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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, and 3-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nyberg (US 2024/0128835) and in view of Downs (US 20220310493).
As to claim 1, Nyberg discloses a stator suitable for an application of an insulating varnish or
resin in a vacuum pressure impregnation process (Para 0084), comprising: a plurality of conductive windings (Para 0069-0070); and a coolant passage extending through the stator (Para 0076); wherein the coolant passage is sealed via a coolant passage seal (Para 0086).
Nyberg fails to disclose a stator body, and a plurality of coolant passages extending through the stator body.
Downs, however, discloses a stator body, and a plurality of coolant passages extending through the stator body (Para 0008).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention,
to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the stator of Nyberg with a stator body, and a plurality of coolant passages extending through the stator body, as disclosed by Downs, to optimize cooling potential of the stator.
Claims 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nyberg, Downs, and in view of Vanhee (US 2023/0017636).
As to claim 3, the combination of Nyberg and Downs discloses the stator of claim 1.
Nyberg fails to disclose wherein the coolant passage is surrounded by a core end ring.
Vanhee, however, discloses wherein the coolant passage is surrounded by a core end ring (Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
611
757
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention,
to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the stator of Nyberg with the coolant passage is surrounded by a core end ring, as disclosed by Vanhee, to reduce the leaking of cooling fluid.
As to claim 4, the combination of Nyberg, and Downs discloses the stator of claim 1.
Nyberg fails to disclose wherein the coolant passage seal comprises an extended core end ring.
Vanhee, however, discloses the coolant passage seal comprises an extended core end ring (Fig.3; Para 0029 and 0037).
PNG
media_image2.png
534
814
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention,
to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the stator of Nyberg with the coolant passage seal comprises an extended core end ring, as disclosed by Vanhee, to better support the stator.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nyberg, Downs, Vanhee and in view of Kuhn (“Method for impregnation of a machine ED”, submitted by applicant).
As to claim 5, the combination of Nyberg, Downs, and Vanhee discloses the stator of claim 4, the coolant passage seal, and an adhesive applied to the extended core ring (Para 0026).
Nyberg fails to disclose an O-ring.
Kuhn discloses an O-ring (Page 11, lines 11-22).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention,
to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the stator of Nyberg with an O-ring, as disclosed by Kuhn, to
prevent leaks.
Claims 6 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nyberg, Downs, and in view of Leonardi (US 2023/0105407).
As to claim 6, the combination of Nyberg and Downs discloses the stator of claim 1, and the
coolant passage seal.
Nyberg fails to disclose a sealing plug.
Leonardi, however, discloses a sealing plug (Para 0039).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention,
to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the stator of Nyberg with a sealing plug, as disclosed by
Leonardi, to prevent leaks.
As to claim 12, the combination of Nyberg and Downs discloses the stator of claim 1, and the
coolant passage seal.
Nyberg fails to disclose the coolant passage seal comprises a threaded sealing plug.
Leonardi, however, discloses the coolant passage seal comprises a threaded sealing plug (Para
0044).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention,
to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the stator of Nyberg with the coolant passage seal comprises
a threaded sealing plug, as disclosed by Leonardi, to properly secure the plug.
As to claim 13, the combination of Nyberg, Downs, and Leonardi discloses the stator of claim
12, wherein the threaded sealing plug comprises a threaded body (Para 0044 of Leonardi).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nyberg, Downs, Leonardi,
and in view of Guntermann (US 2019/0390679) and Erikson (US 2023/0187995).
As to claim 7, the combination of Nyberg, Downs, and Leonardi discloses the stator of claim 6,
and the sealing plug.
Nyberg fails to disclose a plug body and an extended flange.
Guntermann, however, discloses a plug body (14; Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image3.png
193
545
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention,
to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the stator of Nyberg with the sealing plug comprising a plug
body, as disclosed by Guntermann, to prevent leaking.
Erikson, however, discloses an extended flange (Fig. 3b).
PNG
media_image4.png
396
599
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention,
to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the stator of Nyberg with the sealing plug comprising an
extended flange, as disclosed by Erikson, to prevent leaking.
Claims 8 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nyberg, Downs,
Leonardi, and in view of Kombowski (DE 10205216684) and McDonald (US 2021/0273502).
As to claim 8, the combination of Nyberg, Downs, and Leonardi discloses the stator of claim 6,
and the coolant passage seal.
Nyberg fails to disclose an O-ring and an adhesive applied to the sealing plug.
Kombowski, however, discloses an O-ring (“The sealing of the plug to the carrier can be realized
by simple O-rings”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention,
to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the stator of Nyberg with an O-ring applied to the sealing
plug, as disclosed by Kombowski, to prevent leaking.
McDonald, however, discloses an adhesive applied to the sealing plug (Para 0048).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention,
to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the stator of Nyberg with an adhesive applied to the sealing
plug, as disclosed by McDonald, to properly secure the sealing plug.
As to claim 14, the combination of Nyberg, Downs, and Leonardi discloses the stator of claim 12,
and an adhesive applied to the threaded sealing plug (Para 0044 of Leonardi).
Nyberg fails to discloses an O-ring.
Kombowski, however, discloses an O-ring (“The sealing of the plug to the carrier can be realized
by simple O-rings”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention,
to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the stator of Nyberg with an O-ring applied to the sealing
plug, as disclosed by Kombowski, to prevent leaking.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nyberg, Downs, and in
view of Guntermann.
As to claim 9, the combination of Nyberg and Downs discloses the stator of claim 1, and the
coolant passage seal comprises a sealing plug.
Nyberg fails to discloses an extended sealing plug.
Guntermann, however discloses an extended sealing plug (Fig. 2 and 4A).
PNG
media_image5.png
303
547
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
455
420
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention,
to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the stator of Nyberg with an extended sealing plug, as
disclosed by Guntermann, to improve sealing and prevent leaking.
As to claim 10, the combination of Nyberg, Downs, and Guntermann discloses the stator of
claim 9, wherein the extended sealing plug comprises a pair of sealing plugs connected by a plug body
connector (Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image7.png
304
531
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nyberg, Downs,
Guntermann, and in view of Kombowski and McDonald.
As to claim 11, the combination of Nyberg, Downs, and Guntermann discloses the stator of
claim 9, and the coolant passage seal.
Nyberg fails to disclose the coolant passage seal comprises an O-ring and an adhesive applied to
the extended sealing plug.
Kombowski, however, discloses an O-ring (“The sealing of the plug to the carrier can be realized
by simple O-rings”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention,
to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the stator of Nyberg with an O-ring applied to the extended
sealing plug, as disclosed by Kombowski, to prevent leaking.
McDonald, however, discloses an adhesive applied to the sealing plug (Para 0048).
Therefore, to provide the stator of Nyberg with an adhesive applied to the extended sealing
plug, as disclosed by McDonald, to properly secure the extended sealing plug.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nyberg and in view of Xing
(US 2022/0360124), Vanhee, and Downs.
As to claim 15, Nyberg discloses a method of manufacturing a stator for an electrical machine
(Para 0023), comprising: applying an insulating varnish or resin to the stator in a vacuum pressure
impregnation process (Para 0084).
Nyberg fails to disclose drilling a coolant passage through the stator; sealing the coolant passage
with a coolant passage seal; and removing the coolant passage seal from the coolant passage.
Xing, however, discloses drilling a coolant passage through the stator (Para 0022).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention,
to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the method of Nyberg with drilling a coolant passage through the stator, as disclosed by Xing, to provide cooling to the stator.
Downs, however, discloses a plurality of coolant passages through a stator body (Para 0008).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention,
to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the method of Nyberg with a plurality of coolant passages through a stator body, as disclosed by Downs, to optimize cooling of the stator.
Vanhee, however, discloses sealing the coolant passage with a coolant passage seal (Para 0026); and removing the coolant passage seal from the coolant passage (Para 0029).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention,
to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the method of Nyberg with sealing the coolant passage with
a coolant passage seal; and removing the coolant passage seal from the coolant passage, as disclosed by
Vanhee, in order to enhance the cooling of the first and second end-windings (As suggested by Vanheel
in Para 0029).
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nyberg and in
view of Vanhee and Downs.
As to claim 16, Nyberg discloses an electric machine stator suitable for an application of an
insulating varnish or resin in a vacuum pressure impregnation process (Para 0084).
Nyberg fails to disclose a rotor; a stator; the stator comprising a stator body; a plurality of conductive windings in the stator; and a plurality of coolant passages extending through the stator; wherein each of the plurality of coolant passages is sealed via a coolant passage seal.
Vanhee, however, discloses a rotor (310; Para 0024); a stator (302; Para 0024); a plurality of
conductive windings in the stator (218; Para 0023); and a plurality of coolant passages extending through the stator (322; Para 0025); wherein each of the plurality of coolant passages is sealed via a
coolant passage seal (Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image8.png
544
800
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention,
to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the stator of Nyberg with a rotor; a stator; a plurality of
conductive windings in the stator; and a plurality of coolant passages extending through the stator;
wherein each of the plurality of coolant passages is sealed via a coolant passage seal, as disclosed by
Vanhee, in order to provide cooling and functionality to the electric machine.
Downs, however, discloses the stator comprising a stator body.
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention,
to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the stator of Nyberg with the stator comprising a stator body, as disclosed by Downs, in order to optimize cooling for the stator.
As to claim 17, the combination of Nyberg, Vanhee, and Downs discloses the electric machine of claim 16, wherein the coolant passage seal comprises an extended core end ring (Fig.3; Para 0029 and 0037).
PNG
media_image9.png
599
809
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Claims 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nyberg, Vanhee, Downs, and in view of Leonardi.
As to claim 18, the combination of Nyberg, Vanhee, and Downs disclose the electric machine of claim 16, and the coolant passage seal.
Nyberg fails to disclose the coolant passage seal comprises a sealing plug.
Leonardi, however, discloses a sealing plug (Para 0039).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention,
to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the stator of Nyberg with a sealing plug, as disclosed by
Leonardi, to prevent leaks.
As to claim 20, the combination of Nyberg, Vanhee, Downs, and Leonardi discloses the stator of claim 16, wherein the coolant passage seal comprises a threaded sealing plug (Para 0044 of Leonardi).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nyberg, Vanhee, Downs, and in view of Guntermann.
As to claim 19, the combination of Nyberg, Vanhee, and Downs discloses the electric machine of claim 16, and the coolant passage seal.
Nyberg fails to discloses the coolant passage seal comprises an extended sealing plug.
Guntermann, however discloses an extended sealing plug (Fig. 2 and 4A).
PNG
media_image10.png
304
545
media_image10.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image11.png
430
400
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the stator of Nyberg with an extended sealing plug, as
disclosed by Guntermann, to improve sealing and prevent leaking.
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 ETHAN N VO whose telephone number is (571)270-7593. The examiner can
normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30am - 5pm.
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,
Christopher M Koehler can be reached on 571 272 3560. 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.
/ETHAN NGUYEN VO/
Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/CHRISTOPHER M KOEHLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights