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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-5 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Asada et al. (US20170373451, “Asada”).
Re claim 1, Asada discloses a motor device, comprising:
a motor case (figs 2, 6, 13-14 & below, [0055], 6 has housing w/ 10 molded on top of housing of 6 as seen in fig 2; motor case includes motor housing & 10); and
a motor cover 24 (figs 2 & 6, [0052]),
wherein the motor case includes:
a motor 6 (fig 2, [0055]);
a motor terminal 3 connected to the motor (figs 3, 5 & 13-14, [0063-0064]); and
a case main body in which the motor is housed (figs 2 & below, housing for 6 indicated below), the case main body including a base portion from which the motor terminal 3 extends (figs 13-14 & below, [0055], base portion includes top & 10) and a protruding portion 13 protruding from the base portion (fig 6, [0075]) and
wherein the motor cover 24 includes:
a cover-side terminal as an electrical connection portion 4 that is electrically press-fitted over and fixed to the motor terminal 3 at a first position which is separate from the base portion by a first length in an extending direction of the motor terminal 3 (figs 3-4, 6, 8-10, 13-14, 18 & below, [0077], [0079] & [0088], 1st length from surface of top to 32; extending direction of terminal axial direction of motor); and
a fixing portion that constitutes a mechanical connection portion press-fitted over and fixed to the protruding portion 13 at a second position which is separate from the base portion by a second length which is different from the first length in the extending direction of the motor terminal 3 (figs 15-16 & below, [0077], [0079] & [0088], fixing portion includes 241 & projection between 242 & 241 indicated below; 2nd length from surface of top to bottom of protrusion of 241) so that a timing of the starting press-fitting between the protruding portion 13 and the fixing portion is different from a timing of starting press-fitting for an electrical connection between the motor terminal 3 and the cover-side terminal 4 (figs 15-16, [0077] says when fig. 15 occurs 42 is not in contact with 32; when press fit starts, 13 will immediately deform to clear projection between 242 & 241, where 42 will not immediately engage with 32 but will start the press fit slightly after the press fit of 13 starts).
PNG
media_image1.png
443
516
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
394
785
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
336
283
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Re claim 2, Asada discloses claim 1 as discussed above and further discloses the second length is longer than the first length (figs above for claim 1).
Re claim 4, Asada discloses claim 1 as discussed above and further discloses the electrical connection portion 4 is an alligator terminal (fig 4).
Re claim 5, Asada discloses a method of manufacturing a motor device, the method comprising:
a first step of preparing a motor case (figs 2, 6, 13-14 and above for claim 1, [0055], 6 has housing w/ 10 molded on top of housing of 6 as seen in fig 2; motor case includes motor housing & 10), the motor case including:
a motor 6 (fig 2);
a terminal 3 connected to the motor (figs 3, 5 & 13-14, [0063-0064]);
a case main body in which the motor 6 is housed (figs 2 & above for claim 1, housing for 6 indicated above for claim 1), the case main body including a base portion from which the terminal 3 extends (figs 13-14 & above for claim 1, [0055], base portion includes top & 10) and a protruding portion 13 protruding from the base portion (fig 6, [0075]);
a second step of preparing a motor cover 24 (figs 2 & 6, [0052]), the motor cover including:
an electrical connection portion 4 to be electrically fixed to the terminal 3 (figs 3-4, 6, 8-10 & above for claim 1, [0077], [0079] & [0088]); and
a fixing portion that constitutes a mechanical connection portion to be press-fitted over and fixed to the protruding portion 13 (figs 15-16 & below); and
a third step of fixing the motor case and the motor cover 24 to each other so that a first press-fit timing which is a start time of press-fitting the terminal 3 into the electrical connection portion 4 in an extending direction of the terminal 3 and a second press-fit timing which is a start time of press-fitting the protruding portion 13 into the fixing portion in the extending direction of the terminal are different from each other (figs 3-4, 6, 8-10, 13-14, 18 & above for claim 1, [0077], [0079] & [0088], Asada discloses 132 starts to engage w/ protrusion shown in fig 15 before 32 engages w/ 42-[0077]).
PNG
media_image3.png
336
283
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Re claim 7, Asada discloses claim 5 as discussed above and further discloses in the third step, the first press-fit timing is later than the second press-fit timing (figs 3-4, 6, 8-10, 13-14, 18 & above for claim 1, [0077], [0079] & [0088], 132 of 13 engages w/ protrusion of 241 before 32 engages w/ 42).
Re claim 8, Asada discloses claim 5 as discussed above and further discloses in the third step, inspecting a press-fitted state of the terminal 3 and the electrical connection portion 4 based on a relationship between a stroke which is a movement amount of the motor cover 24 in the extending direction of the terminal 3 and a load generated at a time of the stroke (figs 6-11, 16 & 19-20, [0089-0090]).
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 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 3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asada in view of Toyama (JP2016004616, “Toyama”, using machine translation).
Re claim 3, Asada discloses claim 1 as discussed above, but is silent with respect to the second length is shorter than the first length.
Toyama discloses providing terminals 13-14 with different heights in order to ensure each terminals are properly press-fitted (figs 1-3, [0039] & [0050-0052]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the terminal of Asada to have different heights, as disclosed by Toyama, in order to ensure proper press-fitting of the terminal, as taught by Toyama.
It is pointed out that Asada in view of Toyama disclose the second length is shorter than the first length since: Asada discloses the terminal is completely press fitted when 32 is within slit 425 (figs 4-5, [0061]) and 13 is fully engaged in 241 when all terminals are engaged with 425 (figs 18-19); and Toyama discloses one terminal 13 higher than the other terminals 14-15 (fig 2), resulting in terminal 13 being fully engaged with 23b at a higher position than when 13 is engaged with 241.
Re claim 6, Asada discloses claim 5 as discussed above but is silent with respect to in the third step, the first press-fit timing is earlier than the second press-fit timing.
Toyama discloses providing terminals 13-14 with different heights in order to ensure each terminals are properly press-fitted (figs 1-3, [0039] & [0050-0052]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the terminal of Asada to have different heights, as disclosed by Toyama, in order to ensure proper press-fitting of the terminal, as taught by Toyama.
It is pointed out that Asada in view of Toyama disclose the second length is shorter than the first length since: Asada discloses the terminal is completely press fitted when 32 is within slit 425 (figs 4-5, [0061]) and 13 is fully engaged in 241 when all terminals are engaged with 425 (figs 18-19); and Toyama discloses one terminal 13 higher than the other terminals 14-15 (fig 2), resulting in terminal 13 being fully engaged with 23b at a higher position than when 13 is engaged with 241.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/21/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the starting press-fitting of the fixing portion/protruding portion is the same as the starting press-fitting of the of the motor terminal/cover-side terminal (pg 9, 2nd to last paragraph & pg 12, 2nd paragraph to pg 13, 2nd paragraph). Examiner disagrees.
As discussed by Asada figures 15-16 shows the same time period ([0077] reproduced below). When 13 is in contact with the projection between 142 and 142, 42 is not in contact with 32; when press fit starts, 13 will immediately deform to clear projection between 242 & 241, where 42 will not immediately engage with 32 but will start the press fit slightly after the press fit of 13 starts.
PNG
media_image4.png
376
680
media_image4.png
Greyscale
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5715. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 8:30-5pm 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, Seye Iwarere can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ERIC JOHNSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834