON in view of PHAN teaches the system of claim 1:
wherein the first set of sensors (Fig 3; 610)comprises two or more sensor [0058] disposed along or adjacent a path (Fig 5; O1)of the inner magnets (Fig 4; 400) of the inner magnet ring.
Regarding claim 13, BYEON in view of PHAN teaches the system of claim 1:
wherein the first set (Fig 5; 610)of sensors comprises at least three sensors spaced apart and disposed within one quadrant of rotation of the rotor(Fig 4; 300)[0058], and the second set of sensors (Fig 4; 610)comprises at least three sensors(second sensors may be in a plurality [0059], even though only 2 are shown in Fig 5 it conceivably teaches 3 or more) that are spaced apart and disposed within one quadrant of rotation of the rotor(Fig 4; 300)[0059].
Regarding claim 14, BYEON in view of PHAN teaches the system of claim 1:
wherein the inner magnet ring (Fig 4; 400), has an even number of magnets with two or more pole pairs(8 poles, 4 pole pairs[0058]).
Regarding claim 16, BYEON in view of PHAN teaches the system of claim 1:
wherein the second set of sensors(Fig 5; 620) comprises two or more sensors disposed along or adjacent a path (Fig 5; O2)of the outer magnets of the outer magnet ring[0059].
Regarding claim 17, BYEON in view of PHAN teaches the system of claim 1:
wherein the outer magnet ring (Fig 4; 500)has an even number of magnets with two or more pole pairs(72 poles, 36 pole pairs [0059]).
In regards to claim 20, BYEON in view of PHAN, teaches the system of claim 1.
BYEON does not teach:
wherein the controller is further configured to:
receive, with the controller, a desired position of the rotor;
compare the desired position with the absolute position or displacement determined; and adjust pulse width modulation and drive direction of the motor based on the comparison to achieve the desired position of the rotor.
PHAN teach:
wherein the controller is further configured to:
receive, with the controller, a desired position of the rotor(Fig 2A; 104) (Fig 10[0051]);
compare the desired position with the absolute position or displacement determined(Fig 10 [0051]); and adjust pulse width modulation and drive direction of the motor based on the comparison to achieve the desired position of the rotor(Fig 10 [0051]).
PNG
media_image7.png
416
529
media_image7.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 21, BYEON in view of PHAN, teaches the system of claim 1.
BYEON does not teach:
wherein the controller is a proportional- integral-derivative (PID) controller.
PHAN teaches:
wherein the controller is a proportional- integral-derivative (PID) controller(Fig 10 [0050-0051]).
In regards to claim 22, BYEON in view of PHAN, teaches the system of claim 1.
BYEON does not teach:
wherein the control unit is further configured with programmable instructions recorded on a memory thereof, the instructions configured to apply in algorithm to analyze the linear portions of the first and second set of signals.
PHAN teaches:
wherein the control unit is further configured with programmable instructions recorded on a memory thereof(PSOC [0053]), the instructions configured to apply in algorithm to analyze the linear portions of the first and second set of signals[0013].
In regards to claim 25, BYEON in view of PHAN, teaches the system of claim 1:
wherein the substrate (Fig 4; 600) is a printed circuit board (PCB) [0042] comprising circuitry enabling analog-to-digital conversion (ADC) of voltage values in the defined linear portions of the signals(the functional limitation process is shown in [0006]) from the first and second set of sensors(Fig 4; 610/620).
Claim(s) 15 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BYEON (US 20210159765 A1) in view of PHAN (US 20170025974 A1), in further view of WOO (US 20190229600 A1).
In regards to claim 15, BYEON in view of PHAN teaches the system of claim 14:
the first set (Fig 5; 610)of sensors are spaced apart (shown in Fig 5).
BYEON does not teach:
wherein the spacing = 120/P where P is the number of pole pairs of the inner magnets.
WOO teaches:
wherein the first set (Fig 4; S1) of sensors are spaced apart, wherein the spacing = 120/P where P is the number of pole pairs of the inner magnets [0013-0014].
PNG
media_image8.png
482
459
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the spacing of the sensors of BYEON by using the equation for spacing as taught by WOO in order to improve sensor resolution (WOO [0060]).
In regards to claim 18, BYEON teaches the system of claim 17:
the second set (Fig 5; 620)of sensors are spaced apart (shown in Fig 5).
Combination BYEON/PHAN does not teach:
where P is the number of pole pairs of the outer magnet ring.
WOO teaches:
wherein the second set of sensors(Fig 4; S2) are spaced apart, wherein the spacing = 120/P, where P is the number of pole pairs of the outer magnet ring[0013-0014].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the spacing of the sensors of BYEON by using the equation for spacing as taught by WOO in order to improve sensor resolution (WOO [0060]).
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BYEON (US 20210159765 A1) in view of PHAN (US 20170025974 A1), in further view of SUMITA (US 20190052214 A1).
In regards to claim 23, BYEON in view of PHAN, teaches the system of claim 22.
Combination BYEON/PHAN does not teach:
wherein the control unit is further configured such that the algorithm utilizes a center-of-mass interpolation.
SUMITA teaches:
wherein the control unit is further configured such that the algorithm utilizes a center-of-mass interpolation[0093].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the control unit of combination BYEON/PHAN by making the algorithm take a center-of-mass approach as taught by Sumita in order to help detect abnormalities in the motor position (SUMITA [0095]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 NICHOLAS L SETZER whose telephone number is (571)272-3021. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 8am-5pm 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, Oluseye 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.
/N.L.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/OLUSEYE IWARERE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights