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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “each thin plate including: a first material region formed of an anisotropic material; and a second material region formed of an isotropic material” (claims 1 and 10) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The amendment filed 11/21/2025 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: The abstract has been amended to include new portions that state: “Each thin plate includes a first material region formed of an anisotropic material. Each thin plate also includes a second material region formed of an isotropic material.” There is no support for these statements in the original specification which merely state in paragraph [0034]: “As shown in FIG. 5, the stator core 120 may be divided into a first material region 500 and a second material region 600. The first material region 500 is formed of an anisotropic
material, such as a grain-oriented electrical steel sheet. The second material region 600 is formed of an isotropic material, such as a non-oriented electrical steel sheet.” The only mention of the thin plates is as follows: In paragraph [0032]: “As shown in FIG. 3, the stator core 120 may be formed to have a predetermined shape by stacking a plurality of thin plates in a stacking direction L.” Hence, the original specification makes no mention of each thin plate having a first material region formed of an anisotropic material and a second material region formed of an isotropic material. In fact, as seen in Figure 6, the anisotropic material region (500) appears to be a plurality of thin plates stacked together while the isotropic material region (600) appears to be a different plurality of thin plates stacked together. This is further established in paragraph [0034] above which states that the anisotropic material is a grain-oriented electrical steel sheet (wherein a sheet is basically a thin plate), while the isotropic material is a non-oriented electrical steel sheet. Therefore, this amendment to the abstract contains new matter and is objected to.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-10 and 12-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 1 recites the new limitations: “wherein each thin plate includes: a first material region formed of an anisotropic material; and a second material region formed of an isotropic material.”
There is no support for these amendments in the original specification which merely states in paragraph [0034]: “As shown in FIG. 5, the stator core 120 may be divided into a first material region 500 and a second material region 600. The first material region 500 is formed of an anisotropic material, such as a grain-oriented electrical steel sheet. The second material region 600 is formed of an isotropic material, such as a non-oriented electrical steel sheet.” The only mention of the thin plates is as follows: In paragraph [0032]: “As shown in FIG. 3, the stator core 120 may be formed to have a predetermined shape by stacking a plurality of thin plates in a stacking direction L.” Hence, the original specification makes no mention of each thin plate having a first material region formed of an anisotropic material and a second material region formed of an isotropic material. In fact, as seen in Figure 6, the anisotropic material region (500) appears to be a plurality of thin plates stacked together while the isotropic material region (600) appears to be a different plurality of thin plates stacked together. This is further established in paragraph [0034] above which states that the anisotropic material is a grain-oriented electrical steel sheet (wherein a sheet is basically a thin plate), while the isotropic material is a non-oriented electrical steel sheet. Therefore, this amendment introduces new matter that is not discussed in the original specification.
Claim 10 also contains similar limitations and so is also rejected for containing new matter that is not supported by the original specification.
Claims 2, 3-9 and 12-18 are also rejected since they depend on a rejected claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-10 and 12-18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the new limitations: “wherein each thin plate includes: a first material region formed of an anisotropic material; and a second material region formed of an isotropic material.” The specification (and drawings) makes no mention of each thin plate include a first material region of an anisotropic material and a second material region of an isotropic material. Hence, it is unclear how each thin plate includes each of these claimed regions and where exactly these regions are formed with respect to each thin plate and the stator core as a whole. As shown in Figure 6 for example, the anisotropic material region (500) appears to be a plurality of thin plates stacked together while the isotropic material region (600) appears to be a different plurality of thin plates stacked together. This is completely different from what is claimed and so it is unclear how these regions should be interpreted.
Claim 10 also contains similar limitations and so is also rejected being unclear.
For the purposes of examination this limitation will be broadly interpreted as follows: “wherein the thin plates form: a first material region formed of an anisotropic material; and a second material region formed of an isotropic material.”
Claims 2, 3-9 and 12-18 are also rejected since they depend on a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 8-13 and 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Thiele et al. (herein Thiele) (US 2018/0219441). Regarding Claim 1:In Figures 1-2 and 20, Thiele discloses a stator (500) of a motor (10, see paragraph [0098]), the stator (500) comprising a stator core (510, 512) the stator core includes a plurality of thin plates (laminated sheets) stacked in a stacking direction (as mentioned in paragraph [0100], stator core portion 510 is formed from laminated sheets that are stacked. Also see paragraph [0096] that mentions stacked thin, flat sheets), wherein the thin plates (510) form: a first material region (510) formed of an anisotropic material; and a second material region (formed by 512 between each two adjacent regions 510) formed of an isotropic material (as mentioned in paragraph [0102], stator segments 510 are made of laminated steel which is anisotropic and segments 512 are made up of SMC which is isotropic).Note that two adjacent first material regions form a boundary for a second material region formed therebetween such that the thin plates form both regions. Regarding Claim 2:In Figures 1-2 and 20, Thiele discloses the stator (500), wherein the stator core (510, 512) comprises: a straight magnetic flux section (510) where a magnetic flux is formed parallel to the axial direction of the axial flux motor (as evident from Figure 20); and a curved magnetic flux section (512) where an angle is formed by the magnetic flux and the axial direction thereof (512 is curved as seen in Figure 20 such that there would be a magnetic flux angle with respect to the axial direction), wherein the straight magnetic flux section (510) is formed of the anisotropic material (as mentioned in paragraph [0102], stator segments 510 are made of laminated steel which is anisotropic) and the curved magnetic flux section is formed of the isotropic material (512 is made of soft magnetic composite SMC which is isotropic, see paragraph [0102]).Regarding Claim 4:In Figures 1-2 and 20, Thiele discloses the stator (500), wherein the first material region (510) and the second material region (512) are partitioned based on a direction of a magnetic flux formed in the stator core (as seen in Figure 20, 510 is partitioned from 512 and as mentioned in paragraph [0102]: “The flux will spend some distance in laminated steel (i.e., laminated tooth segments 510), and some in SMC (i.e., moldable tooth segments 512).”).Regarding Claim 5:In Figures 1-2 and 20, Thiele discloses the stator (500), wherein the magnetic flux has an angle with respect to the axial direction of the axial flux motor in the second material region (512 is curved as seen in Figure 20 such that there would be a magnetic flux angle with respect to the axial direction).Regarding Claim 8:In Figures 1-2 and 20, Thiele discloses the stator (500), wherein: the isotropic material is a non-oriented electrical steel sheet or a soft magnetic composite (SMC) material (512 is made of soft magnetic composite SMC which is isotropic, see paragraph [0102]); and the anisotropic material is a grain-oriented electrical steel sheet (510 is formed from laminated electrical steel sheets which is anisotropic, see paragraphs [0096] and [0102])Regarding Claim 9:In Figures 1-2 and 20, Thiele discloses the stator (500), wherein the stator core (510, 512) has a coil (514) wound around the stator core (see Figure 20).Regarding Claim 10:In Figures 1-2 and 20, Thiele discloses an axial flux motor (10, see paragraph [0037]) comprising: a rotor (18) including a plurality of permanent magnets (each rotor module 34 comprises a plurality of permanent magnets, see paragraph [0038]); and a stator (500, see paragraph [0098]) disposed in an axial direction of the rotor and the axial flux motor (500 would be arranged as stator 24 is arranged in Figures 1-2, i.e., in the axial direction of the rotor 18 and the axial flux motor 10), the stator (500) including a stator core (510, 512) having a coil (514) mounted on the stator core (as seen in Figure 20), wherein the stator core includes a plurality of thin plates (laminated sheets) stacked in a stacking direction (as mentioned in paragraph [0100], stator core portion 510 is formed from laminated sheets that are stacked. Also see paragraph [0096] that mentions stacked thin, flat sheets), wherein the thin plates (510) form: a first material region (510) formed of an anisotropic material; and a second material region (formed by 512 between each two adjacent regions 510) formed of an isotropic material (as mentioned in paragraph [0102], stator segments 510 are made of laminated steel which is anisotropic and segments 512 are made up of SMC which is isotropic).Note that two adjacent first material regions form a boundary for a second material region formed therebetween such that the thin plates form both regions.Regarding Claim 12:In Figures 1-2 and 20, Thiele discloses the axial flux motor (10), wherein the first material region (510) and the second material region (512) are partitioned based on a direction of a magnetic flux formed in the stator core (as seen in Figure 20, 510 is partitioned from 512 and as mentioned in paragraph [0102]: “The flux will spend some distance in laminated steel (i.e., laminated tooth segments 510), and some in SMC (i.e., moldable tooth segments 512).”).Regarding Claim 13:In Figures 1-2 and 20, Thiele discloses the axial flux motor (10), wherein the magnetic flux has an angle with respect to the axial direction of the axial flux motor in the second material region (512 is curved as seen in Figure 20 such that there would be a magnetic flux angle with respect to the axial direction).
Regarding Claim 15:In Figures 1-2 and 20, Thiele discloses the axial flux motor (10), wherein the stator core (510, 512) comprises: a straight magnetic flux section (510) where a magnetic flux is formed parallel to the axial direction of the axial flux motor (as evident from Figure 20); and a curved magnetic flux section (512) where an angle is formed by the magnetic flux and the axial direction of the axial flux motor (512 is curved as seen in Figure 20 such that there would be a magnetic flux angle with respect to the axial direction), wherein the straight magnetic flux section (510) is formed of the anisotropic material (as mentioned in paragraph [0102], stator segments 510 are made of laminated steel which is anisotropic) and the curved magnetic flux section is formed of the isotropic material (512 is made of soft magnetic composite SMC which is isotropic, see paragraph [0102]).Regarding Claim 16:In Figures 1-2 and 20, Thiele discloses the axial flux motor (10), wherein: the isotropic material is a non-oriented electrical steel sheet or a soft magnetic composite (SMC) material (512 is made of soft magnetic composite SMC which is isotropic, see paragraph [0102]); and the anisotropic material is a grain-oriented electrical steel sheet (510 is formed from laminated electrical steel sheets which is anisotropic, see paragraphs [0096] and [0102]).Regarding Claim 18:In Figures 1-2 and 20, Thiele discloses the axial flux motor (10), further comprising a shaft (32) configured to rotate with the rotor (see paragraph [0038]) and formed to pass through the stator (as seen in Figure 1).
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) 6-7 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thiele et al. (herein Thiele) (US 2018/0219441) as evidenced by Fischer et al. (herein Fischer) (US 2017/0288476). Regarding Claims 6-7 and 14:While Thiele discloses the angle (see rejections of claims 5 or 13), the specific angle is not mentioned. However, it is known in the art that stator cores are designed with angles to optimize the flux density in order to improve the efficiency of the motor. For instance, in paragraph [0043] and Figure 4, Fischer discloses a stator core with a portion (36) that is oriented at an angle of less than 25° (i.e., along easy axis M) with respect to an axial direction (i.e., direction of coil axis M) in order to reduce the magnetic flux leakage (as further elaborated in paragraphs [0010]-[0011]). Hence, it can be seen that the orientation of the angle between the magnetic flux and an axial direction of the stator core is an result effective optimizable variable that can be optimized to reduce leakage of magnetic flux and improve flux density.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have optimized the angle to be in the range of 10° to 20° (per claims 6 and 14) or to have a value of 15° (per claim 7) to reduce the magnetic flux leakage (common knowledge in the art and as evidenced by Fischer), since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Additionally, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thiele et al. (herein Thiele) (US 2018/0219441)Thiele fails to disclose a bobbin around the stator core. However, in an alternate embodiment shown in Figures 1-2, 9-10 and 15-16, Thiele discloses the axial flux motor (10, see paragraph [0037]) wherein the stator (200) comprises: a bobbin (244) disposed to surround the stator core (244 surrounds at least some portions of the stator core 240 as evident from Figure 16 and paragraph [0085]), wherein the coil (258) is wound around the bobbin (see paragraph [0086]); and a first housing (208, see Figure 10) and a second housing (220) respectively mounted on a first side of the bobbin (208 is at the bottom side of the bobbin which is part of 210 as seen in Figure 10) and a second side thereof (220 is at a top side of the bobbin as seen in Figure 10).Hence, based on Thiele’s alternated embodiment, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have included a bobbin (of the type disclosed in the alternate embodiment) to surround the stator core (510, 512) in the manner described above, since doing so would ensure proper winding orientation and ensure that the stator coils stay in place during assembly and repair.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/21/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Firstly, applicant has argued that Thiele discloses two different stator cores (510 and 512) and so fails to disclose the newly added limitation in claims 1 and 10 that states: “ stator core includes a plurality of thin plates stacked in a stacking direction wherein each thin plate includes: a first material region formed of an anisotropic material; and a second material region formed of an isotropic material.” Firstly, this amendment raises several 112a and 112b issues that have been mentioned above and so as presented, the proper scope of these claims cannot be fully ascertained at this time. However, in an interest of expediting prosecution, the examiner has broadly interpreted this limitation as follows: “wherein the thin plates form: a first material region formed of an anisotropic material; and a second material region formed of an isotropic material.”
Secondly, this argument that Thiele’s segments (510 and 512) form two separate cores is erroneous and merely counsel’s assertion. One of ordinary skill in the art realizes that these two segments together form a single stator core (500). Furthermore, the claim (as interpreted above to expedite prosecution) requires that the stacked thin plates form a first material region of anisotropic material and a second material region of isotropic material. As explained in the amended rejection of claims 1 and 10: the stator core includes a plurality of thin plates (laminated sheets) stacked in a stacking direction (as mentioned in paragraph [0100], stator core portion 510 is formed from laminated sheets that are stacked. Also see paragraph [0096] that mentions stacked thin, flat sheets), wherein the thin plates (510) form: a first material region (510) formed of an anisotropic material; and a second material region (formed by 512 between each two adjacent regions 510) formed of an isotropic material (as mentioned in paragraph [0102], stator segments 510 are made of laminated steel which is anisotropic and segments 512 are made up of SMC which is isotropic). Note that two adjacent first material regions form a boundary for a second material region formed therebetween such that the thin plates form both regions.
Furthermore, it is noted that Thiele’s thin plates (laminated sheets 510) form both claimed regions since these plates form the spaces for the second region (512) as well.
The argument that each thin plate much comprise both an anisotropic material as well as an isotropic material which is not taught by Thiele is not persuasive since this interpretation would cause other issues with instant claims 8 and 16 for example. Claims 8 and 16 specifically state that the isotropic material is a soft magnetic composite (SMC) and not necessarily a thin plate or a sheet. This is clearly taught by Thiele as explained in the rejections of claim 8 and 16 above.
In order for these arguments to be persuasive, the applicant is requested to amend the claims to further state: the stator core includes “a plurality of thing plates stacked in a stacking direction that form a first material region formed of an anisotropic material in the stacking direction and a second material region formed of an isotropic material in the stacking direction.” This arrangement can be broadly seen in Figure 6 and would be different from Thiele’s arrangement wherein the thin plates form the two claimed regions in a circumferential direction and not in an axial stacking direction.
The remaining arguments are all related to the aforementioned arguments and so are also not persuasive for the same reasons.
Conclusion
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 DOMINICK L PLAKKOOTTAM whose telephone number is (571)270-7571. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 12 pm -8 pm ET.
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, Essama Omgba can be reached at 469-295-9278. 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.
/DOMINICK L PLAKKOOTTAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746