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 .
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.
Claims 1,4-6,12-14 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shioda et al (JP2000346916).
As to claim 1, Shioda et al disclose a degradation determining apparatus as shown in figures 1 & 3 , comprising: an antenna (A1,A2) to receive an electromagnetic wave in a microwave frequency band emitted due to partial discharge occurring in an insulating member included in a motor (1), and generate a reception signal (S1,S2); and degradation determining circuitry (11) for determining whether any degradation occurs in the insulating member and identify/display by display unit (25) , the type of the degradation in the insulating member including at least one of a cause of the degradation in the insulating member or a position of the degraded insulating member (see paragraphs# 0024-0029). It is noted that Shioda et al do not explicitly mention about comparing a phase characteristic of a signal intensity of the reception signal with a phase characteristic pattern associated with a type of degradation in the insulating member, However, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to recognize that in the process of determining the degradation in the insulating member , the a phase characteristic of a signal intensity of the reception signal is compared with phase characteristic pattern associated with a type of degradation in the insulating member.
As to claim 4, Shioda et al disclsoe an insulation inspection device as mentioned in claim 1 but do not explicitly mention about the antenna includes a plurality of the antennas being planar antennas each oriented such that a surface of the antenna provided with antenna elements faces a corresponding motor of a plurality of the motors. However, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to provide more than one antennas for a plurality of motors for the purpose of determining the type of degradations in the insulating members of the motors. It is noted that duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced (see In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960)).
As to claim 5, Shioda et al disclose an insulation inspection device for motors as shown in figures 1 &3 having an antenna (A1,A2) to receive an electromagnetic wave in a microwave frequency band emitted due to partial discharge occurring in an insulating member included in a motor (1), and generate a reception signal; and a-degradation determining circuitry (11) to determine whether any degradation occurs in the insulating member and identify the type of the degradation in the insulating member including at least one of a cause of the degradation in the insulating member or a position of the degraded insulating member. Furthermore, it is well known in the art that the plurality of motors being configured to be fed with electric power from a common power conversion apparatus. It is noted that Shioda et al do not disclose a plurality of antennas to receive electromagnetic waves in a microwave frequency band emitted due to partial discharge occurring in insulating members included in a plurality of motors, and generate reception signals, the plurality of antennas being planar antennas each disposed adjacent to a corresponding motor of the plurality of motors and oriented such that a surface of the antenna provided with antenna elements faces the corresponding motor, the plurality of motors being configured to be fed with electric power from a common power conversion apparatus, and degradation determining circuitry to determine, based on a difference among signal values of the reception signals generated by the plurality of antennas, whether any degradation occurs in the insulating member. However, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to provide more than one antennas more than one motors and degradation determining circuitry for determining any degradation occurs in the insulating member in each of the motors, based on a difference among signal values of the reception signals generated by the plurality of antennas. Furthermore, it is noted that duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced (see In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960)).
As to claim 6, Shioda et al disclose the degradation determining apparatus of mentioned in claim 1 wherein the antenna (A1,A2) is mounted on an outer surface of a frame of the motor (1).
As to claim 12, Shioda et al disclose the degradation determining apparatus of mentioned in claim 5, wherein the antenna (A1,A2) is mounted on an outer surface of a frame of the motor (1).
As to claim 13, Shioda et al disclose the degradation determining apparatus of mentioned in claim 1, wherein the antenna (A1,A2) is mounted on an outer surface of a stator core (3) of the motor (1).
As to claim 14, Shioda et al disclose the degradation determining apparatus of mentioned in claim 5, wherein the antenna (A1,A2) is mounted on an outer surface of a stator core (3) of the motor (1).
As to claim 21, the apparatus of Shioda et al as mentioned in claims 1 and performs the method steps of claim 21.
A degradation determining method, comprising: comparing a phase characteristic of a signal intensity of a reception signal obtained by receiving an electromagnetic wave in a microwave frequency band emitted due to partial discharge occurring in an insulating member included in a motor with a phase characteristic pattern associated with a type of degradation in the insulating member; and determining whether any degradation occurs in the insulating member and identifying the type of the degradation in the insulating member including at least one of a cause of the degradation in the insulating member or a position of the degraded insulating member.
Claims 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shioda et al as
applied to claim 1,5 and 21 above, and further in view of Daus (Pat# 1,214,141).
As to claim 15, Shioda et al disclose an insulation inspection device as mentioned in claim 1, but Shioda et al do not mention about wherein the motor is installed under a floor of a railway.
Daus teaches that it would have been well known in the art to test a motor disposed on the railway (see column lines 62-68). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art install the motor and the insulation inspection device and each of the antenna of Shioda et al to adjacent to the corresponding motor under the floor of the railway vehicle as taught by Daus so that the insulation of the motor under the floor of the railway vehicle is inspected for the safety of the railway vehicle,
As to claim 16, Shioda et al disclose an insulation inspection device as mentioned in claim 5, but Shioda et al do not mention about the plurality of motors is installed under a floor of a railway vehicle and generates a propulsion of the railway vehicle, and each of the plurality of antennas is disposed adjacent to the corresponding motor under the floor of the railway vehicle.
Daus teaches that it would have been well known in the art to test railway motor (see column lines 62-68). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art install the plurality of motors and the insulation inspection device and each of the antenna of Shioda et al to adjacent to the corresponding motor, under the floor of the railway vehicle as taught by Daus so that the insulations of the motors under the floor of the railway vehicle is inspected for the safety of the railway vehicle,
As to claim 17, Shioda et al disclose an insulation inspection device as mentioned in claim 1, but Shioda et al do not mention about wherein the motor is installed in a railway vehicle
and generates a propulsion of the railway vehicle, and the antenna is disposed adjacent to rails on which the railway vehicle runs.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art install the motor of Shioda et al in a railway vehicle as taught by Daus for the purpose of inspecting the insulation defects of the motor in the railway vehicle. Furthermore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to disposed the antenna in the device of Shioda et al in view of Daus for the purpose of sending detected signals of the insulation of the motor to the inspection device of Shioda et al l in view of Daus.
As to claim 18, Shioda et al disclose an insulation inspection device as mentioned in claim 5, but Shioda et al do not mention about wherein the plurality of motors are installed in a railway vehicle and generates a propulsion of the railway vehicle, and the plurality of antennas is disposed adjacent to rails on which the railway vehicle runs.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art install the plurality of motors of Shioda et al in a railway vehicle as taught by Daus for the purpose of inspecting the insulation defects of the motor in the railway vehicle.
Furthermore, It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art install the plurality of antennas of Shioda et al adjacent to rails on which the railway vehicle runs for the purpose of sending detected signals of insulation of the motor to the inspection device of Shioda in view of Daus. antennas adjacent to the rails
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19-20 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.
The prior art does not disclose the motor is installed in a railway vehicle, and the degradation determining circuitry determines, based on the reception signal and a history of an operation condition of the motor, whether any degradation occurs in the insulating member, the operation condition including at least one of a running period of a power conversion apparatus that feeds electric power to the motor, a switching frequency of the power conversion apparatus, a rotational speed of the motor, a temperature of the motor, or an occupancy rate of a vehicle body provided with the motor in the railway vehicle as recited in claim 19.
The prior art does not disclose the plurality of motors are installed in a railway vehicle, and the degradation determining circuitry determines, based on the difference among signal values of the reception signals and a history of an operation condition of the plurality of motors, whether any degradation occurs in the insulating member, the operation condition including at least one of a running period of a power conversion apparatus that feeds electric power to the motor, a switching frequency of the power conversion apparatus, a rotational speed of the motor, a temperature of the motor, or an occupancy rate of a vehicle body provided with the motor in the railway vehicle as recited in claim 20.
Conclusion
Applicant's submission of an information disclosure statement under 37 CFR 1.97(c) with the timing fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(p) on 05/20/2026 prompted the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 609.04(b). 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Stowell (Pat# 11.555.761) disclose Sensors Incorporated Into Elastomeric Components To Detect Physical Characteristic Changes.
Slepchenkov et al (Pat# 11,827,115) disclose Systems, Devices, And Methods For Rail-based And Other Electric Vehicles With Modular Cascaded Energy Systems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VINH P NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1964. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:00am-4:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Phan Huy can be reached on 571-272-7924. 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.
/VINH P NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights