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
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue (JP 2011033166 A).
RE claim 1, Inoue teaches a gear motor (Figs.4-6) comprising:
a motor 31; and
a magnetically modulated gear 30,
wherein the magnetically modulated gear 30 includes an inner pole magnet 10 (Fig.5), a plurality of pole pieces 17 disposed on an outer diameter side of the inner pole magnet 10, and an outer pole magnet 18 disposed on an outer diameter side of the pole pieces 17,
the motor 31 and the magnetically modulated gear 30 have different frequencies of vibration components (intended result), and are configured such that magnetic fluctuation components thereof do not have an integer multiple relationship (see notes below),
Inoue disclosed:
Motor 31:
Number of stator slots = 12 (see Figure 6 and translation page 5, 5th ¶).
Number of pole pairs 4 (8 poles) (see Fig.6 and translation page 5, 2nd ¶).
Modulated gear 30:
Number of inner magnets 10 = 4 poles pairs (see Fig.5 translation page 5, 2nd ¶).
Number of outer magnets 13 = 22 pole pairs (see Fig.5 and translation page 5, 2nd ¶).
Numbers of pole pieces 17 = 26 pole pieces (see Fig.5 and translation page 5, 2nd).
Therefore:
the number of pole pairs of the motor and the number of outer pole pairs of the magnetically modulated gear do not have an integer multiple relationship (previous claim 5),
Inoue disclosed: Motor pole pairs and tear outer pole pairs = 22/4 = 5.5
not integer
the number of pole pairs of the motor and the number of pole pieces of the magnetically modulated gear do not have an integer multiple relationship (previous dependent claim 6),
Inoue disclosed: Motor pole pairs and gear pole pieces = 26/4 = 6.5
not integer
the number of stator slots of the motor and the number of outer pole pairs of the magnetically modulated gear do not have an integer multiple relationship (previous dependent claim 8), and
Inoue disclosed: Motor stator slot and gear outer pole pairs = 22/12 = 1.8
not integer
the number of stator slots of the motor and the number of pole pieces of the magnetically modulated gear do not have an integer multiple relationship (previous dependent claim 9).
Inoue disclosed: motor stator slots and gear pole pieces = 26/12 = 2.16
not integer
Inoue does not teach:
the number of pole pairs of the motor and the number of inner pole pairs of the magnetically modulated gear do not have an integer multiple relationship (previously dependent claim 4),
the number of stator slots of the motor and the number of inner pole pairs of the magnetically modulated gear do not have an integer multiple relationship (previous dependent claim 7),
RE (i) and (II) above, However, Inoue suggests that motor and motor gear can have any suitable number of magnetic components which number can be adjusted to obtain desirable gear ratio (see translation page 5, 2nd ¶).
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 Inoue by having the number of pole pairs of the motor and the number of inner pole pairs of the magnetically modulated gear do not have an integer multiple relationship or the number of stator slots of the motor and the number of inner pole pairs of the magnetically modulated gear do not have an integer multiple relationship, as suggested by Inoue, for the same reasons as discussed above.
Furthermore, 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).
RE claim 16/1, Inoue has been discussed above. Inoue further teaches a casing 2a (Figs.14, 15) that accommodates the motor 30 and the magnetically modulated gear, wherein a stator core 52a that is disposed concentrically on an outer diameter side of a motor rotor 49 is held in the casing while being fitted into the casing 2a (Figs.14, 15).
Claims 10-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jungmayr et al. (US 2021/0265905 A1.
RE claim 10/1, Inoue has been discussed above. Inoue does not teach the motor is capable of operating as a generator.
Jungmayr suggests that gear motor can be operated as generator as there is no significant difference between the structural designs of electric motors and generators (¶ 20), doing so allows the electrical machine to be utilized in in a wider range of application.
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 Inoue by having the motor to be capable of operating as a generator, as taught by Jungmayr, for the same reasons as discussed above.
RE claim 11/1, Inoue teaches the magnetically modulated gear includes a first rotor 8 (inner rotor), a second rotor 11 (outer rotor) having a lower speed than the first rotor 8 (inner rotor) (see translation page 3 last ¶), and an outer pole magnet 13, and the first rotor 8 includes a shaft 6 shared by a rotor yoke 9, and an inner pole magnet 10
Inoue does not teach said shaft is shared by motor rotor.
Jungmayr teaches shaft is ahred by magnetic gear 30 and motor 40 (Fig.1), thereby form one compact component (¶ 33).
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 Inoue by having said shaft to be shared by motor rotor, as suggested by Jungmayr, for the same reasons as discussed above.
RE claim 12/11, as discussed above, Jungmayr teaches the shaft 11 extends in an axial direction from the motor 40 to the magnetically modulated gear 30, and both end portions of the shaft 11 are supported by bearings 14, 15 (Fig.1).
RE claim 13/11, Inoue in view of Jungmayr has been discussed above. Inoue further teaches the second rotor 11 includes a pole piece 13 that is disposed on an outer diameter side of the inner pole magnet 10, is formed in a stepped cylindrical shape (Figs.3, 4), and is disposed concentrically with the first rotor 8 (Figs.3, 4).
RE claim 14/13, Inoue in view of Jungmayr has been discussed above. Inoue further teaches the plurality of pole pieces 17 are disposed at predetermined intervals in a circumferential direction (Fig.2), and the number of pole pieces 17 (26 pole pieces, see Fig.5 and translation page 5, 2nd) is the number of outer pole pairs (22 outer pole pairs, see Fig.5 and translation page 5, 2nd--) ± the number of inner pole pairs (4 inner pole pairs).
RE claim 15/14, Inoue in view of Jungmayr has been discussed above. Inoue further teaches the number of pole pieces 17 (=26) is the number of outer pole pairs (=22) + the number of inner pole pairs (=4).
RE claim 17/1, Inoue has been discussed above. Inoue further the motor 31 includes a motor shaft 7 configured to input rotational power to the magnetically modulated gear or to receive rotational power from the magnetically modulated gear 31, the magnetically modulated gear 30 includes a rotating body 6 configured to output rotational power at a reduced speed when the motor 31 inputs the rotational power to the magnetically modulated gear or to serve as an input shaft 6 when the motor receives the rotational power from the magnetically modulated gear 30, the motor shaft 7 is supported by bearing 5, and the rotating body 6 is supported by bearings 3.
Inoue does not teach the motor shaft is supported by two bearings disposed on both sides of the motor and the rotating body is supported by two bearings disposed on both sides of the magnetically modulated gear.
Jungmayr teaches the motor shaft 11 is supported by two bearings 14, 15 disposed on both sides of the motor 40 and the rotating body 23 is supported by two bearings 24, 25 disposed on both sides of the magnetically modulated gear 30 (Fig.2), doing so allows stable rotating support for both sides of the motor and the magnetic gear.
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 Inoue by having the motor shaft is supported by two bearings disposed on both sides of the motor and the rotating body is supported by two bearings disposed on both sides of the magnetically modulated gear, as taught by Jungmayr, for the same reasons as discussed above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/19/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 7 and 8 of the Remark, Applicant argued that Inoue does not teach
i. the number of pole pairs of the motor and the number of inner pole pairs of the magnetically modulated gear do not have an integer multiple relationship,
ii. the number of stator slots of the motor and the number of inner pole pairs of the magnetically modulated gear do not have an integer multiple relationship,
However, the (i) and (ii) are limitation that were previously claimed in dependent claims 4 and 7 (respectively) which now cancelled and have been incorporated into independent claim 1.
Applicant does not provide any argument against the 35 USC 103 Rejection of claims 4 and 7 as noted on pages 6 and 7 of the previous Office Action. Therefore, Applicant's arguments do not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(c) because they do not clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Further, they do not show how the amendments avoid such references or objections.
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 THOMAS TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)270-5532. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-6PM 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 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.
/THOMAS TRUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights