DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 of U.S. Application No. 18634208 filed on 04/12/2024 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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 04/12/2024, and 08/07/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 166, 170, 172. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kikuchi (US 6713927; Hereinafter, “Kikuchi”).
Regarding claim 1: Kikuchi discloses a stator assembly (5), comprising: a circumferential stator core (20 has cylindrical shape; col. 2, line 50) including:
a plurality of stator poles (23) having a length (the axial length of core 20) and a width (circumferential width of tooth 23);
a plurality of stator slots (29) located between a pair of adjacent stator poles (23) and extending the length (the axial length) of the stator poles (23);
a plurality of conductive coils (30) surrounding a portion of each stator pole (23);
and a coolant wall assembly (40, 41 in fig. 3 or 45, 46 in fig. 8) extending between the pair of adjacent stator poles (23) at a radially inner end (closer to the rotor side) of each stator pole (23), the coolant wall assembly including:
a unitary, radially inner wall (40 or 45) extending the length (since 40, 45 is a slot closer) of the pair of adjacent stator poles (23) and spanning between, and secured to (at portion 26 of the tooth 23), the pair of adjacent stator poles (23) on opposing sides (circumferential sides) of an individual stator slot (29); and a radially outer insert (41 or 46) located adjacent the radially inner wall and between the pair of adjacent stator poles (23), and extending the length of adjacent stator poles (fig. 1, 3, 8).
Regarding claim 2/1: Kikuchi discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses that each of the pair of adjacent stator poles (23) includes a radially inner wall retention feature (40 or 45).
Regarding claim 3/2/1: Kikuchi discloses the limitations of claim 2 and further discloses that the retention feature (45) includes a recessed grove (annotated fig. 8 below), wherein the recessed grove is spaced radially outward from a radially innermost end (26) of the stator pole (23).
PNG
media_image1.png
594
988
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuchi in view of Kaneko et al. (US 6809442; Hereinafter, “Kaneko”).
Regarding claim 8/1: Kikuchi discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses that the radially outer insert (46) includes a tapering portion tapering in a radially outward direction (fig. 8).
Kikuchi does not disclose that the radially outer insert is received within a channel formed in the radially inner wall.
Kaneko discloses (see fig. 3) the radially outer insert (14) is received within a channel formed in the radially inner wall (15a).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the wall assembly of Kikuchi to have the radially outer insert is received within a channel formed in the radially inner wall as disclosed by Kaneko to increase the mechanical robustness of the wall assembly.
PNG
media_image2.png
567
584
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claims 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuchi in view of Baumann et al. (US 2020/0072244; Hereinafter, “Baumann”).
Regarding claim 10/1: Kikuchi discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses that the radially inner wall (45) formed of a thermally and/or electrically insulative material (molded resin; col. 6, line 34).
Kikuchi is silent on the material of the radially outer insert.
Baumann teaches forming radially inner wall (70) and radially outer insert (71) are both formed of a thermally and/or electrically insulative material (plastic or resin; para [0071]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the wall assembly of Kikuchi to have the radially inner wall and radially outer insert are both formed of a thermally and/or electrically insulative material as disclosed by Baumann to avoid any electric short circuit that could damage the stator.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7, 9 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.
Regarding claim 4/3/2/1, the limitations of claim 4, “…at least one sealing member positioned radially between the radially outer insert and the plurality of conductive coils” in the combination as claimed are neither anticipated nor obvious over the prior arts in record. Claims 5-7 are also objection-to as they depend on claim 4.
Regarding claim 9/8/1, the limitations of claim 9, “…the radially outer insert includes a radially inner face having a recessed channel and the radially inner wall includes a medial protrusion extending outward from a radially outer face of the radially inner wall, and the medial protrusion is positioned within the recessed channel of the radially outer insert” in the combination as claimed are neither anticipated nor obvious over the prior arts in record.
Claims 11-20 are allowed.
Regarding claim 11: the limitations of claim 11, “…the coolant wall assembly including: a unitary, radially inner wall extending the length of the pair of adjacent stator poles and interlocking between the pair of adjacent stator poles on opposing sides of an individual stator slot; a radially outer insert positioned between the pair of adjacent stator poles and extending the length of adjacent stator poles; and at least one sealing member, wherein the at least one sealing member is positioned radially between the radially outer insert and the plurality of conductive coils” the in the combination as claimed are neither anticipated nor obvious over the prior arts in record. Claims 12-19 are allowable for depending on claim 11.
Regarding claim 20: the limitations of claim 20, “…the coolant wall assembly extending between radially inner ends of the adjacent stator poles, wherein the coolant wall assembly includes a radially outer insert, a unitary, radially inner wall, and a pair of sealing members, each extending the length of the adjacent stator poles, the method comprising: inserting the radially outer insert into an individual stator slot, such that an individual sealing member of the pair of sealing members is positioned between an individual conductive coil on each adjacent stator pole and a radially outer surface receiving portion of the radially outer insert; compressing the pair of sealing members radially outwardly within the stator slot by applying a radially outward force to the radially outer insert; and inserting the radially inner wall within a recessed groove of each of the adjacent stator poles to secure the coolant wall assembly” the in the combination as claimed are neither anticipated nor obvious over the prior arts in record.
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