DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-10 of U.S. Application No. 18675662 filed on 05/28/2024 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.
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.
The term “slightly” in claim 3 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “slightly” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. In the instant application, it is not known how “slightly” is acceptable in the claim, is it 3% greater? 5% greater, 10%, 30%? The specifications does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree.
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, 3-8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 2015/0207368; Hereinafter, “Chen”) in view of Hirabayashi (US 2023/0148272; Hereinafter, “Hirabayashi”) and in further view of Ishikawa et al. (US 2022/0311301: Hereinafter, “Ishikawa”).
Regarding claim 1: Chen discloses a dense assembly motor (10) comprising:
a motor casing (20) serving as a protective structure, and the interior of the motor casing (20) being divided into a first accommodation space (24) and a second accommodation space (25); wherein, the first accommodation space (24) is used for accommodating a motor (30), and the motor comprises: a motor shell(31), wherein the motor shell is a hollow cylindrical body (fig. 2) comprising two open ends (fig. 2-3) and the motor shell (31) is made of a magnetic material (silicon steel; para [0020]), and an interior of the motor shell (31) is defined as an accommodation space (for other parts such as the rotor); a magnet (33), wherein the magnet is cylindrical in shape (fig. 2) and is disposed within (fig. 2-3) the motor shell (31), and the magnet (33) has a magnet length (axial length); and a coil winding (para [0020]), wherein the coil winding is located between the motor shell and the magnet (since the coils are wound around the silicon steel plates 31; para [0020]), and the first accommodation space (24) and the second accommodation space (24) are connected to each other.
PNG
media_image1.png
446
486
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Chen does not show the coil winding has a coil winding length greater than the magnet length; and the second accommodation space is used for passing a wire therethrough; wherein the motor casing and the motor shell are made of different materials.
Hirabayashi discloses the second accommodation space (where gears 5-6 are disposed) is used for passing a wire (the wires in board 8) therethrough; wherein the motor casing (22) and the motor shell are made of different materials (the housing 2 is made of resin; para [0035]).
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 configured the assembly motor of Chen with the second accommodation space is used for passing a wire therethrough; wherein the motor casing and the motor shell are made of different materials (Chen shell is made of steel while Hirabayashi teaches forming the casing of plastic) as disclosed by Hirabayashi to build the assembly compactly and with low cost.
Chen in view of Hirabayashi does not show a coil winding length greater than the magnet length.
Ishikawa teaches forming the motor with a coil winding (30) length greater (the axial length of 30) than the magnet length (the axial length of magnet 3b; fig. 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
537
735
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 configured the assembly motor of Chen in view of Hirabayashi with the coil winding length greater than the magnet length as disclosed by Ishikawa to increase the magnetic interaction between the coil and the magnet, thus increase the torque of the motor.
Regarding claim 3/1: Chen in view of Hirabayashi and Ishikawa disclose the limitations of claim 1 and Ishikawa further discloses that the magnet length (the axial length of magnet 3b) is equal to and/or slightly greater than the length of the motor shell (annotated fig. 1 above).
Regarding claim 4/1: Chen in view of Hirabayashi and Ishikawa disclose the limitations of claim 1 and Hirabayashi further discloses that the wire (on board 8) is connected to the motor accommodated in the first accommodation space through the second accommodation space (fig. 2-3).
Regarding claim 5/1: Chen in view of Hirabayashi and Ishikawa disclose the limitations of claim 1 and Hirabayashi further discloses that the material of the motor casing (2) comprises plastic (resin; para [0035]).
Regarding claim 6/1: Chen in view of Hirabayashi and Ishikawa disclose the limitations of claim 1 and Chen further discloses that wherein the material of the motor shell (31) comprises aluminum and steel (para [0020]).
Regarding claim 7/3/1: Chen in view of Hirabayashi and Ishikawa disclose the limitations of claim 3 and Chen further discloses that the motor casing (20) is directly fixed (fig. 3) to the motor shell (31).
Regarding claim 8/5/1: Chen in view of Hirabayashi and Ishikawa disclose the limitations of claim 5 and Chen further discloses that the motor casing (20) is fixed to the motor shell (31) by pressing and/or bonding.
The limitations “fixed … by pressing and/or bonding” has not been given a patentable weight because it is a product by process limitation. “Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777F, 2d 659, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985); see also MPEP 2113.
Regarding claim 10/4/1: Chen in view of Hirabayashi and Ishikawa disclose the limitations of claim 4 and Chen further discloses that the motor casing (20) is directly fixed (fig. 3) to the motor shell (31).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Hirabayashi and Ishikawa and in further view of Wang (US 4873464; Hereinafter, “Wang”).
Regarding claim 9/1: Chen in view of Hirabayashi and Ishikawa disclose the limitations of claim 1 but does not disclose that the material of the motor casing comprises aluminum and steel.
Wang discloses forming the material of the motor casing (3) comprises aluminum and steel (col. 3, line 8).
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 configured the assembly motor of Chen in view of Hirabayashi and Ishikawa with the material of the motor casing comprises aluminum and steel as disclosed by Wang to since steel is good flux and heat conductor.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 is 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 limitations of claim 2, “…the motor casing extends a fixing column corresponding to the first accommodation space, and the fixing column is a hollow cylindrical column and the fixing column is formed integrally with the motor casing, and at least a part of the fixing column is fixed to the motor” 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