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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Specification
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: “INSULATION STRUCTURE WITH METAL AND INSULATING PARTS AROUND THE BEARING, AND BETWEEN THE BEARING AND THE END WINDINGS”
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 1 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 1 recites, “a concentric shaft” is it “ the motor shaft” recited or a different shaft”, examiner will assume it is the motor shaft. No other shafts are in the bearing except the motor shaft which is the concentric shaft. The disclosure does not discuss or show any other shaft that the “motor shaft”. Clarification is needed.
Claims 2-10 are rejected based on dependency from claim 1.
Inventorship
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-4,6,7,10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneko (US PG Pub 20030062780 hereinafter “Kaneko” in view of Cook et al. (US PG pub 20030042804 hereinafter “Cook”).
Re-claim 1, Kaneko discloses an insulation structure (19,20, 20 is rubber seal, insulating, 19 is integrated with 17, resin layer) configured to be disposed in a motor housing (1B) and configured to block an electric field (resin and rubber seal prevent electrical connection, not electrical conductors) occurring in an end coil (14), which is drawn from each of two shaft ends (ends of 2a) of a stator (5) in a shaft direction (direction between 2a in both ends of fig.1), from being applied to a motor shaft (2a), the insulation structure comprising: a part (19) having a first side in contact with the motor housing (annotated fig.1), surrounding a bearing (3, see annotated fig.1) having a concentric shaft (2a) with the motor shaft (2), and extending to be parallel to the end coil (14); and an insulating part (20) in contact with at least a first portion of a second side (see fig.1) of the conductive part (see fig.1).
Kaneko fails to explicitly teach the insulation structure comprising: a conductive part.
However, Cook teaches the insulation structure (60) comprising a conductive part (60, is metal).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the material of the insulation strucuure of Kaneko and add material which make the insulation structure conductive part as suggested by Cook which provides more strudry and structural soundness to the motor and well around the stator and protect the bearings (Cook, P[0014]).
PNG
media_image1.png
467
426
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re-claim 2, Kaneko as modified discloses the insulation structure of claim 1, wherein the at least the first portion of the second side (annotated fig.1) of the conductive part (end of 19) is accommodated inside the insulating part (20).
Re-claim 3, Kaneko as modified discloses the insulation structure of claim 2, wherein at least one of the conductive part (19) and the insulating part (20) has a predetermined length (see fig.1) in a direction parallel to a shaft direction (annotated fig.1, length in direction of 2a) of the end coil (14) such that the at least one of the conductive part and the insulating part (19) overlaps (19 overlaps 14, see fig.1) the end coil (14) by a predetermined area (area from end of 5).
Re-claim 4, Kaneko as modified discloses the insulation structure of claim 3, wherein an end of the insulation structure (20) has a length (any length of 20) so as to prevent the insulation structure from being in contact with an end of a rotor (2, 20 does not contact 2).
Re-claim 6, Kaneko as modified discloses the insulation structure of claim 1, wherein the insulation structure has a ring shape (19 is cylindrical).
Re-claim 7, Kaneko as modified discloses the insulation structure of claim 1, wherein the conductive part (19) is thinner (see fig.1 showing thin 19, 20 is thicker specially radially) than the insulating part (20).
Re-claim 10, Kaneko as modified discloses the insulation structure of claim 1, wherein the conductive part (19) is integrated with the motor housing (1b,1,1a) such that the first side (20 extends into housing) extends from the housing (1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5, 8 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Re-claim 5, recites “inter alia” : 1. An insulation structure configured to be disposed in a motor housing and configured to block an electric field occurring in an end coil, which is drawn from each of two shaft ends of a stator in a shaft direction, from being applied to a motor shaft, the insulation structure comprising: a conductive part having a first side in contact with the motor housing, surrounding a bearing having a concentric shaft with the motor shaft, and extending to be parallel to the end coil; and an insulating part in contact with at least a first portion of a second side of the conductive part.
2. The insulation structure of claim 1, wherein the at least the first portion of the second side of the conductive part is accommodated inside the insulating part.
3. The insulation structure of claim 2, wherein at least one of the conductive part and the insulating part has a predetermined length in a direction parallel to a shaft direction of the end coil such that the at least one of the conductive part and the insulating part overlaps the end coil by a predetermined area.
5. The insulation structure of claim 3, wherein in a cross-section of the insulating part, a length of the insulating part that is adjacent to the end coil is at least a length to accommodate a portion of the conductive part that overlaps the end coil.
The combination of claims 5,3,2 and 1 altogether are found to be allowed, the prior art of record found, ip.com npl and patent search, or any combination of references alone or combined fail to suggest the combined limitations of claim 5 with claims 3-1. The combination is found to be unique and allowed. Other prior art teach insulation structure but not as detailed above.
PNG
media_image2.png
541
629
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Re-claim 8, recites “inter alia” : 1. An insulation structure configured to be disposed in a motor housing and configured to block an electric field occurring in an end coil, which is drawn from each of two shaft ends of a stator in a shaft direction, from being applied to a motor shaft, the insulation structure comprising: a conductive part having a first side in contact with the motor housing, surrounding a bearing having a concentric shaft with the motor shaft, and extending to be parallel to the end coil; and an insulating part in contact with at least a first portion of a second side of the conductive part.
8. The insulation structure of claim 1, further comprising an auxiliary insulation structure extending from an end of the stator in a direction in which the end coil is drawn, wherein the auxiliary insulation structure has an outer peripheral surface surrounded by a shielding insulation paper, and accommodates a conductive material inside.
The combination of claims 8 and 1 altogether are found to be allowed, the prior art of record found, ip.com npl and patent search, or any combination of references alone or combined fail to suggest the combined limitations of claim 8 with claim 1. The combination is found to be unique and allowed. Other prior art teach insulation structure, but not combined as the shielding and axillary insulation are unique but not as detailed above.
Claim 9 is objected as being dependency from claim 8.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure in PTO892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAGED M ALMAWRI whose telephone number is (313)446-6565. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christopher M. Koehler can be reached on 5712723560. 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.
/MAGED M ALMAWRI/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834