DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. The specification and the drawings are acceptable.
3. The abstract is objected to as it is the same as claim 1. The abstract should summarize the invention and specification. It is also not in a standard abstract format and has more than one paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
4. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
5. Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is a mathematic process for motor data manipulation and data gathering and is directed to an abstract idea without significant more.
Step 1: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of Matter?
Claim 1 recites a method of motor configuration and parameter estimation. Thus, the claim is directed to a process, which is one of the statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A: Prong One: Does the Claim recite an Abstract Idea?
As to claim 1, it is rejected as it is directed to abstract ideas of a mathematic process for data manipulation and data gathering for an electric motor. It is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Step 2A: Prong Two: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application?
As to claim 1: Claim 1 is purely directed to abstract ideas of a mathematic process for motor data manipulation and data gathering which does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Step 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significant more than the abstract idea?
Claim 1 is purely directed to abstract ideas of a mathematic process for motor data manipulation and data gathering which does not recite additional elements that amount to significant more than the abstract idea.
Thus, independent claims 1 should be rejected under 35 USC 101 for the reasons as stated above.
Dependent claims 2-5 are rejected under 35 USC 101 because they are also directed to abstract ideas of a mathematic process for motor data manipulation and data gathering.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
7. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by USPN 11,332,029 to Wang.
As to claim 1, Wang teaches method for reconfiguring an electric machine including a rotor arranged to rotate with an angular speed(fig. 1: “30” where the motor has a rotor arranged to rotate with an angular speed), the electric machine being arranged to pass from a first configuration to a second configuration(col. 1: lines 28-49), the method comprising the steps of: determining in real-time a real speed threshold depending on the current operating condition of the electric machine and checking if the angular speed of the rotor is greater than said real speed threshold(col. 5: lines 39-46); in positive case, no reconfiguration is performed from the first configuration and in negative case and determining the current configuration of the electric machine and selecting a reconfiguring decision method and deciding whether to reconfigure the electric machine or not and, in positive case, reconfiguring the electric machine(col. 1: lines 28-49 wherein apparatus and method are taught for a motor control system to configure to run in the first configuration - motoring mode and or in the second configuration - generating mode).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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 of this title, 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.
9. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USPN 11,332,029 to Wang, and in view of USPN 9,964,452 to Jaros.
As to claim 2, Wang teaches method according to claim 1.
Wang does not teach the step of determining the real speed threshold comprises performing an estimation of the temperature of magnets of the rotor.
Jaros teaches the step of determining the real speed threshold comprises performing an estimation of the temperature of magnets of the rotor(col. 2: lines 11-13).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Jaros into Wang since Wang suggests a motor control system and Jaros suggests the beneficial use of estimation of the temperature of magnets of the rotor in the analogous art of motor control technology.
The motivation for this comes from the fact that Jaros teaches the method of estimation of the temperature of magnets of the rotor which can be used to improve the motor control system disclosed by Wang.
10. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USPN 11,332,029 to Wang.
As to claim 3, Wang teaches method according to claims 1.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Wang in order to obtain the invention as disclosed in claim 2 because Wang teaches the motor multiple configuration modes (col. 1: lines 28-49 wherein apparatus and method are taught for a motor control system to configure to run in the first configuration - motoring mode and or in the second configuration - generating mode).
The motivation for this comes from the fact that Wang teaches the motor multiple configuration modes which can be readily modified by a person of ordinary skill in the art.
Conclusion
11. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
USPN 9,673,744 to Eberlein disclosed a motor control system.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID S LUO whose telephone number is (571)270-5251. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-5PM.
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, Eduardo Colon-Santana can be reached at 571-272-2060. 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.
/DAVID LUO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2846