CTNF 18/701,974 CTNF 79371 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. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/5/24 is being considered by the examiner. Response to Amendment This office action is in response to preliminary amendment filed on 04/17/24. Regarding the amendment, claims 1-16 are present for examination. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 1-2, 5, 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Ikeda et al. (WO 2020066117 A1) . Regarding claim 1, Ikeda teaches a motor (1) that is an outer rotor motor, the motor comprising: a stator (4) including a stator core; a rotor (7) including a rotary shaft (3) and having an axis of the rotary shaft as a rotation center; and an electronic component (9-10), wherein the stator core (4) includes a stator body (4-5) including a shaft hole (5b) into which the rotary shaft (3) is inserted, and a plurality of teeth (not labeled, fig 5) provided in an end portion of the stator body (4), the stator body further includes a cavity portion (4a) different from the shaft hole (5b), and the electronic component (9-10) is disposed within the cavity portion (4a). Regarding claim 2, Ikeda teaches the cavity portion (4a) is a circle in plan view from an extending direction of the axis (fig 8). Regarding claim 5, Ikeda teaches the cavity portion (4a) is present on an imaginary straight line orthogonal to an extending direction of the axis and passing through one of the plurality of teeth and the axis (fig 5). Regarding claim 14, Ikeda teaches a bearing member (6a, 6b), wherein the bearing member (6a, 6b) is disposed within the shaft hole to hold the rotary shaft (3) of the rotor. Regarding claim 15, Ikeda teaches a blower (120) comprising the motor and a blade (51) fixed to the rotary shaft of the motor (fig 10) . 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 3-4, 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikeda . Regarding claims 3 and 4, Ikeda teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 1, except for the added limitation of the cavity portion is a polygon, or a quadrangle (claim 4) in plan view from an extending direction of the axis. An artisan would have ordinary skill in the art to configure the shape of the cavity portion is a polygon or a quadrangle (claim 4) in plan view from an extending direction of the axis to suitable fit in the stator core shape so that reducing weight of the motor. Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ikeda’s motor with the cavity portion is a polygon or and quadrangle (claim 4) in plan view from an extending direction of the axis as recited in the instant claim. Doing so would reduce weight of the motor so that reducing manufacturing cost because a change in size or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Regarding claim 12, Ikeda teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 1, except for the added limitation of the cavity portion and the shaft hole has a shortest distance of 5% or more of a diameter of the shaft hole. An artisan would have ordinary skill in the art to configure the cavity portion and the shaft hole has a shortest distance of 5% or more of a diameter of the shaft hole to suitable fit in the stator core shape so that reducing weight of the motor. Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ikeda’s motor with the cavity portion and the shaft hole has a shortest distance of 5% or more of a diameter of the shaft hole as recited in the instant claim. Doing so would reduce weight of the motor so that reducing manufacturing cost because it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Regarding claim 13, Ikeda teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 1, except for the added limitation of the cavity portion and an outer peripheral edge of the stator body has a shortest distance of 50% or more of a width of a tooth in a direction orthogonal to a protruding direction of the tooth. An artisan would have ordinary skill in the art to configure the cavity portion and an outer peripheral edge of the stator body has a shortest distance of 50% or more of a width of a tooth in a direction orthogonal to a protruding direction of the tooth to suitable fit in the stator core shape so that reducing weight of the motor. Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ikeda’s motor with the cavity portion and an outer peripheral edge of the stator body has a shortest distance of 50% or more of a width of a tooth in a direction orthogonal to a protruding direction of the tooth as recited in the instant claim. Doing so would reduce weight of the motor so that reducing manufacturing cost because it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 6-8, 10-11, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikeda in view of Dube (US 20040160141 A1) . Regarding claim 6, Ikeda teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 1, except for the added limitation of the stator body is provided with a plurality of cavity portions each being the cavity portion, and the electronic component is disposed inside one cavity portion of the plurality of cavity portions. Dube teaches an electric motor having a stator body (34) is provided with a plurality of cavity portions (62’) each being the cavity portion, and the electronic component (87) is disposed inside one cavity portion (62’) of the plurality of cavity portions to improve heat dissipation (para [0054]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ikeda’s motor with the stator body is provided with a plurality of cavity portions each being the cavity portion, and the electronic component is disposed inside one cavity portion of the plurality of cavity portions as taught by Dube. Doing so would improve heat dissipation (para [0054]). Regarding claim 7, Ikeda in view of Dube teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 6, Ikeda further teaches the stator body (4) has a line-symmetrical shape with respect to an imaginary straight line orthogonal to the axis in plan view from an extending direction of the axis (fig 8). Regarding claim 8, Ikeda in view of Dube teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 6, except for the added limitation of a total number of the plurality of cavity portions is a divisor of the number of the plurality of teeth. Dube further teaches an electric motor having a total number of the plurality of cavity portions (6) is a divisor of the number of the plurality of teeth (24, fig 3A) to improve heat dissipation (para [0054]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ikeda in view of Dube’s motor with a total number of the plurality of cavity portions is a divisor of the number of the plurality of teeth as further taught by Dube. Doing so would improve heat dissipation (para [0054]). Regarding claim 10, Ikeda in view of Dube teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 6, except for the added limitation of a plurality of electronic components each being the electronic component, wherein the plurality of cavity portions include a first cavity portion and a second cavity portion, the plurality of electronic components include a first electronic component and a second electronic component, the first electronic component is disposed within the first cavity portion, and the second electronic component is disposed within the second cavity portion. Dube further teaches an electric motor having a plurality of electronic components (87) each being the electronic component, wherein the plurality of cavity portions (62’) include a first cavity portion and a second cavity portion, the plurality of electronic components (87) include a first electronic component and a second electronic component, the first electronic component (87) is disposed within the first cavity portion (62’), and the second electronic component (87) is disposed within the second cavity portion (62’, fig 12) to improve heat dissipation (para [0054]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ikeda in view of Dube’s motor with a plurality of electronic components each being the electronic component, wherein the plurality of cavity portions include a first cavity portion and a second cavity portion, the plurality of electronic components include a first electronic component and a second electronic component, the first electronic component is disposed within the first cavity portion, and the second electronic component is disposed within the second cavity portion as further taught by Dube. Doing so would improve heat dissipation (para [0054]). Regarding claim 11, Ikeda in view of Dube teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 10, except for the added limitation of the first cavity portion and the second cavity portion has a distance of less than or equal to 50% of a diameter of the end portion of the stator body. An artisan would have ordinary skill in the art to configure the first cavity portion and the second cavity portion has a distance of less than or equal to 50% of a diameter of the end portion of the stator body to suitable fit in the stator core shape so that reducing weight of the motor. Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ikeda in view of Dube’s motor with the first cavity portion and the second cavity portion has a distance of less than or equal to 50% of a diameter of the end portion of the stator body as recited in the instant claim. Doing so would reduce weight of the motor so that reducing manufacturing cost because it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Regarding claim 16, Ikeda teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 15, except for the added limitation of a vehicle comprising the blower. Dube teaches a vehicle comprising the blower (para [0002]) to improve heat dissipation (para [0054]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ikeda’s vehicle having blower as taught by Dube. Doing so would improve heat dissipation (para [0054]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikeda in view of Dube, further in view of Chen (US 6,093,985 A) . Regarding claim 9, Ikeda in view of Dube teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 8, except for the added limitation of the total number of the plurality of cavity portions is a divisor of a total of magnetic poles of the rotor. Chen teaches a motor having 16 magnetic poles of rotor (50, fig 2), the total number of the plurality of cavity portions is a divisor of a total of magnetic poles of the rotor to provide a motor of light weight and with low fault, low rubbing damage and low noise (abstract). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ikeda in view of Dube’s motor with the total number of the plurality of cavity portions is a divisor of a total of magnetic poles of the rotor as taught by Chen. Doing so would provide a motor of light weight and with low fault, low rubbing damage and low noise (abstract) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ludwid et al. (US 2020/0119616 A1) teaches an electric drive for a motor vehicle, in particular a fan drive, comprising an electric motor that includes a rotor which is mounted on a motor shaft so as to be able to rotate about a stationary stator as well as a driving part which is coupled to the rotor, and at least one electroconductive cover part for influencing and/or blocking interfering electromagnetic fields generated during operation of the electric motor. Petersen (US 7,598,649 B2) teaches a vertical stator d.c. PM motor employs outer and inner working air gaps wherein the length of the inner working gap at any stator pole is greater than the corresponding length at the outer working gap. A mutual cancellation of detent torque between the outer and inner working gaps is promoted through an offsetting of the rotor magnetic regions. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEDA T PHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-5806. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00. 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 M 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. /LEDA T PHAM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/701,974 Page 2 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/701,974 Page 3 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/701,974 Page 4 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/701,974 Page 5 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/701,974 Page 6 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/701,974 Page 7 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/701,974 Page 8 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/701,974 Page 9 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/701,974 Page 11 Art Unit: 2834 Application/Control Number: 18/701,974 Page 12 Art Unit: 2834
Prosecution Insights