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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/10/24 is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to preliminary amendment filed on 5/10/24. Regarding the amendment, claims 1-13 are present for examination.
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.
Claims 1-13 are 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 1 recites the limitation "a sealing member" in line 5 and in line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is confusing that “a sealing member” in line 12 is referred back to the previous “sealing member” or it is a new limitation. In light of specification, “a sealing member” in line 12 should be change to –the sealing member” to refer back to the previous limitation.
Claims 2-13 are rejected because of their dependence.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tasaka et al. (JP 2018/016669 A) in view of Miyazaki (JP 2017/163797 A).
Regarding claim 1, Tasaka teaches a thermosetting resin composition comprising:
an epoxy resin (page 5, para 1);
a curing agent (page 5, para 3); and
an inorganic filler (page 5, last para.),
wherein the thermosetting resin composition is used for forming a sealing member in a stator (20, fig 2), the stator including
a stator core (1) having a plurality of tooth parts (2) and a plurality of slots (wherein winding inserted) formed in an alternating manner in a circumferential direction,
a coil (3) wound around each of the slots and accommodated in each of the slots, and having a pair of coil ends respectively protruding toward both sides in an axial direction from the stator core (2, fig 2), and
the thermosetting resin composition has a lowest melt viscosity of equal to or less than 40 Pa*s (page 4). However, Tasaka does not teach the sealing member provided in each of the slots by covering the coil.
Miyazaki teaches a stator for electric motor having a resin layer (60) over the inner face (23i) of a slot (23) by integrally forming the insulative resin layer (60) over the inner face (23i) of the slot (23) of a stator core (11) to improve the manufacturability thereof and stator for electric motor (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 Tasaka’s stator with the sealing member provided in each of the slots by covering the coil as taught by Miyazaki. Doing so would improve the manufacturability thereof and stator for electric motor (abstract).
Regarding claim 2, Takasa in view of Miyazaki teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 1, Tasaka further teaches a torque value is measured over time with a Labo Plastomill under conditions of a rotation speed of 30 rpm and a measurement temperature of 175° C, a time T.sub.1 at which the torque value is equal to or less than twice a minimum torque value is equal to or more than 40 seconds and equal to or less than 90 seconds, and the minimum torque value is equal to or less than 0.8 N*m (page 4).
Regarding claim 3, Takasa in view of Miyazaki teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 1, Tasaka further teaches a flexural modulus at 25° C. of a cured product of the thermosetting resin composition is equal to or more than 10 GPa and equal to or less than 30 GPa (page 5).
Regarding claim 4, Takasa in view of Miyazaki teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 1, Tasaka further teaches a gelling time is equal to or more than 40 seconds and equal to or less than 100 seconds (page 5).
Regarding claim 6, Takasa in view of Miyazaki teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 1, Tasaka further teaches a content of the inorganic filler is equal to or more than 50% by mass and equal to or less than 95% by mass with respect to a total of the thermosetting resin composition (page 4).
Regarding claim 7, Takasa in view of Miyazaki teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 1, Tasaka further teaches the inorganic filler includes crushed silica (page 6).
Regarding claim 8, Takasa in view of Miyazaki teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 1, Tasaka further teaches the epoxy resin includes at least one selected from the group consisting of a biphenyl-type epoxy resin, a bisphenol-type epoxy resin, a stilbene-type epoxy resin, a novolac-type epoxy resin, a polyfunctional epoxy resin, a phenol aralkyl-type epoxy resin, and a naphthol-type epoxy resin (page 4).
Regarding claim 9, Takasa in view of Miyazaki teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 1, Tasaka further teaches the thermosetting resin composition is in a powdered form, a granular form, a tablet form, or a sheet form (page 4).
Regarding claim 10, Takasa in view of Miyazaki teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 1, Tasaka further teaches a stator core (1) having a plurality of tooth parts (2) and a plurality of slots (wherein winding inserted) formed in an alternating manner in a circumferential direction,
a coil (3) wound around each of the slots and accommodated in each of the slots, and having a pair of coil ends respectively protruding toward both sides in an axial direction from the stator core (2, fig 2), and
a sealing member (10), wherein the sealing member is formed of a cured product of the thermosetting resin composition (page 4). However, Tasaka does not teach the sealing member provided in each of the slots by covering the coil.
Miyazaki further teaches a stator for electric motor having a resin layer (60) over the inner face (23i) of a slot (23) by integrally forming the insulative resin layer (60) over the inner face (23i) of the slot (23) of a stator core (11) to improve the manufacturability thereof and stator for electric motor (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 Tasaka in view of Miyazaki’s stator with the sealing member provided in each of the slots by covering the coil as further taught by Miyazaki. Doing so would improve the manufacturability thereof and stator for electric motor (abstract).
Regarding claim 11, Takasa in view of Miyazaki teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 10, Miyazaki further teaches the sealing member (60) is provided only within the slot (23) by covering the coil (40).
Regarding claim 12, Takasa in view of Miyazaki teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 10, Takasa further teaches the sealing member (10) cover one coil end of the pair of coil ends. Miyazaki further teaches the sealing member (60) is provided so as to cover the coil (40) in the slot (23).
Regarding claim 13, Takasa in view of Miyazaki teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 10, Takasa further teaches the sealing member (10) cover both coil ends of the pair of coil ends (fig 2), and Miyazaki further teach the sealing member (60) is provided so as to cover the coil (40) in the slot (23).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tasaka et al. in view of Miyazaki, further in view of Shinohara et al. (JP 2013127042 A).
Regarding claim 5, Takasa in view of Miyazaki teaches the claimed invention as set forth in claim 1, except for the added limitation of a thermal conductivity of a cured product of the thermosetting resin composition is equal to or more than 0.7 W/m.K.
Shinohara teaches an epoxy resin injection molding material that provide an epoxy resin molded body for a motor having a thermal conductivity of a cured product of the thermosetting resin composition is equal to or more than 0.7 W/m.K to provide a molded article having excellent thermal conductivity, moldability, heat resistance and excellent crack resistance while maintaining the excellent electrical properties of the epoxy resin (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 Tasaka in view of Miyazaki’s stator with a thermal conductivity of a cured product of the thermosetting resin composition is equal to or more than 0.7 W/m.K as taught by Shinohara. Doing so provide a molded article having excellent thermal conductivity, moldability, heat resistance and excellent crack resistance while maintaining the excellent electrical properties of the epoxy resin (abstract).
Conclusion
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
Prosecution Insights