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 § 102
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) 1-3, 6-8, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ebisawa (JP 2004-158653).
With respect to Claim 1, Ebisawa, Figures 1-15, teaches a method for winding a rectangular wire in a winding space of a coil former 22,23 to form a linearly wound coil, wherein the rectangular wire in the winding space is wound in at least one layer in an axial laying direction (Figures 3c and 4d), having the method steps of:
feeding the rectangular wire 1 to a lateral contact 51 of the winding space and holding the wire in relation to the coil former (See Paragraphs 43, 44, and 51);
linear winding of the coil by rotating the coil formerSee Figures 3c and 4d) and continuously feeding the rectangular wire from a feed tracked in the laying direction until the last winding of the layer is wound in the laying direction;
wherein
a) before winding the coil, a guide device 5 is at least partially inserted into the winding space, wherein the guide device has a stop 52 in the laying direction which limits the rectangular wire in the laying direction;
b) the guide device is entrained during winding as the winding of the coil in the laying direction increases (See Figures 3 and 4); and
c) the guide device 5 is moved out of the winding space before the last winding is wound in front of a second lateral contact.
With respect to Claim 2, Ebisawa further teaches wherein the guide device 5 has a guide roller which rolls on the rectangular wire and the guide roller of the guide device has a stepped diameter and between the a small diameter and the a large diameter the stop is provided for the rectangular wire, and wherein the guide roller with the small diameter rolls on the rectangular wire and with the large diameter limits the rectangular wire in the laying direction.
With respect to Claim 3, Ebisawa further teaches wherein at least one of the windings is pressed against a winding base by means of at least one pressure roller.
With respect to Claim 6, Ebisawa further teaches wherein the guide device is at least one of resiliently mounted in relation to the coil former or tracked in a force or path controlled manner.
With respect to Claim 7, Ebisawa further teaches wherein the guide roller has a reshaping effect on the rectangular wire at least temporarily during unwinding.
With respect to Claim 8, Ebisawa, Figures 1-15, teaches a linear winding device for winding a rectangular wire 1 in at least one layer in an axial laying direction in a winding space of a coil former to form a linearly wound coil, the device, having a rotatably driven carrier 22,23 for receiving a coil former, wherein the device is provided for winding the rectangular wire fed to the device in a feed direction from a feed in a linear winding method of a laying direction in the winding space of the coil former, wherein
the device has a guide device 5 movable in the laying direction for guiding the rectangular wire in the winding space, wherein the guide device guiding the rectangular wire in the laying direction has a limiting stop, and the guide device 5 is resiliently mounted in relation to the coil former or is movable in a force or path controlled manner.
With respect to Claim 10, Ebisawa further teaches wherein the device has at least one pressure roller for pressing the supplied rectangular wire.
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.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebisawa as applied to Claims 1-3, 6-8, and 10 above, and further in view of Sakabe et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0037264), hereinafter “Sakabe”.
With respect to Claim 4, Ebisawa is advanced above.
Ebisawa teaches all the elements of the method for winding a rectangular wire in a winding space of a coil former except for wherein fixing rollers are provided in a feed of the wire in front of the guide device, which can be displaced in the laying direction, wherein during winding the guide device follows the fixing rollers in the laying direction.
However, Sakabe, Figures 1-18, teaches wherein fixing rollers 222,224 are provided in a feed of the wire in front of the guide device, which can be displaced in the laying direction, wherein during winding the guide device follows the fixing rollers in the laying direction.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Ebisawa with fixing rollers, as taught by Sakabe, for the purpose of providing tension to the rectangular wire.
Claim(s) 5 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebisawa as applied to Claims 1-3, 6-8, and 10 above, and further in view of Takeda et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0242227), hereinafter “Takeda”.
With respect to Claim 4, Ebisawa is advanced above.
Ebisawa teaches all the elements of the method for winding a rectangular wire in a winding space of a coil former except for the method according to 1, wherein the guide device is turned after step c) in relation to the laying direction, so that the stop is reversed with respect to the lateral contacts and the rectangular wire and another layer of the coil is wound according to the method or wherein the guide device can be turned with respect to the laying direction so that the stop of the guide device is in the laying direction when the laying direction is reversed rests on the supplied rectangular wire.
However, Takeda, Figures 1-5, teaches wherein the guide device is turned after step c) in relation to the laying direction, so that the stop 7b is reversed with respect to the lateral contacts and the rectangular wire W and another layer of the coil is wound according to the method or wherein the guide device can be turned with respect to the laying direction so that the stop 7b of the guide device is in the laying direction when the laying direction is reversed rests on the supplied rectangular wire W.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Ebisawa with a stop, as taught by Takeda, for the purpose of laying the rectangular wire evenly on the spool hub.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-12 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 following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 11 is allowable over the prior art of record because the prior art of record does not teach or suggest the entire combination of elements of the linear winding device set forth including wherein the guide device has a guide roller which rolls on the rectangular wire and the guide roller of the guide device has a stepped diameter and between a small diameter and a large diameter the stop is provided for the rectangular wire, and wherein the guide roller with the small diameter rolls on the rectangular wire and with the large diameter limits the rectangular wire in the laying direction.
None of the references of the prior art teach or suggest wherein the guide device has a guide roller which rolls on the rectangular wire and the guide roller of the guide device has a stepped diameter and between a small diameter and a large diameter the stop is provided for the rectangular wire, and wherein the guide roller with the small diameter rolls on the rectangular wire and with the large diameter limits the rectangular wire in the laying direction as advanced above and such do not provide the necessary motivation, absent applicant's specification, for modifying the linear winding device in the manner required by the claims.
Claim 12 is allowable over the prior art of record because the prior art of record does not teach or suggest the entire combination of elements of the linear winding device set forth including the guide device can turn in relation to the laying direction, so that the stop can be reversed with respect to the lateral contacts and the rectangular wire and another layer of the coil can be wound.
None of the references of the prior art teach or suggest the guide device can turn in relation to the laying direction, so that the stop can be reversed with respect to the lateral contacts and the rectangular wire and another layer of the coil can be wound as advanced above and such do not provide the necessary motivation, absent applicant's specification, for modifying the linear winding device in the manner required by the claims.
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.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM ARAUZ RIVERA whose telephone number is (571)272-6953. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 9:00 AM to 8:00 PM MDT.
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, Victoria P. Augustine can be reached at 313-446-4858. 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.
/WILLIAM A. RIVERA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights