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 .
Response to Amendment
The preliminary amendment to the claims and specification dated 4/18/2024 is acknowledged. Claims 1 and 4-15 were amended.
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 3 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites the limitations "board-side terminal" and “stator-side terminal” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as the terms are disclosed in claim 2 but claim 3 depends on claim 1.
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.
Claims 1 and 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Japanese Patent No. H09-154260 to Mukaide et al. (hereinafter Mukaide; provided by Applicant on 4/18/2024) in view of WIPO Publication No. 2012/017646 to Kondo et al. (hereinafter Kondo).
Regarding claim 1, Mukaide teaches an electric motor (Paragraph [0001]) comprising:
a stator (FIG. 1, 1);
a rotor (FIG. 1, 4) disposed inside the stator and including a rotor core, a shaft (FIG. 1, 5) provided inside the rotor core, first and second bearings (see annotated FIG. 1) rotatably supporting the shaft;
a circuit board (FIG. 1, 11) facing the first bearing;
a board-side molded resin (FIG. 1, 3) covering at least part of the circuit board and including a first bearing housing (see annotated FIG. 1) holding the first bearing; and
a stator-side molded resin (FIG. 1, 2) that is a different component from the board-side molded resin, the stator-side molded resin covering at least part of the stator and including a second bearing housing (see annotated FIG. 1) holding the second bearing.
Mukaide does not explicitly teach the board-side molded resin being a non-conductive resin, and the stator-side molded resin being a non-conductive resin.
However, Kondo teaches a motor with a board-side molded resin and a stator-side molded resin being a non-conductive resin (Translation Page 12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electric motor of Mukaide with the non-conductive resin of Kondo to further insulate the components of the electric motor and prevent unwanted electrical conduction and damage.
PNG
media_image1.png
440
543
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Mukaide in view of Kondo teaches the electric motor according to claim 1, wherein Mukaide further teaches the first bearing housing including: a bottom surface facing the first bearing (see annotated FIG. 1); and an opening formed on an opposite side from the circuit board with the bottom surface in between in an axial direction (see annotated FIG. 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
530
390
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Mukaide in view of Kondo teaches the electric motor according to claim 1, wherein Mukaide further teaches the rotor core being provided between the first bearing and the second bearing (FIG. 1, 4).
Regarding claim 6, Mukaide in view of Kondo teaches the electric motor according to claim 1, wherein Kondo further teaches the board-side molded resin being a thermosetting resin, and the stator-side molded resin being a thermosetting resin (Translation Page 4).
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mukaide in view of Kondo and in further view of Japanese Patent No. 2016-025847 to Wang et al. (hereinafter Wang; provided by Applicant on 4/18/2024).
Regarding claim 2, Mukaide in view of Kondo teaches the electric motor according to claim 1, wherein Mukaide teaches the stator including a winding (Paragraph [0004]).
Mukaide does not teach a board-side terminal electrically connected to the circuit board, wherein the stator includes a stator-side terminal electrically connected to the winding, an end of the board-side terminal is exposed outside the board-side molded resin, and an end of the stator-side terminal is exposed outside the stator-side molded resin.
However, Wang teaches an electric motor with a board-side terminal (FIG. 4, 1b) electrically connected to a circuit board, wherein the stator includes a stator-side terminal (FIG. 4, 2c) electrically connected to a winding, and end of the board-side terminal being exposed outside the board-side molded resin, and an end of the stator-side terminal being exposed outside the stator-side molded resin (FIG. 4, center of portion 2d).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electric motor of Mukaide in view of Kondo with the exposed terminals of Wang to provide electrical communication between the circuit board and the stator winding to further increase the efficiency of operation of the electric motor.
Regarding claim 3, Mukaide in view of Kondo teaches the electric motor according to claim 1.
Mukaide in view of Kondo does not teach a lead wire that electrically connects the end of the board-side terminal and the end of the stator-side terminal.
However, Wang teaches an electric motor with a lead wire (FIG. 4, 2a) that electrically connects a board-side terminal (FIG. 4, 1b) and a stator-side terminal (FIG. 4, 2c).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electric motor of Mukaide in view of Kondo with the lead wire of Wang to provide electrical communication between the circuit board and the stator winding to further increase the efficiency of operation of the electric motor.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mukaide in view of Kondo and in further view of Japanese Patent No. H11-166500 to Umeda et al. (hereinafter Umeda; provided by Applicant on 4/18/2024).
Regarding claim 7, Mukaide in view of Kondo teaches the electric motor according to claim 1.
Mukaide in view of Kondo does not teach a resin provided between the rotor core and the shaft, wherein the shaft is spaced apart from the rotor core.
However, Umeda teaches a resin (FIG. 1, 10) provided between a rotor core (FIG. 1, 7) and a shaft (FIG. 1, 9), wherein the shaft is spaced apart from the rotor core (FIG. 1; 7, 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electric motor of Mukaide in view of Kondo with the shaft resin of Umeda as it would help prevent static charge buildup on the shaft which could damage other components.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mukaide in view of Kondo and in further view of Japanese Patent No. 2018-201294 to Yoshida (provided by Applicant on 4/18/2024).
Regarding claim 8, Mukaide in view of Kondo teaches the electric motor according to claim 1.
Mukaide in view of Kondo does not teach the board-side molded resin and the stator-side molded resin being assembled with each other by press fit.
However, Yoshida teaches a board-side molded resin (FIG. 2, 23) and a stator-side molded resin (FIG. 2, 22) being assembled with each other by press fit (FIG. 2, 232; Paragraph [0019]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electric motor of Mukaide in view of Kondo with the press fitting of Yoshida to provide a more secure physical connection between the stator and the board.
Claims 9-11 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mukaide in view of Kondo and in further view of Japanese Patent No. 2012-182957 to Maeyama et al. (hereinafter Maeyama; provided by Applicant on 4/18/2024).
Regarding claim 9, Mukaide in view of Kondo teaches the electric motor according to claim 1.
Mukaide in view of Kondo does not teach the board-side molded resin and the stator-side molded resin being combined with each other by a screw.
However, Maeyama teaches a board-side molded resin (FIG. 8, 70) and a stator-side molded resin (FIG. 8, 60) combined with each other by a screw (Paragraph [0026]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electric motor of Mukaide in view of Kondo with the screw of Maeyama to provide a more secure physical connection between the stator and the board.
Regarding claim 10, Mukaide in view of Kondo teaches the electric motor according to claim 1.
Mukaide in view of Kondo does not teach a female screw embedded in the stator-side molded resin; and a male screw to combine the board-side molded resin with the stator-side molded resin, wherein the male screw is fixed to the female screw.
However, Maeyama teaches a female screw (FIG. 8, 661) embedded in a stator-side molded resin (FIG. 8, 60); and a male screw to combine a board-side molded resin (FIG. 8, 70) with the stator-side molded resin, wherein the male screw is fixed to the female screw (Paragraph [0026]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electric motor of Mukaide in view of Kondo with the screw of Maeyama to provide a more secure physical connection between the stator and the board.
Regarding claim 11, Mukaide in view of Kondo teaches the electric motor according to claim 1.
Mukaide in view of Kondo does not teach a female screw embedded in the board-side molded resin; and a male screw to combine the stator-side molded resin with the board-side molded resin, wherein the male screw is fixed to the female screw.
However, Maeyama teaches a female screw (FIG. 8, 771) embedded in a board-side molded resin (FIG. 8, 70); and a male screw to combine a stator-side molded resin (FIG. 8, 60) with the board-side molded resin, wherein the male screw is fixed to the female screw (Paragraph [0026]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electric motor of Mukaide in view of Kondo with the screw of Maeyama to provide a more secure physical connection between the stator and the board.
Regarding claim 13, Mukaide in view of Kondo teaches the electric motor according to claim 1.
Mukaide in view of Kondo does not teach a fixing part provided in the board-side molded resin; and a male screw to combine the stator-side molded resin with the board-side molded resin, wherein the male screw is fixed to the fixing part.
However, Maeyama teaches a fixing part (FIG. 8, 771) provided in a board-side molded resin (FIG. 8, 70); and a male screw to combine a stator-side molded resin (FIG. 8, 60) with the board-side molded resin, wherein the male screw is fixed to the fixing part (Paragraph [0026]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electric motor of Mukaide in view of Kondo with the screw of Maeyama to provide a more secure physical connection between the stator and the board.
Regarding claim 14, Mukaide in view of Kondo teaches the electric motor according to claim 1.
Mukaide in view of Kondo does not teach a fixing part embedded in the stator-side molded resin; and a male screw to combine the board-side molded resin with the stator-side molded resin, wherein the male screw is fixed to the fixing part.
However, Maeyama teaches a fixing part (FIG. 8, 661) embedded in a stator-side molded resin (FIG. 8, 60); and a male screw to combine a board-side molded resin (FIG. 8, 70) with the stator-side molded resin, wherein the male screw is fixed to the fixing part (Paragraph [0026]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electric motor of Mukaide in view of Kondo with the screw of Maeyama to provide a more secure physical connection between the stator and the board.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mukaide in view of Kondo and Maeyama and in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0133935 to Kinugawa et al. (hereinafter Kinugawa).
Regarding claim 12, Mukaide in view of Kondo and Maeyama teaches the electric motor according to claim 10.
Mukaide in view of Kondo and Maeyama does not teach an insulating member provided in the stator, wherein the female screw is united with the insulating member by the stator-side molded resin.
However, Kinugawa teaches an insulating member (FIG. 2, 11) provided in a stator, where a female screw (FIG. 2, 19a) is united with the insulating member by the stator-side molded resin (FIG. 2, 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electric motor of Mukaide in view of Kondo with the insulating member of Kinugawa to further prevent possible unwanted electrical conductivity through the screw and into the stator.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mukaide in view of Kondo and in further view of Chinese Patent No. 112366852 to Yong et al. (hereinafter Yong).
Regarding claim 15, Mukaide in view of Kondo teaches the electric motor according to claim 1.
Mukaide in view of Kondo does not teach an air conditioner comprising: an indoor unit; and an outdoor unit to be connected to the indoor unit, wherein the indoor unit, the outdoor unit, or each of the indoor unit and the outdoor unit includes the electric motor.
However, Yong teaches an air conditioner comprising: an indoor unit; and an outdoor unit to be connected to the indoor unit, wherein the indoor unit, the outdoor unit, or each of the indoor unit and the outdoor unit includes an electric motor (Paragraph [0024]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electric motor of Mukaide in view of Kondo by incorporating it into the air conditioner of Yong for the air conditioner of Yong to benefit from the features of the electric motor of Mukaide in view of Kondo.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA KIEL MIGUEL RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-9881. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30am - 7:00pm ET.
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, Tulsidas Patel can be reached at (571) 272-2098. 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.
/JOSHUA KIEL M RODRIGUEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/TULSIDAS C PATEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834