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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 19 May 2026, but the amendment required the new grounds of rejection shown below. In summary, Takekawa teaches the majority of the limitations in the independent claims, but does not explicitly disclose a rotor bearing support cup. Parker discloses a rotor bearing support cup, and when combined with Takekawa would be in the same location as the claims (i.e., between the bearing and the bearing support housing). Further, it appears this similar rejection with Takekawa as the primary reference would teach claims 8 and 16, as they are similar in scope to claim 1, but the rejection was made with Nishikawa as the primary reference since Nishikawa teaches the majority of the dependent claims. Lastly, as claim 3 now requires a more specific configuration of the bearing support cup and bearing support housing with a retainer, this combination is not obvious when considering the below cited references.
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.
Claims 1-10 and 13-20 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1: Line 5 recites “the housing”. However, multiple housings have been introduced. It is unclear which one this is referring to.
Regarding claim 8: Line 6 recites “the rotor bearing support housing”, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 16: Line 4 recites “the rotor bearing support housing”, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Similarly, line 6 recites “a rotor bearing support housing”, it appears this should go before the limitation in line 4.
Further, lines 12 and 13 repeat one another.
The remaining claims are rejected due to their dependency on a rejected claim.
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 1-2 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takekawa (US 2006/0220481), in view of Parker et al. (“Parker”; US 2017/0261086) and Yokoyama et al. (“Yokoyama”; US 2010/0270872).
Regarding claim 1: Takekawa discloses a support system, comprising:
a rotor bearing support housing (62); and
an electric machine housing (12) circumferentially enclosing the rotor bearing support housing (Fig. 3);
where the housing (assumed to be 62, note this is indefinite) directly supports a resolver stator (66, Fig. 4) and a rotor bearing (18);
where the resolver stator is concentric with a rotor shaft (24);
where the rotor bearing (18) is in direct contact with the rotor bearing support housing (62, shown in Fig. 4);
where a rotor bearing directly contacts and a rotor shaft (24); and
an electrical connector (82) directly coupled to the rotor bearing support housing and electrically coupled to the resolver stator (paragraph 0035);
where the electrical connector extends through the electric machine housing (shown in Fig. 2).
Takekawa does not explicitly disclose a rotor bearing support cup, where the rotor bearing support cup is constructed out of a metal and the rotor bearing support housing is constructed out of plastic.
However, Parker discloses a rotor bearing support cup (60, Fig. 4; when Takekawa is modified to have the support cup of Parker between the bearing and bearing support housing, it results in the above claimed configuration), where the rotor bearing support cup is constructed out of a metal (for example, aluminum, paragraph 0002).
And, Yokoyama discloses a housing (50) comprised of an electric insulating material (paragraph 0017 – plastic).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the bearing support housing of Nishikawa to be made out of plastic as disclosed by Yokoyama, in order to ensure no current is transferred to the housing, and to include the bearing support cup of Parker to better support the bearing and to construct the bearing support cup out of metal, in order to increase the durability.
Regarding claim 2: Takekawa discloses where the rotor bearing support housing is molded over at least a portion of the resolver stator (at 62, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 6: Takekawa discloses an electrical connector interface electrically coupled to the electrical connector that is integrated into the rotor bearing support housing (inherent as 82 is connected to the resolver stator, which is within the rotor bearing support housing).
Regarding claim 7: Takekawa discloses electrical conductors extending from the resolver stator to the electrical connector interface (inherent as they are electrically connected, paragraph 0035).
Claims 8-10 and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishikawa et al. (“Nishikawa”; US 2013/0134841), in view of Takekawa, Parker, and Yokoyama, and Choi (US 2001/0033111).
Regarding claim 8: Nishikawa discloses a method for constructing a support system, comprising:
molding the support such as a resolver stator (32) and the rotor bearing support cup (part of housing supporting bearing 11) when assembled with the support are concentric about a resolver stator center line (along the rotor) and a rotor bearing support cup centerline (also, along the rotor, as shown in Fig. 1), and
fastening the support system to an electric machine housing (10).
Nishikawa does not explicitly disclose the electric machine housing comprised of an electric insulating material, the electric machine housing directly supports a rotor bearing support cup, where the rotor bearing support cup is in direct contact with the rotor bearing support housing; where the rotor bearing support cup is constructed out of a metal and the rotor bearing support housing is constructed out of plastic; and where a rotor bearing directly contacts the rotor bearing support cup and a rotor shaft.
However, Takekawa where an electric machine housing (12) circumferentially enclosing the rotor bearing support housing (Fig. 3);
where the rotor bearing (18) is in direct contact with the rotor bearing support housing (62, shown in Fig. 4);
where a rotor bearing directly contacts and a rotor shaft (24); and
an electrical connector (82) directly coupled to the rotor bearing support housing and electrically coupled to the resolver stator (paragraph 0035);
where the electrical connector extends through the electric machine housing (shown in Fig. 2).
However, Parker discloses a rotor bearing support cup (60, Fig. 4; when Takekawa is modified to have the support cup of Parker between the bearing and bearing support housing, it results in the above claimed configuration),
where the rotor bearing support cup is constructed out of a metal (for example, aluminum, paragraph 0002).
And, Yokoyama discloses a housing (50) comprised of an electric insulating material (paragraph 0017 – plastic).
And, Choi discloses injection molding a housing for an electric machine (paragraph 0002).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have the electric machine housing of Takekawa to better protect the support system, to have the housing injection molded as disclosed by Choi in order to construct the housing efficiently, to modify the bearing support housing of Nishikawa to be made out of plastic as disclosed by Yokoyama, in order to ensure no current is transferred to the housing, and to include the bearing support cup of Parker to better support the bearing and to construct the bearing support cup out of metal, in order to increase the durability.
Regarding claim 9: Nishikawa modified by Yokoyama disclose electric insulation material, Yokoyama further discloses the electric insulation material is plastic (paragraph 0017).
Regarding claim 10: Nishikawa modified by Choi disclose injection molding, Nishikawa further discloses where injection molding the support includes: molding electric conductors in the support (see annotated Fig. 2, above); and
molding the electric connector interface (35) into the support,
where the electrical conductors extend from the electric connector interface to a resolve (see annotated Fig. 2, above).
Regarding claim 13: Nishikawa discloses molding the support over the resolver stator (see annotated Fig. 1, above).
Regarding claim 14: Nishikawa discloses a bearing support cup but does not explicitly disclose molding the support over a bearing support cup.
However, Yokoyama discloses molding the support (50) over a bearing support cup (40, Fig. 2, paragraph 0005).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the housing and bearing cup of Nishikawa to have the housing molded over the support cup, as disclosed by Yokoyama, in order to increase the strength between the housing and bearing (paragraph 0006).
Regarding claim 15: Nishikawa discloses pressing a bearing (11) into the rotor bearing support cup (inherent, paragraph 0015).
Regarding claim 16: Nishikawa discloses a support system (Fig. 1), comprising:
an electric machine housing (5);
an electric machine rotor shaft (12);
a rotor bearing support housing (10), the housing including a resolver stator (32) and a rotor bearing support cup directly integrated therein (paragraph 0015, supporting 11), the resolver stator concentric with the rotor bearing support cup (along the rotor centerline), the rotor bearing support housing coupled to the electric machine housing (as shown in Fig. 1, 5 and 10 are clearly connected).
Nishikawa does not explicitly disclose the housing constructed out of plastic, where an electric machine housing circumferentially enclosing the rotor bearing support housing; a retainer press-fit into the housing and holding the resolver stator in place; where the rotor bearing support cup is constructed out of a metal; where the rotor bearing support cup is constructed out of a metal; and where a rotor bearing directly contacts the rotor bearing support cup and a rotor shaft, an electrical connector (82) directly coupled to the rotor bearing support housing and electrically coupled to the resolver stator; where the electrical connector extends through the electric machine housing.
However, Takekawa where an electric machine housing (12) circumferentially enclosing the rotor bearing support housing (Fig. 3);
where a rotor bearing directly contacts and a rotor shaft (24); and
an electrical connector (82) directly coupled to the rotor bearing support housing and electrically coupled to the resolver stator (paragraph 0035);
where the electrical connector extends through the electric machine housing (shown in Fig. 2).
However, Parker discloses a rotor bearing support cup (60, Fig. 4; when Takekawa is modified to have the support cup of Parker between the bearing and bearing support housing, it results in the above claimed configuration),
where the rotor bearing support cup is constructed out of a metal (for example, aluminum, paragraph 0002).
And, Yokoyama discloses a housing (50) comprised of an electric insulating material (paragraph 0017 – plastic).
And, Choi discloses a retainer (7 and 8’) press-fit into the housing (4) and holding the resolver stator in place (as the housing would not be intact without the retainers, paragraph 0036).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have the electric machine housing of Takekawa to better protect the support system, to have the housing injection molded as disclosed by Choi in order to construct the housing efficiently, to modify the bearing support housing of Nishikawa to be made out of plastic as disclosed by Yokoyama, in order to ensure no current is transferred to the housing, and to include the bearing support cup of Parker to better support the bearing and to construct the bearing support cup out of metal, in order to increase the durability.
Regarding claim 17: Nishikawa discloses a bearing (11), the bearing pressed into the rotor bearing support cup (paragraph 0015).
Regarding claim 18: Nishikawa discloses the electric machine rotor shaft is inserted into the rotor bearing support cup (as it goes through 10 and 11).
Regarding claim 19: Nishikawa discloses resolver lobes coupled to the electric machine rotor shaft (inherent as the shaft rotates within the stator 32, there must be lobes to interact with the stator).
Regarding claim 20: Nishikawa discloses an electrical connector receiver (35) formed in the housing, an electrical connector coupled to the electric machine housing (see annotated Fig. 2, above), the electrical connector mated to the electrical connector receiver (38, connected to 19, Fig. 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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.
The prior art of record, alone or in combination does not explicitly teach, suggest, or render obvious, at least to the skilled artisan support system of claim 3, specifically comprising:
the resolver stator is held within the rotor bearing support housing via a retainer, where a portion of the rotor bearing support housing extends axially between the bearing cup and the retainer, in the context of the other components of the claim.
Claims 4 and 5 are allowable due to their dependency on claim 3.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN GUGGER whose telephone number is (571)272-5343. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9:00am - 5:00pm 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, T.C. 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.
/SEAN GUGGER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights