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 § 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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Myouki et al. (US20210167659, “Myouki”) in view of Fukunaga et al. (WO2020213585, “Fukunaga”, using US20220200398 as translation) and Feron et al. (FR3000622, “Feron”, using machine translation).
Re claim 1, Myouki discloses a cable holding structure for holding a cable of a rotating electrical machine, the cable holding structure for a rotating electrical machine comprising:
a holding member 84 that holds the cable 71a and is attached to a frame 53 that accommodates the rotating electrical machine 21 (fig 3, [0052] & [0075-0076]);
wherein the frame 53 is provided with a connector 81 which is connected with the cable 71a (fig 3, [0075]);
the cable 71a is connected inside the frame 53 and at least partially wired within the frame (fig 3, at least connected to 88 inside 53).
Myouki discloses claim 1 except for:
the connector having a terminal which is connected with the cable inside the frame;
at least one attachment hole for attachment of the holding member is formed in an inner surface of the frame along a wiring route of the cable;
the holding member has a head portion that is provided with a through-hole through which the cable is passed and a shaft portion that extends from the head portion, the holding member being attached to the inner surface of the frame by the shaft portion being inserted into the attachment hole, the holding member holding the cable passed through the through-hole on an inner surface side of the frame.
Fukunaga discloses the connector 4 having a terminal 42 which is connected with the cable 74 inside the frame 6 (figs 2-3 , [0022], [0057] & [0061]).
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 connector of Myouki to have a terminal which is connected with the cable inside the frame, as disclosed by Fukunaga, in order to provide means to electrically connect the connector with the cable, as demonstrated by Fukunaga
Feron discloses at least one attachment hole for attachment of the holding member 1 is formed in the frame 2 along a wiring route of the cable 4 (fig 3, [0002]),
the holding member 1 has a head portion 10 that is provided with a through-hole through which the cable 4 is passed (figs 1-3, [0002]), and a shaft portion 20 that extends from the head portion (figs 1-3, [0002]), the holding member 1 being attached to the frame 2 by the shaft portion 20 being inserted into the attachment hole (figs 3), the holding member 1 holding the cable 4 passed through the through hole on a side of the frame 2 (fig 3).
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 holding member and housing of Myouki in view of Fukunaga to comprise at least one attachment hole for attachment of the holding member is formed in the frame along a wiring route of the cable; and the holding member has a head portion that is provided with a through-hole through which the cable is passed, and a shaft portion that extends from the head portion, the holding member being attached to the frame by the shaft portion being inserted into the attachment hole, the holding member holding the cable passed through the through hole on a side of the frame, as disclosed by Feron, in order to provide simple installation of the holding member, as taught by Feron ([0011]).
It is pointed out that Myouki in view of Fukunaga and Feron disclose:
at least one attachment hole for attachment of the holding member is formed in an inner surface of the frame, since: Myouki discloses the holding member 84 is on the inner surface of the frame 53; and Feron discloses the attachment hole is on the side of the frame 2 with the holding member 1;
the holding member being attached to the inner surface of the frame by the shaft portion being inserted into the attachment hole, since: Myouki discloses the holding member 84 is attached to the inner surface of the frame 53; and Feron discloses the attachment hole is on the side of the frame 2 with the holding member 1 and the shaft portion 20 is inserted into the attachment hole; and
the holding member holding the cable passed through the through-hole on an inner surface side of the frame, since: Myouki discloses the holding member 84 is on an inner surface side of the frame 53; and Feron discloses the holding member 1 holds the cable 4 passed through the through-hole.
Re claim 2, Myouki in view of Fukunaga and Feron disclose claim 1 as discussed above and further disclose the holding member has a flange portion 24 (Feron, figs 1 & 3), between the head portion 10 and the shaft portion 20 (Feron, figs 1 & 3), that extends outward in a radial direction of the cable holding structure from the shaft portion 20 (Feron, figs 1 & 3), the holding member holding the cable 4 in a state in which a predetermined distance is maintained between the cable 4 and the inner surface of the frame 2 (Feron, fig 3; Myouki, fig 3).
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Myouki in view of Fukunaga, Feron and in further view of Chellamuthu et al. (US20180073895, “Chellamuthu”).
Re claims 4 and 5, Myouki in view of Fukunaga and Feron disclose claims 1 and 2, respectively, as discussed above. Myouki further disclose the frame 53 is provided with a plurality of connecters 81, 88 for external connection (fig 3, [0075], 81 connects to connections external to the frame 53 & 88 is external to cable 71a), and the holding member 84 holds the cable 71a.
Myouki discloses claims 4 and 5 except for the holding member holds the cable for fitting detection adapted to establish connection between the connectors and detect fitting of the cable to the connectors.
Chellamuthu discloses the resolver system includes an imbalance detector that compares the two outputs of the resolver and generates a fault signal when the signals differ (abstract).
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 rotating machine of Myouki in view of Fukunaga and Feron to include an imbalance detector, as disclosed by Chellamuthu, in order to determine degraded signal of the resolver, as taught by Chellamuthu (abstract).
It is pointed out that the cable of Myouki in view of Fukunaga, Feron and Chellamuthu is capable of being employed for fitting detection adapted to establish connection between the connectors (Myouki, portion of 88 & 81) and detect fitting of the cable 71a to the connectors, since disconnected connectors will result in signals of the resolver 71 sent to the imbalance detector triggering a fault signal (no signal will not be typical signal output).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 12/3/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Myouki does not disclose the holding member attached to the inner surface of the frame so that the holding member holds the cable on the inner surface of the frame (pg 9). Examiner disagrees.
Myouki clearly shows the holding member 84 attached to the inner surface of the frame 53 and holding the cable 71a on the surface of the frame 53 (fig 3).
Applicant argues that Feron does not disclose at least one attachment hole on the inner surface of the frame and the holding member attached to the inner surface of the frame so that the holding member holds the cable on the inner surface of the frame (pg 10, 3rd to 2nd paragraph). Examiner disagrees.
Since Myouki discloses the holding member 84 is on the inner surface of the frame 53, employing the holding member 1 of Feron with Myouki will require an attachment hole on the inner surface of the frame of Myouki. Motivation to employ the holding member of Feron with Myouki is to provide simple installation of the holding member, as taught by Feron ([0011]).
Fukunaga is added to the rejection of claim 1 to disclose the frame with a connector having a terminal which is connected with the cable inside the frame, since none of Myouki or Feron disclose this limitation.
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
Prosecution Insights