DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This Office Action is responsive to the Applicant's communication filed 31 March 2024. In view of this communication, claims 1-20 are now pending in the application, with claims 15-20 being withdrawn from further consideration.
Election/Restriction
Applicant’s election of Invention I, corresponding to claims 1-14, in the reply filed on 27 April 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claim(s) 15-20 is/are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 27 April 2026.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) submitted on 31 March 2024 and 16 February 2026 was/were filed before mailing of the first action on the merits. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Disclosure
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: Motor with Sealed Cover Member.
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION. — The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 14 recites an average radius of curvature of the curled portion “is R2 or more and R4 or less”. The terms “R2” and “R4” are not defined anywhere in the application as originally filed. As such, these variables could be of literally any value, and thus the claimed range does not further limit the radius of curvature to any specific value or range of values.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-6, 8-10, 12, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (WO 2023/017971 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Kim”.
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a motor [100] including a stator [20] and a rotor [30] disposed to be spaced apart from an inner circumferential surface of the stator [20] (fig. 1-3; ¶ 43-44), the motor [100] comprising:
a housing [11] in which the stator [20] and the rotor [30] are accommodated and an opening centered on a rotation axis [10] and exposing at least a portion of the rotor [30] is provided (fig. 3; ¶ 44-46); and
a cover member [15] covering the opening of the housing [11] (fig. 3; ¶ 54),
wherein, in the housing [11], a curled portion [115A] is formed to be curvedly curled such that a wall thereof forming an edge portion of the opening faces the rotation axis [10], and the curled portion [115A] comes into contact with an edge portion [152] of the cover member [15] to seal the opening (fig. 3; ¶ 49, 54).
PNG
media_image1.png
521
664
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Kim discloses the motor [100] of claim 1, as stated above, further comprising a bearing [14] to which at least a portion of the rotor [30] is coupled, wherein the housing [11] includes a bearing seating portion [116] so that the bearing [14] is disposed around the opening (fig. 3; ¶ 47).
Regarding claim 4, Kim discloses the motor [100] of claim 3, as stated above, wherein the edge portion [152] of the cover member [15] is sandwiched between the bearing [14] and the curled portion [115A] (fig. 3).
Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses the motor [100] of claim 4, as stated above, wherein: the bearing [14] includes an outer ring [14o] in fixed contact with the housing [11] and an inner ring [14i] disposed inside the outer ring [14o] and in fixed contact with the rotor [30]; and a protruding portion [151] of the cover member [15] is provided at a center of the rotation axis [10] and spaced a predetermined distance from the inner ring [14i] (fig. 3; the outer race of the bearing contacts the housing while the inner race contacts the hollow shaft [31] on which the rotor is mounted).
PNG
media_image2.png
203
560
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses the motor [100] of claim 3, as stated above, wherein the housing [11] includes: a sidewall portion [111] surrounding a radial outer side of the stator [20]; and an inclined portion [114] configured to connect the sidewall portion [111] and the bearing seating portion [116] and form a predetermined angle with a radial direction (fig. 3; ¶ 46-47).
Regarding claim 8, Kim discloses the motor [100] of claim 6, as stated above, wherein the bearing seating portion [116] is provided to extend from the inclined portion [114], is bent two or more times, and comes into contact with an outer ring [14o] of the bearing [14] (fig. 3; ¶ 47-49).
Regarding claim 9, Kim discloses the motor [100] of claim 8, as stated above, wherein the bearing seating portion [116] includes: a first sidewall [sw1] formed by being bent from the inclined portion [114] inward from the housing [11] to be parallel to the rotation axis [10]; a first support wall [117] formed by being bent from the first sidewall [sw1] toward the rotation axis [10]; a second support wall [sw2] formed by being bent 180° from the first support wall [117] outward from the housing [11]; and a second sidewall [115] formed by being bent from the second support wall [sw2] outward from the housing [11] to be parallel to the rotation axis [10] (fig. 3; ¶ 46-47).
Regarding claim 10, Kim discloses the motor [100] of claim 9, as stated above, wherein the curled portion [115A] is formed by being curled from an end portion of the second sidewall [115] (fig. 3; ¶ 47-49).
Regarding claim 12, Kim discloses the motor [100] of claim 9, as stated above, wherein: the first support wall [117] is spaced a predetermined distance from the rotor [30]; and the second support wall [sw2] is in contact with the outer ring [14o] of the bearing [14] and spaced a predetermined distance from the inner ring [14i] (fig. 3).
Regarding claim 14, Kim discloses the motor [100] of claim 1, as stated above, wherein an average radius of curvature of the curled portion [115A] from the wall forming the edge portion of the opening to a portion in contact with the edge portion of the cover member [15] is R2 or more and R4 or less (fig. 3; since neither R2 nor R4 are defined anywhere in the application as originally filed, the claimed radius of curvature could be any value; since the curled portion of Kim has a radius of curvature, as shown in fig. 3, it meets the limitation as defined).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Puterbaugh et al. (US 2005/0073204 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Puterbaugh”.
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses the motor [100] of claim 1, as stated above. Kim does not disclose a sealant portion sealing a gap between the curled portion [115A] and the cover member [15].
Puterbaugh discloses a motor [10] comprising a housing [20] with a cover member [92] covering an opening of the housing [20], wherein a curled portion [90] is formed at an edge portion of the opening (fig. 1, 5; ¶ 0034-0036), further comprising a sealant portion [82] sealing a gap between the curled portion [90] and the cover member [92] (fig. 5; ¶ 0035-0036).
PNG
media_image3.png
280
674
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the housing of Kim having a sealant portion between the curled portion and the cover member as taught by Puterbaugh, in order to prevent the ingress of moisture into the motor interior as well as insulating critical motor components from oxidative attack thereby increasing the life cycle of the motor (¶ 0001-0005 of Puterbaugh).
Claim(s) 7, 11, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim.
Regarding claim 7, Kim discloses the motor [100] of claim 6, as stated above. Kim does not explicitly disclose that the inclined portion [114] forms an angle ranging from 20° to 60° with the radial direction.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the inclined portion of Kim at an angle ranging from 20° to 60° with the radial direction, for the purpose of allowing sufficient axial space for the bearing, and since the only difference between the inclined portion of Kim and the claimed inclined portion is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device. In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Regarding claim 11, Kim discloses the motor [100] of claim 10, as stated above. Kim does not explicitly disclose that a length of the second sidewall [115] before the curled portion [115A] is formed by curling is 1.2 times or more and 1.4 times or less a thickness of the outer ring [14o] of the bearing [14].
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the second sidewall of Kim with a length 1.2 times or more and 1.4 times or less a thickness of the outer ring of the bearing, for the purpose of allowing sufficient space for both the bearing and the cover member, and since the only difference between the second sidewall of Kim and the claimed second sidewall is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device. In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Regarding claim 13, Kim discloses the motor [100] of claim 3, as stated above. Kim does not explicitly disclose that an inner diameter of the curled portion [115A] curvedly formed to face the rotation axis is 0.9 times or less a diameter of an outer circumferential surface of the bearing [14].
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the curled portion of Kim with an inner diameter of 0.9 times or less a diameter of an outer circumferential surface of the bearing, for the purpose of providing sufficient overlap to securely hold the bearing, and since the only difference between the curled portion of Kim and the claimed curled portion is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device. In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Citation of Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Prior art:
Isogai et al. (US 2012/0061201 A1) discloses a motor comprising a bearing disposed within an opening in the housing, and provided with a sealant portion.
Niimi et al. (US 2001/0045784 A1) discloses a motor comprising a bearing disposed within an opening in the housing, and provided with a sealant portion.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Andrews whose telephone number is (571)270-7554. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday, 8:30am-3:00pm.
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, Oluseye 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 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/Michael Andrews/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights