DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Amendment
Acknowledgement is made of Amendment filed August 26, 2026.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Specification is objected to because in paragraph [0034] of applicant’s specification filed 3/29/24, the recitation of “The secondary magnet 50 is in a substantially rectangular shape when viewed from the axial direction” does not accurately describe the applicant’s invention as shown in applicant’s figure 2. The term “rectangular shape” means a four-sided shape forming four 90° angles; and the applicant’s secondary magnet 50 in figure 2 does not form four 90° angles.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 13 is objected to as the term “rectangular shape” does not accurately describe the applicant’s invention as shown in figure 2 of the applicant’s drawings, as the secondary magnets 50 in figure 2 are not rectangular (i.e. do not form four 90° angles). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8, 9, 14, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka et al. (Japanese Patent Document No.: JP 2009261167 A) in view of Kayano et al. (US Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2015/0091407 A1) and Hazeyama et al. (US Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2015/0357870 A1).
For claim 1, Tanaka et al. disclose the claimed invention comprising: a plurality of magnetic pole parts (reference numeral 2A, figure 1) lined along a circumferential direction centered on the central axis line (see figure 1); and a rotor core (reference numeral 2) that supports the magnetic pole parts (reference numeral 2A) from one side of a radial direction (see figure 1), wherein the magnetic pole part includes: a main magnet (reference numeral 30A) whose magnetization direction is the radial direction (see figure 1); and secondary magnets (reference numerals 31A, 32A) whose magnetization directions are directions tilted in a circumferential direction with respect to the radial direction (see figure 1), the secondary magnets (reference numerals 31A, 32A) being disposed symmetrically with each other on an outer side of the main magnet (reference numeral 30A) in the circumferential direction (see figure 1), the main magnet has: a main magnet supported face (i.e. side of main magnet 30A facing rotor core 2) that faces one side of the radial direction (see figure 1); and a pair of main magnet side faces (i.e. sides of main magnet 30A facing the circumferential direction) that face an outer side in the circumferential direction (see figure 1), the secondary magnet has: a first side face (i.e. side of secondary magnets 31A, 32A that contact the main magnet 30A) that opposes and contacts the main magnet side face in the circumferential direction (see figure 1); and a second side face (i.e. sides of secondary magnets 31A, 32A that face away from main magnet 30A) that faces an opposite side of the first side face in the circumferential direction (see figure 1), and the rotor core (reference numeral 2) has: a first support face (i.e. surface of rotor core 2 contacting the main magnet 30A) that supports the main magnet supported face (see figure 1). Tanaka et al. however do not specifically disclose the first side face and the second side face approaching each other as going toward the one side of the radial direction; and the rotor core having a second support face that supports the second side face, wherein a magnetization direction of the secondary magnet is approximately orthogonal to the second support face.
Kayano et al. disclose the first side face (i.e. side of secondary magnet 11B1 adjacent to wall portion 15a, see figure 12) and the second side face (i.e. side 16a of secondary magnet 11B1, see figure 12) approaching each other as going toward the one side of the radial direction (see figure 12); and Kayano et al. also disclose the rotor core (reference numeral 6B in figure 12) having a second support face (i.e. surface of rotor core 6B contacting side 16a, see figure 12) that supports the second side face (reference numeral 16a, see figure 12). Hazeyama et al. disclose a magnetization direction of the secondary magnet being approximately orthogonal to the second support face (see figure 20 of Hazeyama et al., also see annotated figure below of Hazeyama et al.).
PNG
media_image1.png
732
1156
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 have the first side face and the second side face approaching each other in the radial direction and also have the second support face for the rotor core as disclosed by Kayano et al. for the secondary magnets and rotor core of Tanaka et al., and also to have the magnetization direction of the secondary magnet be approximately orthogonal to the second support face as disclosed by Hazeyama et al. for the secondary magnet of Tanaka et al., for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal performance in the device (also see Kayano et al.'s paragraph [0008]).
For claim 2, Tanaka et al. in view of Kayano et al. and Hazeyama et al. disclose the claimed invention except for part of the second side face being disposed on the one side of the main magnet supported face in the radial direction. Kayano et al. further disclose part of the second side face (reference numeral 16a, figure 12) which can be considered to be disposed on the one side of the main magnet supported face (i.e. radially inner side of main magnet 10) in the radial direction (i.e. second side face 16a being on one side of the radially inner side of main magnet 10, see figure 12), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the second side face be on one side of the main magnet as disclosed by Kayano et al. for the main magnet supported face of Tanaka et al. in view of Kayano et al. and Hazeyama et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal performance in the device.
For claim 3, Tanaka et al. in view of Kayano et al. and Hazeyama et al. disclose the claimed invention except for, when viewed from an axial direction, in the secondary magnet, a second dimension in a face direction of the second side face being larger than a first dimension in a normal direction of the second side face. Having certain dimensions for the secondary magnet would merely involve adjusting the size of the secondary magnet which is a known skill as exhibited by Kayano et al. (i.e. magnets 21, 11, 24, 31, see figures 17-20), which when applied to the secondary magnets of Tanaka et al. in view of Kayano et al. and Hazeyama et al. would disclose a second dimension in a face direction of the second side face being larger than a first dimension in a normal direction of the second side face. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust the size of the magnets as disclosed by Kayano et al. for the secondary magnets of Tanaka et al. in view of Kayano et al. and Hazeyama et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal performance in the device.
For claim 4, Tanaka et al. in view of Kayano et al. and Hazeyama et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the second side face being a flat face that is orthogonal to the magnetization direction of the secondary magnet. Hazeyama et al. further disclose the second side face being a flat face that is orthogonal to the magnetization direction of the secondary magnet (i.e. the second support face shown in the annotated figure above of Hazeyama et al. also can be considered the second side face of the secondary magnet, shown to be a flat face orthogonal to the magnetization direction of the secondary magnet), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the second side face be a flat face that is orthogonal to the magnetization direction of the secondary magnet as disclosed by Hazeyama et al. for the secondary magnet of Tanaka et al. in view of Kayano et al. and Hazeyama et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal performance in the device.
For claim 5, Tanaka et al. in view of Kayano et al. and Hazeyama et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the magnetization direction of the secondary magnet being within a range of 45°±5° with respect to the radial direction. Having a particular range for the magnetization direction of the secondary magnet would merely involve being able to adjust the magnetization direction for the magnet which is a known skill as exhibited by Hazeyama et al. which disclose magnetization directions being adjusted for the magnets (reference numerals 43a, 43b, 43d, 43e, see figure 20), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the different magnetization directions as disclosed by Hazeyama et al. so that a particular range can be attained for the magnetization direction of the secondary magnet for Tanaka et al. in view of Kayano et al. and Hazeyama et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal performance in the device.
For claim 6, Tanaka et al. disclose the main magnet (reference numeral 30A, figure 1) having a main magnet opposing face (i.e. side of main magnet 30A that is facing radially outward, figure 1) that faces another side of the radial direction and opposes the stator (i.e. stator 200 as illustrated in figure 12), the secondary magnet (reference numerals 31A, 32A, figure 1) has a secondary magnet opposing face (i.e. side of secondary magnets 31A, 32A that are facing radially outward, figure 1) that faces the other side of the radial direction and opposes the stator (i.e. stator 200 as illustrated in figure 12), and both the main magnet opposing face (i.e. side of main magnet 30A that is facing radially outward, figure 1) and the secondary magnet opposing face (i.e. side of secondary magnets 31A, 32A that are facing radially outward, figure 1) are inscribed in a virtual circle centered on the central axis line (i.e. a virtual circle can be disposed around the radially outer surface of rotor 1A, see figure 1).
For claim 8, Tanaka et al. disclose the stator (i.e. see figure 12, reference numeral 200) opposing the rotor (reference numeral 300A, see figure 12), i.e. a rotating electrical machine comprising: the rotor according to claim 1; and the stator that opposes the rotor.
For claim 9, Tanaka et al. disclose the pair of main magnet side faces (i.e. side faces of main magnet 30A contacting secondary magnets 31A, 32A, see figure 1) being flat faces that extend along the radial direction and being parallel to each other (see figure 1).
For claim 14, Tanaka et al. disclose the first side face (face of secondary magnets 31A, 32A contacting the main magnet 30A, figure 1) and the main magnet side face (face of main magnet 30A contacting the secondary magnets 31A, 32A, see figure 1) being in contact with each other without a gap therebetween, such that a magnetic path passes directly between the secondary magnet (reference numerals 31A, 32A) and the main magnet (reference numeral 30A, see figure 1).
For claim 15, Tanaka et al. disclose each of the pair of main magnet side faces (face of main magnet 30A contacting the secondary magnets 31A, 32A, see figure 1) being in contact with the first side face of a corresponding one of the secondary magnets (i.e. face of secondary magnets 31A, 32A contacting the main magnet 30A, figure 1) that are disposed on both sides of the main magnet (reference numeral 30A) in the circumferential direction (see figure 1).
Claim(s) 7 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka et al. in view of Kayano et al. and Hazeyama et al. as applied to claims 1 and 6 above, and further in view of Iwami et al. (WIPO Document No.: WO 2013/008284 A1).
For claim 7, Tanaka et al. disclose the main magnet opposing face (i.e. radially outer side of the main magnet 30A, see figure 1) being an arc face whose curvature of radius is smaller than a radius of the virtual circle (radially outer side of the main magnet 30A can be considered to have a curvature of radius smaller than a virtual circle disposed around the outer surface of rotor 1A, see figure 1), but Tanaka et al. in view of Kayano et al. and Hazeyama et al. however do not specifically disclose the secondary magnet opposing face being a flat face that extends along a plane orthogonal to the radial direction. Having secondary magnets with a flat face on the radially outer side of the magnets is a known skill as exhibited by Iwami et al. (reference numeral 4, see figures 1, 3), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a flat face that extends along a plane orthogonal to the radial direction as disclosed by Iwami et al. for the secondary magnets of Tanaka et al. in view of Kayano et al. and Hazeyama et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal performance in the device.
For claim 10, Tanaka et al. in view of Kayano et al. and Hazeyama et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the main magnet supported face being a flat face that is orthogonal to the radial direction. Having a flat face for the main magnet supported face that is orthogonal to the radial direction is a known skill as exhibited by Iwami et al. (reference numeral 3, see figures 1, 3), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a flat face for the main magnet supported face as disclosed by Iwami et al. for the main magnet of Tanaka et al. in view of Kayano et al. and Hazeyama et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal performance in the device.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka et al. in view of Kayano et al. and Hazeyama et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tanaka et al. (US Patent No.: 9735636, hereinafter Tanaka ‘636).
For claim 12, Tanaka et al. in view of Kayano et al. and Hazeyama et al. disclose the claimed invention except for a part of the second support face adjacent to the first support face being recessed toward the one side of the radial direction with respect to the first support face. Having a second support face that is recessed toward one side of the radial direction with respect to a first support face would merely involve forming recessed portions on the adjacent face which is a known skill as exhibited by Tanaka ‘636 (reference numerals 67, 87, see figures 5-7), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the recessed portion as disclosed by Tanaka ‘636 for the second support face of Tanaka et al. in view of Kayano et al. and Hazeyama et al. for predictably providing desirable configuration for achieving optimal performance in the device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: While the prior art discloses some of the claimed invention as explained above in the present action, the prior art of record do not sufficiently disclose the combination of features including the main magnet side face that contacts the first side face and the second support face that supports the second side face being disposed in a V-groove shape that approaches toward the one side of the radial direction as recited in claim 11.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/26/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to applicant’s assertion that Hazeyama et al. do not disclose the claimed feature of the magnetization direction of the secondary magnet being approximately orthogonal to the second support face because Hazeyama houses the magnet blocks in magnet insertion apertures that pass through the rotor core and fixes the magnet blocks with adhesive, this is not persuasive since the surface of the rotor core that is supporting the secondary magnet is still shown to be orthogonal to the magnetization direction of the secondary magnet as shown in the annotated figure of Hazeyama et al. above in the present action.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX W MOK whose telephone number is (571)272-9084. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-4pm.
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.
/ALEX W MOK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights