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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 7, and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 2: Line 1 should recite “an other end”.
Line 3 should recite “..extends upwardly from the insulator and is coupled…”.
Line 5 should recite “..extends upwardly from the insulator and is coupled…”.
Regarding claim 7: Lines 1-2 should recite “is disposed”.
Regarding claim 18: Line 1 should recite “is disposed”.
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 1-4, 8-9, and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2021/0408861, published in 2020 as WO 2020/122462 A1), in view of Watanabe et al. (“Watanabe”; JP 2019-176540 A, English translation attached).
Regarding claim 1: Kim discloses a motor (Fig. 1-2) comprising:
a stator core (310);
an insulator (320) coupled to the stator core;
a coil (330) wound around an outer surface of the insulator; and
a terminal (400) coupled to the insulator,
wherein the terminal includes a coil coupling portion (440, best shown in Fig. 8) to which both ends of the coil are coupled.
Kim does not explicitly disclose the insulator includes a protruding portion which protrudes further upward compared to other regions and supports any one of both ends of the coil, and wherein a groove into which one end of the coil is coupled is disposed on an outer surface of the protruding portion.
However, Watanabe discloses the insulator includes a protruding portion (50, Fig. 2) which protrudes further upward compared to other regions and supports any one of both ends of the coil (14), and
wherein a groove (60) into which one end of the coil is coupled is disposed on an outer surface of the protruding portion (as shown in Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the insulator of Kim to include the protruding portion of Watanabe in order to better support the cable.
Regarding claim 2: Kim discloses the coil includes one end and other end,
wherein the one end of the coil extending upwardly from the insulator and coupled within the coil coupling portion (shown in Fig. 4, the coil 330 is extending upwardly into 400), but does not explicitly disclose the other end of the coil extending upwardly from the insulator and coupled within the coil coupling portion via an outer surface of the protruding portion.
However, Watanabe discloses disclose the other end (relative to the one end in 37, Fig. 2) of the coil extending upwardly from the insulator and coupled within the coil coupling portion via an outer surface of the protruding portion (shown in Fig. 2, the coil 14, wraps around 50).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the insulator of Kim to include the protruding portion of Watanabe in order to better support the coil.
Regarding claim 3: Kim discloses the terminal includes a protrusion projecting downwardly (440, Fig. 8), and wherein the insulator includes a coupling portion to which the protrusion is coupled (see circled area of annotated Fig. 4 below, it is identical to Fig. 6 of the instant application).
PNG
media_image1.png
584
608
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4: Kim modified by Watanabe discloses the protruding portion, Watanabe further discloses the protruding portion is disposed on an inner side of the coupling portion (as shown in Fig. 2, 50 is interior to 37).
Regarding claim 8: Kim modified by Watanabe discloses the protruding portion, Watanabe further discloses an upper end of the protruding portion is disposed above an upper end of the coupling portion (point 53 is above 37 in Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 9: Kim modified by Watanabe discloses the protruding portion, Watanabe further discloses the protruding portion is integrally formed with the insulator (as 50 is part of the insulator 12).
Regarding claim 11: Kim discloses the coupling portion includes a plurality of plate portions, and wherein an inclined surface is formed on an upper surface of the plurality of plate portions (though Fig. 5 of Kim is pixelated, the protruding portions with inclined surfaces, identical to Fig. 7 of the instant application are apparent, see circled area, above).
Regarding claim 12: Kim modified by Watanabe discloses the protruding portion, Watanabe further discloses an outer surface of the protruding portion and an inner surface of the coupling portion contact each other (via 36, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 13: Kim modified by Watanabe discloses the protruding portion, Watanabe further discloses the protruding portion has a triangular cross-section (as the right side of 50, at arrow 50 is wider than the end with 53), and wherein a corner area of the protruding portion has a rounded shape (the corners of 53 are rounded).
Regarding claim 14: Kim discloses the coupling portion is plural, and wherein the plurality of coupling portions are spaced apart in a circumferential direction (as there are 3 terminals, and a coupling portion for each of them, Fig. 5).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Watanabe as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Kato et al. (“Kato”; JP 2013-212020 A, English translation attached).
Regarding claim 5: Kim modified by Watanabe discloses the protruding portion, Watanabe further discloses the protruding portion includes a first surface facing the inner surface of the coupling portion (see arrow in annotated Fig. 2 below), and a second surface and a third surface neighboring the first surface (any of the other surfaces), but does not explicitly disclose wherein the groove is disposed on the first surface.
However, Kato discloses the groove is disposed on the first surface (in that Kato discloses a protruding portion 27 with a grove facing radially outward).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the protruding portion to have the grove facing the coupling portion, as disclosed by Kato, in order to better secure the coil.
Claims 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Watanabe as applied to claims 1 and 16 above, and further in view of Okinaga et al. (“Okinaga”; US 2015/0035397).
Regarding claim 15: Kim discloses the coil coupling portion, but does not explicitly disclose within the coil coupling portion, both ends of the coil have a height difference.
However, Okinaga disclose within the coil coupling portion (52), both ends (43u, 43v of 50) of the coil have a height difference (Fig. 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify both ends of Kim to be at different heights in the coil coupling portion in order to support both ends at different heights to allow for more of the coil to be in the support.
Regarding claim 20: Kim discloses the coil coupling portion, but does not explicitly disclose within the coil coupling portion, both ends of the coil have a height difference.
However, Okinaga disclose within the coil coupling portion (52), both ends (43u, 43v of 50) of the coil have a height difference (Fig. 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify both ends of Kim to be at different heights in the coil coupling portion in order to support both ends at different heights to allow for more of the coil to be in the support.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, in view of Watanabe and Kato.
Regarding claim 16: Kim discloses a motor (Fig. 1-2) comprising:
a stator core (310);
an insulator (320) coupled to the stator core;
a coil (330) wound around an outer surface of the insulator; and
a terminal (400) coupled to the insulator,
wherein the terminal includes a coil coupling portion (440, best shown in Fig. 8) to which both ends of the coil are coupled.
Kim does not explicitly disclose the insulator includes a protruding portion which protrudes further upward compared to other regions and supports any one of both ends of the coil, and the protruding portion includes a first surface facing the inner surface of the coupling portion and a second surface and a third surface neighboring the first surface but does not explicitly disclose wherein the groove is disposed on the first surface, and the groove is disposed on the first surface.
However, Watanabe discloses the insulator includes a protruding portion (50, Fig. 2) which protrudes further upward compared to other regions and supports any one of both ends of the coil (14), and
the protruding portion includes a first surface facing the inner surface of the coupling portion (see arrow in annotated Fig. 2 below), and a second surface and a third surface neighboring the first surface (any of the other surfaces), but does not explicitly disclose wherein the groove is disposed on the first surface.
And, Kato discloses the groove is disposed on the first surface (in that Kato discloses a protruding portion 27 with a grove facing radially outward).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the insulator of Kim to include the protruding portion of Watanabe in order to better support the coil, and to modify the protruding portion to have the grove facing the coupling portion, as disclosed by Kato, in order to better secure the coil.
PNG
media_image2.png
504
372
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-7, 10, and 17-19 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 a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
The prior art of record, alone or in combination does not explicitly teach, suggest, or render obvious, at least to the skilled artisan the motor of claim 6, specifically comprising:
wherein the first surface and the fourth surface form an obtuse angle, wherein the first surface and the fifth surface form an obtuse angle, wherein the first surface and the second surface form an acute angle, and wherein the first surface and the third surface form an acute angle., in the context of the other components in the claim.
Claim 7 is allowed due to its dependency on claim 6.
The prior art of record, alone or in combination does not explicitly teach, suggest, or render obvious, at least to the skilled artisan the motor of claim 10, specifically comprising:
the coil coupling portion includes a groove in which two ends of the coil are disposed, and wherein the groove disposed on the first surface is disposed higher than a lower surface of the groove disposed on the coil coupling portion, in the context of the other components in the claim.
Claim 17 is allowable for reciting a similar limitation as claim 6.
Claim 18 is allowed due to its dependency on claim 17.
Claim 19 is allowable for reciting a similar limitation as claim 10.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN GUGGER whose telephone number is (571)272-5343. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9:00am - 5:00pm EST.
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, T.C. 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.
/SEAN GUGGER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834