DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent Application No. 18/682,768, filed on 9 February, 2024, were presented for examination, and are currently pending in the application.
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 required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9 February, 2024, was filed before the mailing date of this Office action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
The listing of references (two DE references) in the specification (¶ 0005-0006) is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “15” has been used to designate both a “radial feed duct (15)” {see ¶ 0078} and what appears to be some axial coolant flow path arrow (dotted line with an arrow at the far right-hand-side – see enlarged snapshot of fig. 1 below, wherein the Examiner has put a square around the two 15’s). The one on top is clearly the radial feed duct. The Examiner leaves it to the Applicant to correct or remove the other (at bottom) reference numeral 15, as he cannot be sure of exactly what it is supposed to be.
PNG
media_image1.png
348
726
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. It does not refer to the dual motor feature nor does it refer to the cooling circuits/passages – in fact it does not even refer to the motor(s), only to a vehicle. It is broad enough to read on a vehicle air conditioner. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following guidelines illustrate the preferred layout for the specification of a utility application. These guidelines are suggested for the applicant’s use.
Arrangement of the Specification
As provided in 37 CFR 1.77(b), the specification of a utility application should include the following sections in order. Each of the lettered items should appear in upper case, without underlining or bold type, as a section heading. If no text follows the section heading, the phrase “Not Applicable” should follow the section heading:
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT.
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM.
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION.
(1) Field of the Invention.
(2) Description of Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98.
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S).
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS (commencing on a separate sheet).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE (commencing on a separate sheet).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING. (See MPEP § 2422.03 and 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825). A “Sequence Listing” is required on paper if the application discloses a nucleotide or amino acid sequence as defined in 37 CFR 1.821(a) and if the required “Sequence Listing” is not submitted as an electronic document either on read-only optical disc or as a text file via the patent electronic system.
The specification is objected to for omitting Section b (wherein reference should be made to the PCT and DE priority applications) and the Section Headings for sections b, g1, g2, h, i, and j. As detailed above, these should be inserted via amendment in ALL CAPS without underlining or bold type.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 3, the limitation “and in the housing” should be changed to “and the housing” (with the word “in” removed).
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-19 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, lines 18-19 of claim 1 recite “the separate cooling of the first stator (4) and the second stator (4a)” but a reader cannot determine whether “separate” means that the cooling of the first stator is separate from the cooling of the second stator or whether the cooling of the first and second stators is separate from the cooling of the first and second rotors. The Examiner will interpret this to mean the cooling of the stators is separate from the cooling of the rotors for examination on the merits.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the combined cooling" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the first conjoint coolant line" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There is only antecedent basis for “a conjoint coolant line” or “the conjoint coolant line” (without the word “first”) in claims 2 and 3.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the outside of the drive output shaft" in line 3, again in line 5, and again in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. A reader cannot tell if this is referring to an external surface of the shaft, such as how “outer drive output shaft side” was used in claim 5, or simply to a geometric volume/space external to the shaft.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “radially in the circumferential direction…” Using the cylindrical coordinate system laid out by the claim language, an opening can extend radially in the radial direction or circumferentially in the circumferential direction, but not radially in the circumferential direction. The Examiner believes this may be a typo and will interpret it to mean the opening extends radially in the radial direction.
Line 6 of claim 6 recites “after passing through…” but a reader cannot tell what has been passed through. For examination on the merits, the Examiner will interpret this as passing through the at least one through-going opening.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the circumference" in lines 3-4 and again in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There are several elements claimed so far that have a circumference. In fact, the overall limitation “extending toward the circumference” associated with both of the “the circumference” recitations, with reference to openings/apertures 16/24, simply does not correspond to fig. 1. The Examiner is forced to interpret both instances of this limitation as “extending along the circumference of the shaft” for want of any other reasonable functional meaning for openings/apertures 16/24.
Lines 4-5 of claim 7 recite “so that at least some of the coolant of the first coolant line…” but the claim never completes the sentence, such as for example, there is no verb to say what “some of the coolant” does. Immediately after this partial limitation, a series of other limitations veer off to discuss how the coolant can be split up “after” being conveyed and “after” flowing – but the term “some of the coolant…” is left hanging as if the preceding part of the claim did not matter.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the outside thereof" (referring to the drive output shaft) in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. A reader cannot tell if this is referring to an external surface of the shaft, such as how “outer drive output shaft side” was used in claim 5, or simply to a geometric volume/space external to the shaft.
Lines 9-10 of claim 7 contain further antecedent basis problems. Instead of detailing them, the Examiner will provide a marked-up revision of what he believes the limitation should be, so that Applicant can see (better than if the limitation were picked apart herein) what should be changed:
“and into a second lower coolant path (19) that flows in a direction opposite to the first lower coolant path…”
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the through-going openings" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The through-going openings were introduced in claim 6, but claim 9 depends from claim 8 which depends from claim 1.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the circumferential direction" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The circumferential direction was introduced in claim 6, but claim 9 depends from claim 8 which depends from claim 1.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the outside of the drive output shaft" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. A reader cannot tell if this is referring to an external surface of the shaft, such as how “outer drive output shaft side” was used in claim 5, or simply to a geometric volume/space external to the shaft.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the direction opposite" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the first lower coolant path" in line 4 and “the second lower coolant path” in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The first and second lower coolant paths were introduced in claim 9, but claim 10 depends from claim 8.
Lines 3-5 of claim 11 recite the limitation “the various bearings and/or other structural elements located int eh first electric machine and/or in the second electric machine…” Firstly, everything in the limitation is without antecedent basis. Secondly, the words “various” and “other” are by definition indefinite statements, such that the claim fails to point out what is included or excluded by the claim language.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the rotor axis (R)" in lines 5 and 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. It is noted that claim 1 provides antecedent basis for a rotational axis, not a rotor axis.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the circumference" in both lines 6 and 9, each seemingly with reference to different stators whose respective circumferences have not been previously established. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the stator" in lines 6 and 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The first instance seems to be referring to the fist stator and the second instance seems to be referring to the second stator.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the conjoint coolant line" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is noted that the conjoint coolant line was introduced in claim 2 but claim 16 depends from claim 1.
Regarding claim 17, the phrase "if necessary" (in line 4) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Line 5 of claim 17 recites “to cool the second transmission portion (10) separately…” The word “separately” is indefinite because a reader cannot tell if the second transmission is cooled separately from the first transmission portion, first rotor, the second rotor, the first stator, the second stator, the housing, etc.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “the second transmission portion” in the transition from line 4 to line 5 and also again in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. It is noted that the second transmission portion was introduced in claim 8 but claim 17 depends from claim 1.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the two power electronics units" in lines 4-5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim only provided antecedent basis for “at least two power electronics”.
Line 9 of claim 19 recites “power electronics units (29, 29a) are cooled first”. A reader cannot tell what the power electronics units are cooled before. Even if there were a basis for the chronological term, since the second coolant circuit is, via the word “circuit”, an infinite loop, there is no “first” or “last” and if the power electronics units are being cooled before the heat exchanger, which seems to be the intention of Applicant here, considerably more context needs to be inserted for the limitation to stop being generally indefinite.
Claims 2, 5, 8, 13-15, and 18 are rejected for depending from rejected claim 1.
Due to the extremely high number of instances of indefiniteness found by the Examiner in the claims, he believes there must be more that he did not find and he has already spent considerable time discovering them, and then outlining them above. Applicant is requested to carefully review the claims before responding in order to find whatever else unclear limitations that can be found in the claims, such that the Office does not have to continue pointing out things as prosecution advances. Applicant is also requested to be careful in responding not to overlook any of the single items put forth above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ito (US 2019/0190350 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Ito teaches a cooling arrangement [fig. 8] for cooling a hybrid vehicle or an electrically powered vehicle (see ¶ 0002-0003) the cooling arrangement comprising:
a first electric machine [GEN(50)], wherein the first electric machine [GEN(50)] comprises a first rotor [51] mounted to rotate about a rotation axis (see ¶ 0038 which recites “the motor MOT and the generator GEN are… adjacent to each other in a case 11 to have rotation axes on the same straight line..”) and a drive output shaft [combined generator shaft 27 and motor shaft 29], wherein the first rotor [51] is arranged coaxially with the drive output shaft [27/29], and wherein the rotation axis [X] (the rotation axis has been drawn and conjointly labeled with the axial direction in the annotated excerpt of fig. 8 attached below – it is noted that much of the disclosure is directed to fig. 1 but fig. 8 is being used herein, since it is identical to fig. 1 but shows the cooling flows) defines an axial direction, and wherein the first rotor [51] extends in the axial direction about the rotation axis [X] (see ¶ 0039), the first electric machine [GEN(50)] further comprising a first stator [52] that surrounds the first rotor [51] peripherally (the Examiner will forego explanation of the cylindrical coordinate system and side-cross-sectional views often used for electric motors, and as used in fig. 8 of the reference, because fig. 2 of the instant application shows that Applicant is familiar with them, and thus will understand the relationship between “peripheral”, “axial”, “radial”, etc. as concerns fig. 8 of the reference);
a second electric machine [MOT(50)] mounted axially close to the first electric machine [GEN(50)] (see ¶ 0038 and 0042),wherein the second electric machine [MOT(50)] comprises a second rotor [51] mounted to rotate about the rotation axis [X] (see ¶ 0045-0046), wherein the second rotor [51] is mounted coaxially with the drive output shaft [27/29] and wherein the second rotor [51] extends in the axial direction about the rotation axis [X], the second electric machine [MOT(50)] further comprising a second stator [52] that surrounds the second rotor [51] peripherally;
PNG
media_image2.png
637
674
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a first coolant circuit [63/70/81/102] having at least one first coolant line [63] configured for cooling the first rotor [51] (via supply path 70 – see ¶ 0050) and the second rotor [51] (via supply path 102 – see ¶ 0071) and a second coolant line [101] parallel to the first coolant line [63/70/81/102] (101 is parallel to 63, both extending in the axial direction in fig. 8), the second coolant line [101] configured for the separate cooling of the first stator [52] (via 101a/101b – see ¶ 0059) and the second stator [52] (via 101a/101b – see ¶ 0060) by means of the second coolant line [101];
wherein the second electric machine [MOT(50)] has a conjoint housing [59] which forms a casing for the first electric machine [GEN(50)] and the second electric machine [MOT(50)] (see ¶ 0047);
wherein the drive output shaft [27/29] extends through the housing [59] in the axial direction, and wherein the first electric machine [GEN(50)] and the second electric machine [MOT(5)] are arranged in the first coolant circuit [63/70/81/102] which contains a first coolant for cooling the first electric machine [GEN(50)] and the second electric machine [MOT(50)] {see ¶ 0047 which recites “in the generator shaft 27, a coolant flow path 63 through which a coolant flows is formed… the coolant flow path 63 is connected to a circulation path 60 formed in a motor housing 59 constituting the case 11…” and ¶ 0050 which recites “the annular groove 87 and the radial groove 88 constitute an introduction portion 44 for introducing the coolant supplied from the coolant flow path 63 to the internal flow paths 81…” – see also ¶ 0071 which describes path 102 feeding the second rotor 51 of the second electric machine MOT(50)}.
With respect to claim 5/1, Ito teaches the arrangement of claim 1, and further teaches wherein the drive output shaft [27/29] has an outer drive output shaft side (labeled by the Examiner in the new annotated excerpt of fig. 8 attached below) that faces toward the two rotors [51], and the housing has a feed duct [60] extending radially through the housing [59] (see last three lines of ¶ 0047) to the drive output shaft [27/29] (in flow path 63, see arrow labeled by the Examiner), the feed duct [60] configured for supplying coolant onto and into the drive output shaft [27/29] as the first coolant line [63/70/81/102] (see ¶ 0063-0065).
PNG
media_image3.png
582
753
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 6/1, Ito teaches the arrangement of claim 1, and further teaches wherein at least one through-going opening [70/102] (still referring to the fig. 8 excerpt above) that extends radially in the radial direction toward the outside of the drive output shaft [27/29] {see rejections of claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) above} is provided in the drive output shaft [27/29], the at least one through-going opening [70/102] configured for conveying at least some of the coolant in the first coolant line [63/70/81/102] to the outside of the drive output shaft [27/29], so that after passing through, a fluid flow of the first coolant line [63/70/81/102] onto the outside (see arrows running through the passages 81 in the rotors in both fig. 7 and fig. 8) of the drive output shaft [27/29] takes place (see ¶ 0050-0051 and also groove 87 of fig. 7, which is described in ¶ 0050-0051).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 2-4, 11, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito in view of Yang (US 2022/0320962 A1).
With respect to claim 2/1, Ito teaches arrangement of claim 1, and further teaches wherein the first coolant circuit [63/70/81/102] is configured such that after the cooling of the first rotor [51] and the second rotor [51] (referring to the fig. 8 excerpts attached above) the first coolant line [63/70/81/102] (in ¶ 0066 it is referred to as “first cooling mechanism 41) merges with the second coolant line [101/101a/101b] (in ¶ 0066 it is referred to as the “second cooling mechanism 42”) after the cooling of the first stator [52] and second stator [52] (¶ 00660 recites “the coolant which cools the rotor 51 and the stator 52 by the first cooling mechanism 41 and the second cooling mechanism 42 is recirculated by the coolant pump…” – since they are both recirculated by a single pump, they necessarily merge – it is noted that ref. #’s 41 and 42 are present in fig. 8, and correspond to 63/70/81/102 and 101/101a/101b, respectively).
Ito omits teaching wherein the first coolant circuit and the second coolant, once merged, form a conjoint coolant line.
Yang discloses a cooling arrangement for cooling an electric vehicle (¶ 0003-0004), the cooling arrangement comprising a first electric machine [11] comprising a first rotor [113], a drive output shaft [114], and a first stator [111], a second electric machine [11B] comprising a second rotor [113] and a second stator [111] (see ¶ 0142 and 0151-152), a first coolant circuit [8] for cooling the first rotor [113] and a second coolant line [7] parallel (in a flow sense) to the first coolant line [8] for separate cooling of the stator [111], wherein the second electric machine [11B] has a conjoint housing [8] which forms a casing for the first electric machine [11] and the second electric machine [11B] (see ¶ 0161 and fig. 8).
PNG
media_image4.png
331
672
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Yang teaches wherein after cooling of the first rotor [113], the first coolant line [8] merges with the second coolant line [7] after cooling the first stator [111], to form a conjoint coolant line [5]. It is noted that they first merge in the tank 10 (see ¶ 0116 and 0172), and like Ido are recycled through a pump system [15/13]. However, the conjoint coolant line [5] is formed from the same oil as described in ¶ 0149 (“an oil passage 3 and an oil passage 4 that are shown in FIG. 7A converge into an oil passage…”.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the cooling arrangement of Ito, while incorporating a heat exchanger and a conjoint cooling line, as taught by Yang, in order to cool the coolant, and further in order to feed the coolant to a heat exchanger having only one inlet, reducing complexity (compared to a dual-duct heat exchanger) and manufacturing cost. It is noted that Ito just omits many details of the coolant circuit such as the “coolant pump (not illustrated)…” (¶ 0060) in order to focus on the novel elements of its invention, leaving out things well known in the art such as the cooling circuit, etc. However, this does not mean Ito is operating without at least the minimum requirements of a cooling circuit, such as a heat exchanger and a ducting system leading up to it, through it, and out of it. Yang simply completes the picture
PNG
media_image5.png
314
676
media_image5.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 3/2/1, Ito in view of Yang teaches the arrangement of claim 2, Yang further teaches wherein the first coolant circuit [8] is configured such that after combined cooling (in heat exchanger 14) by the conjoint coolant line [5], the conjoint cooling line [5] is split into the first coolant line [8] and the second coolant line [7] (see ¶ 0109 and fig. 7A above).
With respect to claim 4/3/2/1, Ito in view of Yang teaches the arrangement of claim 3, Yang further teaches wherein the conjoint coolant line [5] is connected to a heat exchanger [14] (see ¶ 0109) for cooling.
Although Yang teaches “heat carried in the cooling oil is transmitted to the heat exchanger 14 to a coolant circulating in the heat exchanger 14” (¶ 0110) and this (second) “coolant” can be seen inside the heat exchanger 14 in fig. 7A (as arrows), neither Ito nor Yang teaches wherein the heat exchanger is connected to a separate, second circuit containing a second coolant for cooling down the first coolant flowing through the conjoint coolant line by means of the second coolant. However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a separate, second circuit containing the second coolant in order to circulate the second coolant, in order to convey the heated second coolant out of the heat exchanger such that its heat could be extracted elsewhere. Not only is this how almost all liquid-to-liquid heat exchangers work – if the second coolant did not have a second circuit for it, it would heat up inside the heat exchanger and then the latter would sever no purpose.
With respect to claim 11/1, Ito teaches arrangement of claim 1, and further teaches wherein the drive output shaft [27/29] has one or more radial apertures [70/102] arranged to let through some of the coolant (see ¶ 0050-0051 and 0071), so that the various bearings and/or other structural elements located in the first electric machine [GEN(50)] and/or in the second electric machine [MOT(50)] can be lubricated {see rejection of claim 11 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) above}.
Ito omits teaching wherein the coolant is oil.
Yang teaches wherein the coolant is oil (abstract, ¶ 0007-0010).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the arrangement of Ito, while using oil as the coolant, as taught by Yang, in order to simultaneously lubricate and cool the moving parts the coolant is in contact with (as opposed to aqueous coolants which damage metal parts over time, wash the grease out of the bearings, and offer almost no lubrication), as is well known in the art.
With respect to claim 16/1, Ito teaches the arrangement of claim 1, but omits teaching a third coolant line split off from the conjoint cooling line or from the first coolant line or the second coolant line.
Yang teaches a third coolant line [9] split off from the conjoint cooling line or from the first coolant line or the second coolant line [7] (see ¶ 0111 – oil passages 7, 8, and 9 all emanate from the cavity 16 – see new annotated excerpt of fig. 7A attached below).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the arrangement of Ito, while using a third coolant line splitting away from at least one of the other coolant lines, in order to provide coolant to a reduction gear to provide oil required by the reduction gear (Yang ¶ 0115).
PNG
media_image6.png
336
674
media_image6.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 17/16/1, Ito in view of Yang teaches the arrangement of claim 16, Yang further teaches wherein coolant is configured to be delivered via the coolant line [9] by way of a through-going opening in the housing (coolant in the line goes through or past a wall/division separating the first machine 11 from the reducer 12 so it is “configured to” be delivered by a through-going opening in the housing depending on how and if a practitioner would implement the coolant’s traversal of the wall/division – still referring to the fig. 7A excerpt above) and/or a component fixed to the housing, and if necessary (there is no evidence Yang found it necessary) by way of further apertures and through-going openings to the second transmission portion in order to cool the second transmission portion separately {see the various rejections of claim 17 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) above}.
With respect to claim 18/16/1, Ito in view of Yang teaches the arrangement of claim 16, Yang further teaches wherein after a cooling process (the cooling of reduction gearing 12), coolant from the third coolant line [9] is fed back again into the conjoint coolant line [5] (¶ 0146 provides that the “the first motor 11, the second motor 11B, the first reducer 12, and the second reducer 12B share an oil pan 10 at the bottom. The oil pan 10 includes a reducer oil return port and a motor oil return port…” it has already been shown in the rejection of claim 2 that all of the oil from the oil pan 10 ends up in the conjoint coolant line 5 – still referring to the fig. 7A excerpt above).
Claims 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito in view of El-Antably (US 2002/0077209 A1).
With respect to claim 8/1, Ito teaches the arrangement of claim 1, but omits teaching a change-speed transmission comprising a first transmission portion with one or more shifting elements and a second transmission portion with at least one gearwheel set, wherein the second transmission is at least partially arranged inside the second rotor and the first transmission portion is arranged at least partially inside the first rotor.
El-Antably discloses a cooling arrangement for cooling an electric vehicle (¶ 0001 and 0015) comprising a first electric machine [delivery unit 18] comprising a first rotor [26], an output shaft [38/40], and a first stator [22] that surrounds the first rotor peripherally, a second electric machine [delivery unit 20] comprising a second rotor [30] and a second stator [28] surrounding the second rotor peripherally, a first coolant circuit comprising a first coolant line [86/90A/90B/90C/92B/90D] and a second coolant line [174], wherein the second electric machine [20] has a conjoint housing [24] which forms a casing for the firs electric machine [18] and the second electric machine [20].
PNG
media_image7.png
473
746
media_image7.png
Greyscale
El-Antably teaches a first transmission portion [planetary subset 32] with one or more shifting elements [planet gear 60] and a second transmission portion [third planetary subset 36] with at least one gearwheel set (¶ 0034 recites “rotating members in the planetary gear subsets 32, 34, and 36…”), wherein the second transmission [36] is at least partially arranged inside the second rotor [30] and the first transmission portion [32] is arranged at least partially inside the first rotor [26] (see ¶ 0033).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the arrangement of Ito, while utilizing a change-speed transmission with a transmission portion inside of each rotor, wherein each rotor contains a hollow space for accommodating the transmission portion, as taught by El-Antably, in order to better utilize space within the arrangement, effectively obviating external gearing and allowing the transmission to be cooled and lubricated by the shaft coolant line.
With respect to claim 10/8/1, Ito in view of El-Antably teaches the arrangement of claim 8, Ito further teaches wherein the first stator [52] has first winding heads [coil ends 98a and 98b] (see ¶ 0056-0057 -- see new annotated excerpt of fig. 8 below, wherein the Examiner has labeled the first and second winding heads) at each of its ends and the second stator [52] has second winding heads at each of its ends, so that the first coolant path [70/81] after cooling the first rotor [51] flows under the action of centrifugal force produced by the rotation (see ¶ 0051 which recites “the second cooling mechanism 42 cools the rotor 51 from the inside and discharges the coolant after cooling the rotor 51 to the radially outside from the discharge ports 84 by centrifugal force such that the stator coil 92 is cooled from the inner circumferential side of the stator 52…”) to the first winding heads (see arrows), thereby cooling the first winding heads (see last citation wherein stator coil 92 is cooled and also ¶ 0067-0071) of the first stator [52], and the second cooling path [102/81], after cooling the second rotor [51], flows under the action of the centrifugal force to the second winding heads [90a/90b], thereby cooling the second winding heads [90a/90b] of the second stator [52] (the citation from ¶ 0051 is taken as applying to the second stator/rotor too – see also ¶ 0067-0071).
PNG
media_image8.png
620
1167
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito in view of Hara (US 6,323,613 B1).
With respect to claim 19/1, Ito teaches the arrangement of claim 1, Ito further teaches a vehicle cooling assembly (see ¶ 0002-0003) with the cooling arrangement of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), but Ito does not teach a separate second coolant circuit having a second coolant, wherein in the second coolant circuit at least two power electronics units are arranged, wherein the two power electronics units are configured to drive the first electric machine and the second electric machine respectively, and a heat exchanger arranged in the second coolant circuit after the at least two power electronics units so that the at least two power electronics are cooled first.
Hara discloses a cooling arrangement for cooling an electric vehicle (col. 1, lines 6-10) comprising a first electric machine [G] comprising a first rotor [32] and an output shaft [31], and a first stator [30] that surrounds the first rotor peripherally, a second electric machine [M] comprising a second rotor [22] and a second stator [20] surrounding the second rotor peripherally, a first coolant circuit [circulation passage L] comprising a first coolant line (labeled by the Examiner in the annotated fig. 6 excerpt attached below, and which passes into shaft 31) and a second coolant line (also labeled and which cools the stators 30/20), wherein the second electric machine [M] has a conjoint housing [10] which forms a casing for the first electric machine [G] and the second electric machine [M].
PNG
media_image9.png
451
804
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Hara teaches a separate second coolant circuit [F] having a second coolant (see abstract), wherein in the second coolant circuit [F] at least two power electronics units [inverters U] (see col. 4, lines 26-36, wherein the inverter of fig. 1 is introduced, and then also col. 6, line 60 through col. 7, line 24) are arranged, wherein the at least two power electronics units [U] are configured to drive the first electric machine and the second electric machine respectively {col. 7, lines 26-38 recite, with respect to fig. 7, “inverter U’ for the motor and inverter U” for the generator (collectively, inverter U)”}, and a heat exchanger [collectively C in fig. 1 and the abstract, but including components 13, 13a, 12, c1, c2, c3, c4 as shown in fig. 6) arranged in the second coolant circuit [F] after the at least two power electronics units [U] (see arrows which indicate the coolant flow) so that the at least two power electronics [U] are cooled first (the Examiner is interpreting “first” as meaning that the power electronics are cooled before the electric machines, see rejections of claim 19 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) above – see col. 7, lines 9-24).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the arrangement of Ito, while incorporating a second coolant circuit comprising a heat exchanger and power electronics, as taught by Hara, in order to simplify the coolant circuit (Hara abstract) and in order to cool an inverter (inverters) simultaneously with the motor (electric machines), while preventing the temperature of the coolant from rising above the heat tolerance of the inverter (Hara col. 3, lines 23-32).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 9, and 12-15 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 claims and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 7, the prior art of record does not teach or reasonably suggest, inter alia, a cooling arrangement for cooling a hybrid vehicle or an electrically powered vehicle, the cooling arrangement comprising:
a first electric machine, wherein the first electric machine comprises a first rotor mounted to rotate about a rotation axis and a drive output shaft, wherein the first rotor is arranged coaxially with the drive output shaft, and wherein the rotation axis defines an axial direction, and wherein the first rotor extends in the axial direction about the rotation axis, the first electric machine further comprising a first stator that surrounds the first rotor peripherally,
a second electric machine mounted axially close to the first electric machine, wherein the second electric machine comprises a second rotor mounted to rotate about the rotation axis, wherein the second rotor is mounted coaxially with the drive output shaft and wherein the second rotor extends in the axial direction about the rotation axis, the second electric machine further comprising a second stator that surrounds the second rotor peripherally;
a first coolant circuit having at least one first coolant line configured for cooling the first rotor and the second rotor and a second coolant line parallel to the first coolant line, the second coolant line configured for the separate cooling of the first stator and the second stator by means of the second coolant line;
wherein the second electric machine has a conjoint housing which forms a casing for the first electric machine and the second electric machine;
wherein the drive output shaft extends through the housing in the axial direction, and wherein the first electric machine and the second electric machine are arranged in the first coolant circuit which contains a first coolant for cooling the first electric machine and the second electric machine;
the cooling arrangement further comprising:
a plurality of through-going openings and/or apertures extending along the circumference of the shaft {see rejections of claim 7 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) above} and arranged between the first rotor and the second rotor, so that at least some of the coolant of the first coolant line, after being conveyed to the drive input shaft and to the outside thereof {see rejections of claim 7 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) above}, and after flowing through the plurality of through-going openings and/or apertures extending along the circumference of the shaft {see rejections of claim 7 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) above} between the first rotor and the second rotor, the first coolant line can be split up into a first lower coolant path for the cooling of the first rotor by the first lower coolant path, and into a second coolant path that flows in the direction opposite to the first coolant path for the cooling of the second rotor by the second lower coolant path.
Ito does not teach conducting the coolant along the circumference (or external surface) of the shaft such that it is split to travel in two directions, one path toward the first rotor and the other path toward the second rotor. US 20160172931 A1 (to Teets, see Conclusion section below), in fig. 2, teaches splitting coolant flow from a shaft feed hole in two opposite directions along multiple rotors, but Teets has structure that precludes its combination with Ito. The Examiner notes that there are other references, cited in PTO Form 892 herein or not, teaching coolant exiting a radial shaft-outlet-hole and traveling axially in both axial directions along the external surface of the shaft. However, the Examiner cannot find much evidence (other than references like Teets) of this being done in a cooling arrangement for two electric machines having two rotors on the same shaft, and does not believe there are grounds for alleging that the various such references teaching splitting the shaft-outlet-flow axially reasonably suggest modifying Ito in such a way as to read on claim 7.
Examiner Warning: It is noted that the Examiner has liberally attempted to take all the subject matter of claim 7 into account in determining allowability, even though the claim is replete with instances of indefiniteness {see rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) above}. In the event that Applicant combines claims 1 and 7 into a single independent claim to pursue this indication of allowability, Applicant is requested to be very careful to clarify claim 7’s limitations such that they are all clear/unambiguous, and to not use the opportunity of “clarifying” to renege on the full scope of claim 7. If during the combination of claims 1 and 7, the scope of claim 7 is broadened such that the amended independent claim can be rejected by the Office, the rejection will be final.
Regarding claim 9, the prior art of record does not teach or reasonably suggest, inter alia, a cooling arrangement for cooling a hybrid vehicle or an electrically powered vehicle, the cooling arrangement comprising:
a first electric machine, wherein the first electric machine comprises a first rotor mounted to rotate about a rotation axis and a drive output shaft, wherein the first rotor is arranged coaxially with the drive output shaft, and wherein the rotation axis defines an axial direction, and wherein the first rotor extends in the axial direction about the rotation axis, the first electric machine further comprising a first stator that surrounds the first rotor peripherally,
a second electric machine mounted axially close to the first electric machine, wherein the second electric machine comprises a second rotor mounted to rotate about the rotation axis, wherein the second rotor is mounted coaxially with the drive output shaft and wherein the second rotor extends in the axial direction about the rotation axis, the second electric machine further comprising a second stator that surrounds the second rotor peripherally;
a first coolant circuit having at least one first coolant line configured for cooling the first rotor and the second rotor and a second coolant line parallel to the first coolant line, the second coolant line configured for the separate cooling of the first stator and the second stator by means of the second coolant line;
wherein the second electric machine has a conjoint housing which forms a casing for the first electric machine and the second electric machine;
wherein the drive output shaft extends through the housing in the axial direction, and wherein the first electric machine and the second electric machine are arranged in the first coolant circuit which contains a first coolant for cooling the first electric machine and the second electric machine;
the cooling arrangement further comprising a change-speed transmission comprising a first transmission portion with one or more shifting elements and a second transmission portion with at least one gearwheel set, wherein the second transmission portion is at least partially arranged inside the second rotor and the first transmission portion is arranged at least partially inside the first rotor;
further wherein the through-going openings that extend in the circumferential direction are located between the first rotor and the second rotor, so that at least some of the coolant of the first coolant line is split off from the outside of the drive output shaft into a first lower coolant path for cooling the first transmission portion, wherein after cooling the first transmission portion the first lower coolant path flows to the first rotor for the cooling of the first rotor by the first lower coolant path, and in addition into a second lower coolant path that flows in the direction opposite to the first lower coolant path for the cooling of the second rotor by the second lower coolant path.
Ito teaches the coolant split off from the drive output shaft into a first lower coolant path for cooling the first rotor and the second rotor. El-Antably teaches the coolant split off from the drive output shaft into a first lower coolant path for cooling the first transmission portion. However, the Examiner can find no direct evidence in El-Antably that the coolant, after cooling the first transmission portion, passes to the rotor for cooling the rotor. In the event that the first transmission portion of El-Antably can be considered as part of the first rotor and the teaching could be considered inherent, there is simply no reason to believe the prior art teaches or suggests this coolant going to a second path to flow in a direction opposite the first path for cooling the second rotor.
The Examiner directs Applicant to the “Examiner Warning” above (in the indication of allowability of claim 7) which applies in the case of claim 9, but will not be repeated here.
Regarding claim 12, and claims 13-15 which depend therefrom, the prior art of record does not teach or reasonably suggest, inter alia, a cooling arrangement for cooling a hybrid vehicle or an electrically powered vehicle, the cooling arrangement comprising:
a first electric machine, wherein the first electric machine comprises a first rotor mounted to rotate about a rotation axis and a drive output shaft, wherein the first rotor is arranged coaxially with the drive output shaft, and wherein the rotation axis defines an axial direction, and wherein the first rotor extends in the axial direction about the rotation axis, the first electric machine further comprising a first stator that surrounds the first rotor peripherally,
a second electric machine mounted axially close to the first electric machine, wherein the second electric machine comprises a second rotor mounted to rotate about the rotation axis, wherein the second rotor is mounted coaxially with the drive output shaft and wherein the second rotor extends in the axial direction about the rotation axis, the second electric machine further comprising a second stator that surrounds the second rotor peripherally;
a first coolant circuit having at least one first coolant line configured for cooling the first rotor and the second rotor and a second coolant line parallel to the first coolant line, the second coolant line configured for the separate cooling of the first stator and the second stator by means of the second coolant line;
wherein the second electric machine has a conjoint housing which forms a casing for the first electric machine and the second electric machine;
wherein the drive output shaft extends through the housing in the axial direction, and wherein the first electric machine and the second electric machine are arranged in the first coolant circuit which contains a first coolant for cooling the first electric machine and the second electric machine;
wherein the first stator has a first stator upper side facing toward the housing and the second stator has a second stator upper side facing toward the housing, wherein the first stator upper side has a plurality of first stator ducts which extend parallel to the rotational axis and are distributed over an axial length of the first stator and around the circumference of the first stator {see rejections of claim 12 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) above}, and the first stator ducts each have radially through-going first inlet openings in the first stator upper side, and the second stator upper side has a plurality of second stator ducts which extend parallel to the rotational axis and are distributed over an axial length of the second stator and around the circumference of the second stator, and the second stator ducts each have radially through-going second inlet openings in the second stator upper side, and in addition at least one distributor duct is provided for conveying coolant from the first coolant circuit as a second coolant line, wherein the distributor duct is arranged in the housing and extends both to the first inlet openings and to the second inlet openings, in order to distribute coolant from the second coolant line to the first inlet openings as a first upper coolant path and to the second inlet openings as a second coolant path.
Fig. 2 of Teets (ref. #65), fig. 1 of El-Antably (ref. #174), and fig. 7A of Yang (ref. #16), as well as several other references reviewed by the Examiner during search and consideration, teach some type of distributor duct feeding coolant to the first and second axially-adjacent stators from an area axially between them. Also, there are many references in the relevant arts that teach stators having outer sides with stator ducts and inlet openings to the ducts that can be fed by a distributor for conveying coolant from a coolant line, but there is no evidence that the Examiner has seen that suggests providing a distributor distributing coolant simultaneously to duct-openings in axially-adjacent stators from said between-space. A person of ordinary skill in the art, provided the references cited in PTO Form 892, could make the device of claim 12, but the Examiner believes it would require hindsight reasoning, or more-than-ordinary skill in the art, to pick-and-choose the relevant tools in the cited prior art to create the specific arrangement of claim 12.
The Examiner directs Applicant to the “Examiner Warning” above (in the indication of allowability of claims 7 and 9) which applies in the case of claim 12, but will not be repeated here.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Fig. 2 of Teets (US 2016/0172931 A1) was discussed in the indication of allowability of claims 7 and 12 above.
PNG
media_image10.png
433
656
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Figs. 1-2 of US 6,022,287 A teach an electric vehicle drive comprising two electrical machines each with a rotor and a stator, wherein there are coolant channels in the shaft and planetary transmission elements (with cooling) located at least partially within the rotors.
PNG
media_image11.png
375
579
media_image11.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image12.png
403
627
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL K SCHLAK whose telephone number is (703)756-1685. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:30 am - 6:00 pm 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, Seye Iwarere can be reached at (571) 270 - 5112. 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.
/Daniel K Schlak/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/OLUSEYE IWARERE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834