CTNF 18/687,603 CTNF 98060 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 statement (IDS) submitted on05/12/2026 i s/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement are being considered by the examiner. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see page 6, filed 02/10/2026, with respect to the 35 USC 112(b) rejection of claim 2, and the claim objection of claims 4 and 6 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 USC 112(b) rejection of claim 2, and the claim objection of claims 4 and 6 have been withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments, with respect to the number of lightening holes and pole pairs being different has been fully considered and are persuasive. The concept of providing a rotor with a different number of pole pairs versus lightening holes is concept well-known within the art or the claimed invention as demonstrated by Yamashita in the office action below. Regarding applicant’s argument that Tanaka fails to disclose “two permanent magnets and three teeth…as a basic unit” because Tanaka includes sixty teeth is not found persuasive. The claim language does not require the motor to contain only three teeth total. Rather, the claim recites a repeating basic unit relationship between permanent magnets and adjacent teeth in the circumferential direction. Tanaka’s rotor and stator arrangement establishes repeating circumferential groupings of permanent magnets and teeth corresponding to the claimed basic unit relationship. Therefore, Tanaka teaches or at least suggests the claimed limitation. Applicant’s argument that Tanaka fails to explicitly disclose lightening holes centered at intermediate positions between adjacent permanent magnets has been considered but is not persuasive. Tanaka teaches circumferentially extending lightening holes positioned relative to permanent magnets for controlling magnetic flux characteristics and educing rotor weight. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to reposition Tanaka’s lightening hole ssuch that the circumferential centers of the lightening holes align with intermediate circumferential positions between adjacent permanent magnets as a predictable variation for optimizing magnetic flux leakage paths, improving air-gap flux utilization, and adjusting rotor magnetic characteristics. Furthermore, Yamashita teaches a rotor configuration in which the number of lightening holes differs from the number of magnetic pole pairs. Accordingly, the combination of Tanaka and Yamashita teaches or suggests all limitations of claim 1 and 3. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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, 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being unpatentable over Tanaka (US2015061443A1) in view of Yamashita (US 20200014278 A1). Claim 1 Tanaka teaches: A permanent magnet synchronous motor rotor (2) comprising: a rotor (2); and a stator (4) which is provided to surround an outer periphery of the rotor (2), wherein the rotor (2) includes: a rotor core (10); a shaft (3) which is disposed inside the rotor core (10) and extends in an axial direction; and a plurality of permanent magnets (80, 90) which are provided in the rotor core (10), the stator (4) includes: a core back (5); and a plurality of teeth (7) which protrude inward in a radial direction from the core back (5), a number of the plurality of permanent magnets (80, 90) and a number of the plurality of teeth (7) are set with two permanent magnets (a selective two adjacent magnets 80, 90) and three teeth (a selective corresponding three of the plurality of teeth 7) which are adjacent in a circumferential direction as a basic unit, the rotor core (10) is provided with at least one lightening hole (40); PNG media_image1.png 752 614 media_image1.png Greyscale Tanaka is silent to teaching: a number of the at least one lightening hole is different from a number of pole pairs of the plurality of permanent magnets. Yamashita conversely teaches a permanent magnet synchronous motor rotor (13), wherein the rotor (13) comprises eight lightening holes (32), and four magnetic poles pairs (40). PNG media_image2.png 550 468 media_image2.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the claimed invention to modify Tanaka’s rotor to employ a number of lightening holes different from the number of pole pairs, as taught by Yamashita, in order to further reduce rotor weight, adjust rotor rigidity, improve mechanical balance, and/or optimize magnetic flux characteristics while maintaining sufficient structural integrity. Claim 2 Tanaka as modified by Yamashita teaches: The permanent magnet synchronous motor (1) according to claim 1, wherein each lightening hole (40) extends in the circumferential direction and is disposed such that a center (C1) of the lightening hole (40) in the circumferential direction and a center (C2) of a corresponding one of the permanent magnets (80) in the circumferential direction coincide with each other in the circumferential direction. PNG media_image3.png 752 614 media_image3.png Greyscale Claim 5 Tanaka as modified by Yamashita teaches: The permanent magnet synchronous motor (1) according to claim 1, wherein each lightening hole (40) is formed symmetrically with respect to a line (L1) connecting an axis of the shaft (3) and a center (C2) of the lightening hole (40) in the circumferential direction. PNG media_image4.png 656 756 media_image4.png Greyscale Claim 6 Tanaka as modified by Yamashita teaches: The permanent magnet synchronous motor (1) according to claim 1, wherein the rotor core (10) includes a plurality of core plates stacked (as illustrated in Fig. 1B) in the axial direction, and the rotor core (10) is provided with a positioning hole (20) which adjusts positions of the plurality of core plates. PNG media_image5.png 554 788 media_image5.png Greyscale Claim 10/1 The permanent magnet synchronous motor according to claim 1, wherein the at least one lightening hole (40) is formed in an arc shape along the circumferential direction. Claim 11/1 The permanent magnet synchronous motor according to claim 1, further comprising: a plurality of lightening holes (40), wherein the plurality of lightening holes are arranged at equal intervals in the circumferential direction, and the plurality of lightening holes have the same shape. Claim 12/1 The permanent magnet synchronous motor according to claim 1, wherein the at least one lightening hole (40) is disposed on an inside of the permanent magnet (80, 90) in a radial direction. 07-21-aia AIA Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka as modified by Yamashita . Claim 3 Tanaka as modified by Yamashita teaches: The permanent magnet synchronous motor (1) of the first embodiment according to claim 1, but is silent to: wherein each lightening hole extends in the circumferential direction and is disposed such that a center of the lightening hole in the circumferential direction and an intermediate position of permanent magnets, of the plurality of permanent magnets, adjacent to each other in the circumferential direction coincide with each other in the circumferential direction. Tanaka conversely provides an embodiment of their permanent magnet synchronous motor wherein the lightening hole (40 of the second embodiment) is narrower compared to that illustrated in the first embodiment and extends in the circumferential direction and is disposed such that a center (C2) of the lightening hole (40 of the second embodiment) in the circumferential direction and an intermediate position of permanent magnets (80, 90), of the plurality of permanent magnets (80, 90), adjacent to each other in the circumferential direction coincide with each other in the circumferential direction. PNG media_image6.png 778 676 media_image6.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Tanaka’s lightening holes such that the lightening hole extends in the circumferential direction and is disposed such that a center of the lightening hole in the circumferential direction and an intermediate position of permanent magnets, of the plurality of permanent magnets, adjacent to each other in the circumferential direction coincide with each other in the circumferential direction. Such a modification would be advantageous in effectively reducing the amount of magnetic flux that leaks through the iron ribs, thus making more flux available in the air gap for energy conversion . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4, 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka as modified by Yamashita in view of Wang (CN 102593985 A) . Claim 4/2/1 Tanaka as modified by Yamashita teaches: The permanent magnet synchronous motor according to claim 2, wherein the plurality of permanent magnets (80, 90) are arranged at equal intervals in the circumferential direction, but does not explicitly disclose: and when a separation angle around an axis of the shaft between both ends of the lightening hole in the circumferential direction is o and a separation angle around the axis of the shaft between the centers of permanent magnets, of the plurality of permanent magnets, adjacent to each other in the circumferential direction is β in a cross-section orthogonal to the axial direction, the lightening hole is provided to satisfy β≤α≤3β. Although Tanaka does not explicitly state a relationship between the dimensions of their lightening hole (40) position relative to the permanent magnets (80, 90) position in the manner of the limitation above, it is at least clear that a dimension of the lightening hole “α” (indicating the angular span of the lightening hole in the circumferential direction) is less than three times a dimension “β” (indicating the angular span between the centers of two circumferentially adjacent permanent magnets 80 and 90) as seen in Fig. 2. This thus satisfies one half of the expression above where α≤3β. The remaining half of the expression above however where β≤α, is not clearly illustrated in Fig. 2. In order to clearly illustrated said half of the expression above, either the angular positioning of the permanent magnets relative to their adjacent magnets must be narrowed or the angular span of the lightening holes must be increased. Wang conversely teaches the latter, wherein the angular span of a lightening hole (003) may be adjusted to be greater than the angular span between the centers of two circumferentially adjacent permanent magnets (005). This can be seen in Wang’s modification of the rotor from Fig. 3 to the rotor of Fig. 4, where the angular span of the lightening holes (003) are increased. PNG media_image7.png 796 436 media_image7.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have optimized Tanaka’s lightening holes to widen further along the circumferential direction while reducing the number of lightening holes such that the lightening hole is provided to satisfy β≤α≤3β. An optimization of the lightening holes to such a configuration would be advantageous in improving weight reduction and enhancing heat dissipation (para. 0034). Claim 8/3/1 Tanaka as modified by Yamashita teaches: The permanent magnet synchronous motor according to claim 3, wherein the plurality of permanent magnets (80, 90) are arranged at equal intervals in the circumferential direction, but does not explicitly disclose: and when a separation angle around an axis of the shaft between both ends of the lightening hole in the circumferential direction is α and a separation angle around the axis of the shaft between the centers of the permanent magnets, of the plurality of permanent magnets, adjacent to each other in the circumferential direction is β in a cross-section orthogonal to the axial direction, the lightening hole is provided to satisfy β≤α≤3β. Although Tanaka does not explicitly state a relationship between the dimensions of their lightening hole (40) position relative to the permanent magnets (80, 90) position in the manner of the limitation above, it is at least clear that a dimension of the lightening hole “α” (indicating the angular span of the lightening hole in the circumferential direction) is less than three times a dimension “β” (indicating the angular span between the centers of two circumferentially adjacent permanent magnets 80 and 90) as seen in Fig. 2. This thus satisfies one half of the expression above where α≤3β. The remaining half of the expression above however where β≤α, is not clearly illustrated in Fig. 2. In order to clearly illustrated said half of the expression above, either the angular positioning of the permanent magnets relative to their adjacent magnets must be narrowed or the angular span of the lightening holes must be increased. Wang conversely teaches the latter, wherein the angular span of a lightening hole (003) may be adjusted to be greater than the angular span between the centers of two circumferentially adjacent permanent magnets (005). This can be seen in Wang’s modification of the rotor from Fig. 3 to the rotor of Fig. 4, where the angular span of the lightening holes (003) are increased. PNG media_image7.png 796 436 media_image7.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have optimized Tanaka’s lightening holes to widen further along the circumferential direction while reducing the number of lightening holes such that the lightening hole is provided to satisfy β≤α≤3β. An optimization of the lightening holes to such a configuration would be advantageous in improving weight reduction and enhancing heat dissipation (para. 0034). Claim 9/1 Tanaka as modified by Yamashita teaches: The permanent magnet synchronous motor according to claim 1, but is silent to teaching: wherein the number of the at least one lightening hole is smaller than the number of pole pairs of the plurality of permanent magnets. Wang teaches a rotor including sixteen circumferentially arranged permanent magnets (disposed within sixteen corresponding recesses) forming sixteen magnetic poles corresponding to eight magnetic pole pairs, and further teaches four lightening holes formed in the rotor core. PNG media_image8.png 582 638 media_image8.png Greyscale Accordingly, Wang teaches a configuration in which the number of lightening holes (4) is smaller than the number of magnetic pole pairs (8), as recited in claim 9. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Tanka in view of Wang to employ fewer lightening holes relative to the number of magnetic pole pairs in order to optimize rotor rigidity, reduce stress concentration within the rotor core, maintain structural integrity at higher rotational speeds, and/or tailor magnetic flux distribution while still achieving rotor weight reduction. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AHMED F SECK whose telephone number is (571)272-4638. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am - 4:30 pm. 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, Christopher Koehler can be reached at (571) 272-3560. 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 F SECK/Examiner, Art Unit 2834 /CHRISTOPHER M KOEHLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/687,603 Page 2 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/687,603 Page 3 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/687,603 Page 4 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/687,603 Page 5 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/687,603 Page 6 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/687,603 Page 7 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/687,603 Page 8 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/687,603 Page 9 Art Unit: 2834
Prosecution Insights