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 .
Remarks
Office Action is in response to the Preliminary Amendment filed 4/1/2024.
Claims 5-6 are new.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 6/6/2024 and 10/30/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-6 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2, 4, and 6 of U.S. Patent No. 11990810 in view of Chan et al. (US 2015/0050178).
In claim 1, the Patent at issues teaches the recitation (table below) of the claimed invention with the exception of wherein the ferromagnetic yoke comprises a soft magnetic composite (SMC).
However, Chan teaches wherein soft magnetic composites are used in electromagnetic devices, due to its high permeability, high magnetic saturation, and low eddy current losses.
Therefore in view of (secondary inventor), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to provide a yoke having high permeability, high magnetic saturation, and low eddy current losses, and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claim
App No. 18613539
Pat No. 11990810
1 v 1
An axial field rotary energy device,comprising: a housing; a rotor coupled to the housing, the rotor comprising an axis of rotation and a rotor disk comprising a magnet; a cooling plate coaxial with the rotor and coupled to the housing, the cooling plate comprising a continuous sealed channel connected to an inlet and an outlet and configured to convey a liquid coolant; a stator coaxial with the rotor and comprising a printed circuit board (PCB) having a plurality of conductive layers laminated together with layers of an insulating material, each conductive layer comprises a plurality of coils that can carry electrical current when connected to an external voltage source, and the stator is mechanically coupled to the housing, so the stator reacts to torque produced by the device; and a ferromagnetic yoke coaxial with the rotor and the stator, the ferromagnetic yoke is mechanically and thermally coupled to the stator and to the cooling plate to provide a path for magnetic flux produced by the magnet and a path to conduct heat generated by the stator from the stator to the cooling plate, and the ferromagnetic yoke comprises a soft magnetic composite (SMC).
An axial field rotary energy device, comprising:a housing; a rotor coupled to the housing, the rotor comprising an axis of rotation and a rotor disk comprising a magnet; a cooling plate coaxial with the rotor and coupled to the housing, the cooling plate comprising a continuous sealed channel connected to an inlet and an outlet and configured to convey a liquid coolant; a stator coaxial with the rotor and comprising a printed circuit board (PCB) having a plurality of conductive layers laminated together with layers of an insulating material, each conductive layer comprises a plurality of coils that can carry electrical current when connected to an external voltage source, and the stator is mechanically coupled to the housing, so the stator reacts to torque produced by the device; and a ferromagnetic yoke coaxial with the rotor and the stator, the ferromagnetic yoke is mechanically and thermally coupled to the stator and to the cooling plate to provide a path for magnetic flux produced by the magnet and a path to conduct heat generated by the stator from the stator to the cooling plate.
2 v 2
wherein the ferromagnetic yoke comprises a radial width W that is in a range of 90% to 110% of a radial length L of the magnet.
wherein the ferromagnetic yoke comprises a radial width W that is in a range of 90% to 110% of a radial length L of the magnet.
3 v 4
wherein the ferromagnetic yoke comprises a single annular ring.
wherein the ferromagnetic yoke comprises a single annular ring of soft ferrite.
4 v 6
wherein the ferromagnetic yoke is segmented.
wherein the ferromagnetic yoke comprises segments of soft ferrite.
5 v 6
wherein the ferromagnetic yoke comprises a single annular ring.
wherein the ferromagnetic yoke comprises a single annular ring of soft ferrite.
6 v 6
wherein the ferromagnetic yoke is segmented.
wherein the ferromagnetic yoke comprises segments of soft ferrite.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Pennander et al.(US 2015/0348698) teaches an inductor core having a higher magnetic permeability than air, and including an endless channel adapted for containing an inductor winding.
Jaderberg et al. (US 2019/0329310) teaches a method and a corresponding arrangement for producing a hardened sheet metal product.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RASHAD H JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1231. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am-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 Koehler can be reached at 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.
RASHAD H. JOHNSON
Examiner
Art Unit 2834
/RASHAD H JOHNSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2834