DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-19 of U.S. Application No. 18626626 filed on 04/04/2024 are presented for examination.
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 submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11/13/2024, and 01/23/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claims 1-3, 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sasaguri Keishi (JP 2021083183; Hereinafter, “Sasaguri”).
Regarding claim 1: Sasaguri discloses an annular silicon steel sheet (electromagnetic steel, para [0018]; which is silicon steel), comprising:
a plurality of open slots (between teeth 212), each open slot penetrates the silicon steel sheet (21) in an axial direction of the silicon steel sheet (fig. 3), and a projection of each open slot in the axial direction of the silicon steel sheet comprises a first curve segment (C1 in annotated fig. 3 below), a second curve segment (C2 in annotated fig. 3 below), and a third curve segment (C3 in annotated fig. 3 below), wherein the first curve segment and the third curve segment are oppositely arranged in a circumferential direction (fig. 3) of the silicon steel sheet (forming core 21), a bending direction of the first curve segment is away from a bending direction of the third curve segment (annotated fig. 3 below), and a bending direction of the second curve segment is away from an opening of the open slot (annotated fog. 3 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
365
918
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2/1: Sasaguri discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses a maximum distance (X1) between the first curve segment (C1) and the third curve segment (C3) in the circumferential direction of the silicon steel sheet (forming core 21) is greater than a maximum distance (X2) between two ends of the second curve segment (C2).
PNG
media_image2.png
532
828
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3/1: Sasaguri discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses the second curve segment comprises a first curve sub-segment (SC1 in annotated fig. 3 below), a second curve sub-segment (SC2 in annotated fig. 3 below), and a third curve sub-segment (SC3 in annotated fig. 3 below); the first curve sub-segment and the third curve sub-segment are oppositely arranged along a central axis of the open slot; and curvatures of the first curve sub-segment, the second curve sub-segment, and the third curve sub-segment are the same (since the slot is symmetric at the center (SCA).
PNG
media_image3.png
532
968
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5/1: Sasaguri discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses the first curve segment (C1) and the second curve segment (C2) are tangent at a joint (joined at SC1), the third curve segment (C3) and the second curve segment (C2) are tangent at a joint (at SC3), the first curve segment (C1) and the third curve segment (C3) are symmetrically arranged along a central axis of the open slot (SCA), and the second curve segment (C2) is axisymmetric along the central axis of the open slot (annotated fig. 3 above).
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claims 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sasaguri in view of Koji Tange (JP 20200156298; Hereinafter, “Koji”).
Regarding claim 6: Sasaguri discloses a circular wire motor (110) assembly, comprising: an iron core (21), a winding (23), and a plurality of groups of slot insulator (22); the iron core (21) comprises a plurality of silicon steel sheets (electromagnetic sheets; para [0018]) comprising a plurality of open slots (fig. 3), each open slot penetrates the silicon steel sheet (forming core 21) in an axial direction of the silicon steel sheet (fig. 3), and a projection of each open slot in the axial direction of the silicon steel sheet comprises a first curve segment (C1), a second curve segment (C2), and a third curve segment (C3), wherein the first curve segment (C1) and the third curve segment (C3) are oppositely arranged in a circumferential direction of the silicon steel sheet (see annotated fig. 3 below), a bending direction of the first curve segment (C1) is away (fig. 3) from a bending direction of the third curve segment (C3), and a bending direction of the second curve segment (C2) is away from an opening of the open slot (annotated fig. 3 below); and the plurality of silicon steel sheets (forming core 21) are adjacently arranged in an axial direction of the silicon steel sheets (fig. 2-3); a plurality of open slots of two adjacent silicon steel sheets are respectively connected to form a plurality of winding slots (between teeth 212);
PNG
media_image1.png
365
918
media_image1.png
Greyscale
each winding slot is configured to accommodate a group of slot insulator (22) and a plurality of circular wires (23) of the winding slot; each circular wire of each winding slot passes through the winding slot in an axial direction of the iron core (21); and each group of slot insulator (22) is configured to wrap a plurality of circular wires (23; fig. 6 below) in one winding slot.
PNG
media_image4.png
491
828
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Sasaguri does not specifically disclose that the insulator in in form of paper.
Koji teaches forming the insulator in in form of paper (30).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have provided the stator of Sasaguri with the insulator in in form of paper as disclosed by Koji since insulator paper is easy to bend and work with and save on the cost.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4/3/1, 7/6-13 are 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.
Claims 14-19 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 14 recites, “…stator assembly comprises: an iron core, a winding, and a plurality of groups of slot paper; the iron core comprises a plurality of silicon steel sheets comprising a plurality of open slots, each open slot penetrates the silicon steel sheet in an axial direction of the silicon steel sheet, and a projection of each open slot in the axial direction of the silicon steel sheet comprises a first curve segment, a second curve segment, and a third curve segment, wherein the first curve segment and the third curve segment are oppositely arranged in a circumferential direction of the silicon steel sheet, a bending direction of the first curve segment is away from a bending direction of the third curve segment, and a bending direction of the second curve segment is away from an opening of the open slot; … rotor assembly comprises :an iron core, a winding, and a plurality of groups of slot paper; the iron core comprises a plurality of silicon steel sheets comprising a plurality of open slots, each open slot penetrates the silicon steel sheet in an axial direction of the silicon steel sheet, and a projection of each open slot in the axial direction of the silicon steel sheet comprises a first curve segment, a second curve segment, and a third curve segment, wherein the first curve segment and the third curve segment are oppositely arranged in a circumferential direction of the silicon steel sheet, a bending direction of the first curve segment is away from a bending direction of the third curve segment, and a bending direction of the second curve segment is away from an opening of the open slot; … , and openings of a plurality of winding slots of the rotor assembly face the stator assembly” in the combination as claimed are neither anticipated nor obvious over the prior arts in record. Claims 15-19 are allowable for depending on claim 14.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AHMED ELNAKIB whose telephone number is (571)270-0638. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00AM-4:00PM.
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, Tulsidas Patel can be reached at 571-272-2098. 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.
/AHMED ELNAKIB/Primary Examiner,
Art Unit 2834