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.
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.
Claims 26, 27, 29 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shimokawa et al. (US 2020/0336046 A1).
RE claim 26, Shimokawa teaches a motor 1 (Fig.1) comprising: a stator 3; a rotor 2 disposed inside the stator 3; a shaft 23 coupled to the rotor 2; and a sensing magnet 8 disposed above the rotor 2, wherein the sensing magnet 8 includes a base portion 82 and a plurality of protruded portions 81 protruded from the base portion 82, and wherein the plurality of protruded portions 81 are spaced apart from each other (Fig.5).
RE claim 27/26, Shimokawa teaches the sensing magnet 8 is provided with a plurality of radial slots (S) (space between protruding portion 81, see annotated Fig.5 below), and wherein a radial length of the base portion 82 is equal to or smaller than a radial length of the sensing magnet 8 (Fig.5).
[AltContent: textbox (Slot (S))][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
376
546
media_image1.png
Greyscale
RE claim 29/27, Shimokawa teaches the sensing magnet 8 includes one surface facing the rotor 2, and wherein the slot is formed on the other surface of the sensing magnet facing the one surface (see Fig.2).
RE claim 30/27, Shimokawa teaches the slot (S) is disposed on an upper surface of the sensing magnet 8 (see annotated Fig.5 above).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 11, 12, 23 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (KR 20090050650 A) in view of Mizuno et al. (JP 2009042060 A).
RE claim 11, Kim teaches a motor 1 (Figs.2, 3) comprising: a stator 160; a rotor 150 disposed inside the stator 160; a shaft 140 coupled to the rotor 150; and a sensing magnet 173 disposed above the rotor 150, wherein the sensing magnet 173 includes first unit magnets 173 and second unit magnets 173 (Fig.3) arranged alternately along a circumferential direction (Fig.3), wherein a polarities of the first unit magnet 173 and the second unit magnet 173 are different from each other (Fig.3).
Kim does not teach wherein the sensing magnet is provided with a plurality of radial slots and the slot is disposed between the first unit magnet and the second unit magnet.
Mizuno teaches sensing magnet is provided with a plurality of radial slots 2a (Fig.4) and the slot 2a is disposed between the first unit magnet 5a and the second unit magnet 5b (Fig.4), so that the magnet mold shaft has a center of gravity on the central axis of the shaft body from the viewpoint of expressing good rotation characteristics (see translation page 8, 5-7th ¶).
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 Kim by having the sensing magnet is provided with a plurality of radial slots and the slot is disposed between the first unit magnet and the second unit magnet, as taught by Mizuno, for the same reasons as discussed above.
RE claim 12/11, Kim in view of Mizuno has been discussed above. Kim further teaches the sensing magnet 173 is coupled to a support plate 170, and the support plate 170 is coupled to the shaft 140 (Fig.2).
RE claim 23/11, as discussed above, Mizuno teaches the first unit magnet 5a and the second unit magnet 5b are spaced apart from each other (Fig.4).
RE claim 25/11, Mizuno teaches the slot 2a overlaps a boundary between the first and second unit magnets 5a, 5b in a radial direction (Fig.4).
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Mizuno as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (US 20190379261 A1, hereinafter referred to as Kim’261).
RE claim 13/12, Kim in view of Mizuno has been discussed above. Kim does not teach a cover coupled to the support plate to cover the other surface of the sensing magnet.
Kim’261 teaches a cover 2440 (Fig.1) coupled to the support plate 2410 to cover the other surface of the sensing magnet 2421 (Fig.10), the cover member 2440 serves to fix the sensing magnet to the sensing plate (¶ 168).
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 Kim in view of Mizuno by having a cover coupled to the support plate to cover the other surface of the sensing magnet, as taught by Kim’261, for the same reasons as discussed above.
RE claim 14/13, as discussed above, Kim’261 teaches the support plate 2410 includes one surface facing the rotor 2200 and the other surface facing the cover 2440, wherein the other surface of the support plate 2410 includes a protruded region (PR) (see annotated Fig.9 below) more protruded than the other region, and wherein the sensing magnet 2420 is disposed outside the protruded region (PR).
[AltContent: textbox (Protruded region (PR))][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image2.png
1036
870
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-22, 24, 28 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.
RE claim 15/11, the prior-art does not teach, inter alia, the sensing magnet includes one surface facing the rotor, and wherein the slot is formed on the other surface of the sensing magnet facing the one surface.
Claims 16-19 and 21 are allowable for their dependency on claim 15.
RE claim 20/11, the prior-art does not teach, inter alia, the slot is disposed on an outer circumferential surface of the sensing magnet.
RE claim 22/11, the prior-art does not teach, inter alia, an axial length of the slot is the same as an axial length of the sensing magnet.
RE claim 24/11, the prior-art does not teach, inter alia, the slot is disposed on an upper surface of the sensing magnet.
RE claim 28/27, the prior-art does not teach, inter alia, an axial length of the slot is the same as an axial length of the sensing magnet.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)270-5532. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-6PM 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, Seye Iwarere can be reached at (571) 270-5112. 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.
/THOMAS TRUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights