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 .
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.
Claims 1 – 20 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fochtman et al. (US 6,431,474 B2; hereinafter Fochtman) in view of Lerchenmueller et al. (US 2015/0233735 A1; hereinafter Lerchenmueller).
Regarding Claim 1, Fochtman discloses a ferromagnetic compensation apparatus (Fig. 1, item 10), comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
744
346
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a ferromagnetic enclosure (Fig. 1, item 18) having
an inner surface (Fig. 1, item 22);
an outer surface (Fig. 1, item 18 in outer surface);
a body (Fig. 1, item 14) disposed between the inner surface (Fig. 1, item 22) and the outer surface (Fig. 1, item 18), wherein the body (Fig. 1, item 14) includes a first portion (Fig. 1, upper left portion of item 14) having a first predetermined thickness (Fig. 1, upper left portion of item 14 having a thickness) and a second portion (Fig. 1, lower right portion of item 14) having a second predetermined thickness (Fig. 1, upper right portion of item 14 having a thickness);
a first notch (Fig. 1, lower left notch 52 of item 18) in the outer surface (Fig. 1, item 18 in outer surface), the first notch (Fig. 1, lower left notch 52 of item 18) is positioned in the first portion (Fig. 1, upper left portion of item 14) of the body (Fig. 1, item 14); and
a second notch (Fig. 1, lower right notch 52 of item 18) in the outer surface (Fig. 1, item 18 in outer surface), the second notch (Fig. 1, lower right notch 52 of item 18) is positioned in the second portion (Fig. 1, lower right portion of item 14) of the body (Fig. 1, item 14);
wherein a position of the first notch (Fig. 1, lower left notch 52 of item 18) is configured to be aligned with a position of a first magnetic coil (Fig. 1, item 28 in the left), and a position of the second notch (Fig. 1, lower right notch 52 of item 18) is configured to aligned with a position of a second magnetic coil (Fig. 1, item 28 in the right);
wherein the ferromagnetic enclosure (Fig. 1, item 18) is configured to compensate a magnetic field detected by at least one of the first magnetic sensor and the second magnetic sensor (Fig. 1 and column 5, lines 16 – 21; due to the concentric uniformity in the working gap 15 between the inlet connector 18 and the housing 12, the increased path length reduces the amount of leakage which the apparatus experiences during operation, and this reduction in the amount of leakage allows for increased effective use of the magnetic field).
But Fochtman does not specifically teach magnetic sensor of a motor.
However, Lerchenmueller suggests magnetic sensor of a motor (para [0020]; magnetic sensor includes, in particular, at least one coil and para [0001]; in a motor).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify Fochtman in view of Lerchenmueller because it is advantageous in that, because of the use of coils for providing a magnetic sensor working according to the eddy current principle, already at relatively low coil cross sections, an output signal can be obtained with a relatively high signal amplitude and a high signal quality as a function of the rotational motion of the rotating element (Lerchenmueller, para [0020]).
Regarding Claim 2, Fochtman and Lerchenmueller suggest the apparatus of claim 1, Fochtman also discloses wherein the ferromagnetic enclosure is at least one of: a partially circular ferromagnetic enclosure, a partially polygonal ferromagnetic enclosure, a fully circular ferromagnetic enclosure, a fully polygonal ferromagnetic enclosure, and any combination thereof (column 2, lines 6 – 10; comprises, a ferromagnetic core, a magnetic coil at least partially surrounding the ferromagnetic core).
Claim(s) 6 – 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fochtman in view of Lerchenmueller, and further in view of Sorensen et al. (US 2023/0257888 A1; hereinafter Sorensen).
Regarding Claim 6, Fochtman and Lerchenmueller suggest the apparatus of claim 1. But Fochtman and Lerchenmueller do not specifically teach wherein the body has a predetermined magnetic permeability.
However Sorensen suggests wherein the body has a predetermined magnetic permeability (para [0033]; core is usually made of magnetic material with a high magnetic permeability and is used to confine and guide magnetic field lines. It is usually made of ferrimagnetic metal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the combination of Fochtman and Lerchenmueller in view of Sorensen because high permeability, relative to the surrounding material causes the magnetic field lines to be concentrated in the core material (Sorensen, para [0033])).
Regarding Claim 7, Fochtman, Lerchenmueller, and Sorensen suggest the apparatus of claim 6, Sorensen also suggests wherein the predetermined magnetic permeability is greater than one (para [0033]; high permeability, relative to the surrounding material causes the magnetic field lines to be concentrated in the core material).
Regarding Claim 8, Fochtman and Lerchenmueller suggest the apparatus of claim 1. But Fochtman and Lerchenmueller do not specifically teach wherein at least one of the first and second magnetic sensors is a linear Hall sensor.
However, Sorensen suggests wherein at least one of the first and second magnetic sensors is a linear Hall sensor (para [0029]; magnetic flux is registerable by an element such as a hall sensor; further, a coil may be used to register magnetic flux changes).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the combination of Fochtman and Lerchenmueller in view of Sorensen because magnetic flux is registerable by an element such as a hall sensor (Sorensen; para [0029]).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fochtman in view of Lerchenmueller in view of Sorensen, and further in view of Maass et al. (US 5,021,735; hereinafter Maass).
Regarding Claim 9, Fochtman, Lerchenmueller, and Sorensen suggest the apparatus of claim 8. But Fochtman, Lerchenmueller, and Sorensen do not specifically teach wherein the motor is a brushless direct current motor.
However, Maass suggests wherein the motor is a brushless direct current motor (column 3, lines 46 – 48; motor is a brushless direct-current motor).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the combination of Fochtman and Lerchenmueller in view of Maass because the invention provides magnetic cores economically and efficiently (Maass, column 2, lines 42 – 45).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fochtman in view of Lerchenmueller, and further in view of Gibbs (US 3,407,490; hereinafter Gibbs).
Regarding Claim 10, Fochtman and Lerchenmueller suggest the apparatus of claim 1. But Fochtman and Lerchenmueller do not specifically teach wherein the ferromagnetic enclosure is configured to be positioned adjacent to a stator of the motor.
However Gibbs suggests wherein the ferromagnetic enclosure is configured to be positioned adjacent to a stator of the motor (column 4, lines 26 – 27; the stators of the motor have ferromagnetic laminated cores).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the combination of Fochtman and Lerchenmueller in view of Gibbs in order to provide a device with relatively simple construction (Gibbs, column 1, lines 21 – 23).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11 – 20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding Claim 11, the prior art of record does not teach claimed limitation: “motor assembly, comprising: a stator enclosing the one or more magnets; a first and a second magnetic sensors positioned in at least one of the stator and the rotor” in combination with all other claimed limitations of claim 11.
Regarding Claims 12 – 20, the claims are allowed as they further limit allowed claim 11.
Claims 3 and 4 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 3, the prior art of record does not teach claimed limitation: “wherein the first portion has a first radial distance defined by a first arc angle value and the second portion has a second radial distance defined by a second arc angle value” in combination with all other claimed limitations of claim 3.
Regarding Claim 4, the prior art of record does not teach claimed limitation: “wherein the first predetermined thickness of the first portion is defined by a first difference between an outer radius and a first inner radius, wherein the outer radius defining a distance between a radial center of the body and the outer surface and the first inner radius defining a distance between the radial center of the body and the inner surface of the first portion; the second predetermined thickness of the second portion is defined by a second difference between the outer radius and a second inner radius, wherein the second inner radius defining a distance between the radial center of the body and the inner surface of the second portion” in combination with all other claimed limitations of claim 4.
Regarding Claim 5, the claim would be allowable for depending on claim 4.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Song et al. (US 2008/0272765 A1) suggests an arrangement for the stator, magnetic sensors, and a rotor (see Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
433
670
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Matsuda (US 8,333,259 B2) discloses an arrangement for the stator, magnetic sensors, and a rotor (see Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image3.png
696
496
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Osterweil (US 8,847,580 B1) teaches a magnetic sensor is equipped with a coil for reducing the induction (see claim 2).
Schweitzer, III et al. (US 2009/0251308 A1) discloses magnetic sensors comprising a magnetic coil (see claim 2).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GIOVANNI ASTACIO-OQUENDO whose telephone number is (571)270-5724. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Huy Phan can be reached at 571-272-7924. 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.
/GIOVANNI ASTACIO-OQUENDO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858 1/24/2026