DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This Office Action is responsive to the Applicant's communication filed 29 February 2024. In view of this communication, claims 1-10 and 12-19 are now pending in the application.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) submitted on 29 February 2024 was/were filed before mailing of the first action on the merits. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Disclosure
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
Claim(s) 2-4, 6-7, 9, 14, and 16 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 2, 6-7, 9, 14, and 16, the phrase "in particular" 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).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamasaki et al. (JP 2018-198521 A), hereinafter referred to as “Yamasaki”.
Regarding claim 19, Yamasaki discloses a method for using a water impermeable air gap-facing protective barrier [25] of a stator [2] suitable for an electric machine of a type that comprises a stator [2], a rotor [1] and an air gap in-between (fig. 5; ¶ 0020, 0028, 0055-0068), the method comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
548
568
media_image1.png
Greyscale
using an air gap-facing protective barrier [25] of a stator [2] as a potting material barrier structure [21] for defining a permanently bonded barrier [25] for the potting material [21] (fig. 5; ¶ 0020-0024, 0056-0057); and
using the air gap-facing protective barrier [25] of the stator [2] to prevent the potting material [21] from coming into contact with a potting mold [202] during a manufacturing and potting process for the stator [2] (fig. 5; ¶ 0021, 0033, 0039).
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 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 5-8, 10, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sustersic et al. (WO 2019/151956 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Sustersic”, in view of Yamasaki.
Regarding claim 1, Sustersic discloses a stator [1] for an electric machine of a type that comprises a stator [1], a rotor [2] and an air gap [6] in-between, in particular an inner stator [1] for an outer rotor [2] motor (fig. 1-3; pages 4-5; the “electric motor presented comprises at least a bearing (3), a rotor (2), and a stator (1)”, “electromagnetic air gap (6)”), the stator [2] comprising:
a stator core [12] having a plurality of core teeth (fig. 1; page 6, “a ferromagnetic core with slots (12) where the winding is inserted”; teeth are formed between slots);
electromagnetic windings [10] arranged around the plurality of core teeth (fig. 1; page 6, “a ferromagnetic core with slots (12) where the winding is inserted”); and
PNG
media_image2.png
378
672
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a stator housing [13] comprising a recessed space [13r] which is open at an air gap-facing side of the stator [1], the recessed space [13r] accommodating the stator core [12] and the electromagnetic windings [10] (fig. 2; page 7).
Sustersic does not disclose a water impermeable protective barrier sealing the recessed space at the open air gap-facing side in a fluid-tight manner,
wherein the water impermeable protective barrier is permanently bonded to the electromagnetic windings and the plurality of core teeth by potting material provided in the recessed space.
Yamasaki discloses an electric machine comprising an inner stator [2] and an outer rotor [1] with an air gap in-between (fig. 5; ¶ 0020, 0028, 0055-0068); and
a water impermeable protective barrier [25] sealing the stator [2] at the open air gap-facing side in a fluid-tight manner (fig. 5; ¶ 0028),
wherein the water impermeable protective barrier [25] is permanently bonded to the electromagnetic windings [203] and the stator [2] by potting material [21] provided in the stator [2] (fig. 5; ¶ 0020-0024).
PNG
media_image1.png
548
568
media_image1.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 cover the outer surface of the stator of Sustersic, thereby sealing the recessed space, with a water impermeable protective barrier and a potting material as taught by Yamasaki, in order to improve the water- and dust-proof properties of the stator, thereby preventing deterioration (¶ 0038 of Yamasaki).
Regarding claim 5, Sustersic, in view of Yamasaki, discloses the stator [1] of claim 1, as stated above, wherein Yamasaki further discloses that the water impermeable protective barrier [25] comprises a flexible sleeve and/or is at least partly transparent (¶ 0028; Parylene is a type of ultra-thin and transparent polymer coatings).
Regarding claim 6, Sustersic, in view of Yamasaki, discloses the stator [1] of claim 1, as stated above, wherein Yamasaki further discloses that the water impermeable protective barrier [25] comprises a polymer sheet material, in particular a heat shrinkable polymer sheet material and/or an elastic polymer sheet material, or comprises stainless steel sheet material (¶ 0028; Parylene is a type of ultra-thin and transparent polymer coatings).
Regarding claim 7, Sustersic, in view of Yamasaki, discloses the stator [1] of claim 1, as stated above, wherein Yamasaki further discloses that the water impermeable protective barrier [25] seals the recessed space at the open-air gap-facing side by other means than the potting material [21], in particular by an adhesive (fig. 5; ¶ 0028; the barrier itself, rather than the potting material, provides the waterproof seal).
Regarding claim 8, Sustersic, in view of Yamasaki, discloses the stator [1] of claim 1, as stated above, wherein Yamasaki further discloses that the water impermeable protective barrier [25] contacts the stator housing [221] at opposing axial outer walls of the stator housing [221] (fig. 5; ¶ 0021), the recessed space [slots of the stator where the windings are disposed] being disposed between the outer walls and the water impermeable protective barrier [25] joined to the outer walls in a fluid-tight manner (fig. 5; ¶ 0028; the barrier covers the axial and radially-outer surfaces of the stator).
Regarding claim 10, Sustersic, in view of Yamasaki, discloses the stator [1] of claim 8, as stated above, wherein the electromagnetic windings [10] and the plurality of core teeth are accommodated fully within the recessed space [13r] (fig. 2), such that the outer walls of the stator housing [13] are of about equal height or higher than the plurality of core teeth and electromagnetic windings [10] in a radial direction with respect to an axis of rotation of the electric machine (fig. 2; the radially outward surfaces of the stator housing and stator core appear to be at the same radial distance from the axis).
Regarding claim 12, Sustersic discloses a method of manufacturing a stator [1] for an electric machine of a type that comprises a stator [1], a rotor [2] and an air gap [6] in-between, in particular a method of manufacturing an inner stator [1] for an outer rotor [2] motor (fig. 1-3; pages 4-5; the “electric motor presented comprises at least a bearing (3), a rotor (2), and a stator (1)”, “electromagnetic air gap (6)”), the method comprising:
providing an assembly comprising a stator housing [13] comprising in a recessed space [13r] a stator core [12] having core teeth (fig. 1; page 6, “a ferromagnetic core with slots (12) where the winding is inserted”; teeth are formed between slots) and electromagnetic windings [10] arranged around the core teeth (fig. 1; page 6, “a ferromagnetic core with slots (12) where the winding is inserted”), wherein the recessed space [13r] is open at an air gap-facing side of the stator [1] (fig. 2; page 7).
PNG
media_image2.png
378
672
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Sustersic does not disclose providing a water impermeable protective barrier and covering the recessed space at an open side; or permanently bonding the water impermeable protective barrier to the electromagnetic windings and the core teeth by introducing liquid potting material into the covered recessed space.
Yamasaki discloses a method of manufacturing an electric machine comprising an inner stator [2] and an outer rotor [1] with an air gap in-between (fig. 5; ¶ 0020, 0028, 0055-0068);
providing a water impermeable protective barrier [25] and covering the recessed space [slots] at an open side (fig. 5; ¶ 0028); and
permanently bonding the water impermeable protective barrier [25] to the electromagnetic windings [203] and the core teeth by introducing liquid potting material [21] into the covered recessed space [slots] (fig. 5; ¶ 0020-0024).
PNG
media_image1.png
548
568
media_image1.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 cover the outer surface of the stator of Sustersic, thereby sealing the recessed space, with a water impermeable protective barrier and a potting material as taught by Yamasaki, in order to improve the water- and dust-proof properties of the stator, thereby preventing deterioration (¶ 0038 of Yamasaki).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sustersic and Yamasaki as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ma (US 2021/0218392 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Ma”.
Regarding claim 9, Sustersic, in view of Yamasaki, discloses the stator of claim 1, as stated above.
Yamasaki does not disclose that the water impermeable protective barrier [25] at least partly comprises an adhesive bond-increasing surface finish, in particular a roughened surface finish, on a side facing the stator housing and/or Sustersic does not disclose that the stator housing [13] at least partly comprises an adhesive bond-increasing surface finish, in particular a roughened surface finish, on a side facing water impermeable the water impermeable protective barrier.
Ma discloses a stator housing [140] that at least partly comprises an adhesive bond-increasing surface finish, in particular a roughened surface finish, on a side facing a water impermeable protective barrier [410] (fig. 10; ¶ 0061, 0074; the “rough surface… enhancing the mechanical bonding force between the impregnated insulating medium and the ferromagnetic boundary”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the stator housing or the water impermeable protective barrier of Sustersic/Yamasaki having a rough surface finish as taught by Ma, in order to enhance the mechanical bonding force therebetween and thereby obtaining a better overall insulation performance, preventing the water and steam form being retained, and preventing a breathing phenomenon (¶ 0074 of Ma).
PNG
media_image3.png
386
630
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sustersic and Yamasaki as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Grubel et al. (US 2016/0156241 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Grubel”.
Regarding claim 13, Sustersic, in view of Yamasaki, discloses the method of claim 12, as stated above. Yamasaki further discloses the step of sealing the recessed space [slot] at the open side with the water impermeable protective barrier [25] in a fluid-tight manner, prior to introducing the potting material [21] (fig. 5; ¶ 0020-0024).
Yamasaki does not disclose using an adhesive.
Grubel discloses a method comprising the step of sealing a recessed space [20] at the open side with the water impermeable protective barrier [16] by using an adhesive (fig. 1, 3; ¶ 0043-0046; “adhesive joints”).
PNG
media_image4.png
340
298
media_image4.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 attach the water impermeable protective barrier of Sustersic/Yamasaki using an adhesive as taught by Grubel, in order to provide a better connection between the components (¶ 0020 of Grubel).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 15, and 17-18 is/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.
Claim(s) 2-4, 14 and 16 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 claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 2, and all claims dependent thereon, the prior art does not disclose, inter alia, the stator of claim 1, wherein a bond-increasing mesh-like material permeated by the potting material is provided between the plurality of core teeth and the water impermeable protective barrier, in particular the bond-increasing mesh-like material comprising a flexible sheet material, more particularly the bond-increasing mesh-like material comprises at least one filament containing comprising a roving layer and/or a steel mesh.
Regarding claim 14, and all claims dependent thereon, the prior art does not disclose, inter alia, the method of claim 12, further comprising covering the core teeth with a bond-increasing mesh-like material, in particular with flexible bond-increasing mesh-like sheet material, prior to the covering of the recessed space, in particular enveloping the electromagnetic windings and the core teeth on at least one of the two axial sides and on a radial side with respect to the an axis of rotation of the electric machine prior to the covering of the recessed space.
Regarding claim 15, and all claims dependent thereon, the prior art does not disclose, inter alia, the method of claim 12, wherein the water impermeable protective barrier comprises a flexible sleeve, and wherein the flexible sleeve is pulled over the recessed space for covering the recessed space.
While the prior art discloses various arrangements for sealing stators, it does not disclose an arrangement comprising the combination of a water impermeable protective barrier, a potting material, and a mesh material disposed between the two. Likewise, the prior art does not disclose the barrier comprising a flexible sleeve that is pulled over the recessed space. Thus, the inventions recited above, and shown in figures 4-5, are neither anticipated nor rendered obvious by the prior art.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Citation of Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Prior art:
Hopkins et al. (US 2019/0123620 A1) discloses a stator sealed with an encapsulating resin.
Carroll et al. (US 2018/0323674 A1) discloses a stator sealed with both an encapsulating resin and a water impermeable protective barrier between the stator and the rotor.
Calvert (US 2013/0069462 A1) discloses an inner stator opposed to an outer rotor across an air gap, a low friction coating provided in the air gap.
Hsieh et al. (US 2013/0020885 A1) discloses an inner stator opposed to an outer rotor across an air gap, the stator encapsulated in resin and separated from the rotor by a protective barrier.
Ueno et al. (US 2012/0062051 A1) discloses using roughened surfaces to improve contact between members.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Andrews whose telephone number is (571)270-7554. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday, 8:30am-3:00pm.
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, Oluseye 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Michael Andrews/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834