Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/718,728

CASING FOR AN ELECTRIC MACHINE AND ASSOCIATED ELECTRIC MACHINE, COOLING CIRCUIT, VEHICLE AND COOLING METHOD

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jun 11, 2024
Examiner
ALMAWRI, MAGED M
Art Unit
2834
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Ampere S A S
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
398 granted / 538 resolved
+6.0% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
583
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
65.2%
+25.2% vs TC avg
§102
9.7%
-30.3% vs TC avg
§112
20.8%
-19.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 538 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06-11-2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Inventorship This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a). 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 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 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. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu (US PG Pub 20180294693 hereinafter “Yu”) in view of Garriga et al.(US PG Pub 20120049669 hereinafter “Garriga”). Re-claim 11, Yu discloses a casing (1) for an electric machine, comprising: an oil tank (20) disposed on a lower part of the casing (1) opposite an upper part of the casing (see annotated fig.1); and, an oil pump (9) disposed between the oil tank (20,at 23) and the lower part (annotated fig.1), the oil tank (20,at 23) comprising a section (annotated fig.1) oriented such that a smallest section (annotated fig.1) is linked to a suction inlet of the oil pump (via connection to the tank to the inlet of 9, at 7, via 6) and a largest section (see fig1, largest section is at bottom of section inside of 2) is configured to collect oil running down in the casing (inside of 2, and inside of 1, down to 20). Yu fails to explicitly teach the section is a funnel section oriented such that a smallest section is linked to a suction inlet of the oil pump and a largest section is configured to collect oil running down in the casing. However, Garriga shows the section is a funnel section (annotated fig.1) oriented such that a smallest section (annotated fig.1) is linked to a suction inlet of the oil pump (25, see P[0140, exhaust sump connect to recirculating pump, annotated fig.1) and a largest section (annotated fig.1) is configured to collect oil running down in the casing (annotated fig.1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the section of Yu wherein the section is a funnel section oriented such that a smallest section is linked to a suction inlet of the oil pump and a largest section is configured to collect oil running down in the casing as suggested by Garriga so the fluid may be recirculated within the machine with no need to be removed from the machine, save cost and provide cooling and better structure (Garriga, P[0140-0141]). PNG media_image1.png 588 728 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 697 676 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 275 313 media_image3.png Greyscale Re-claim 12, Yu as modified discloses the electric machine comprising: the casing as claimed in claim 11. Yu fails to explicitly teach a rotor disposed in the casing such that the oil contained in the oil tank is sprayed in the casing by the rotating rotor. However, Garriga teaches a rotor (35) disposed in the casing such that the oil contained in the oil tank is sprayed (sprayed via nozzles, see annotated fig.1) in the casing by the rotating rotor (see arrows shown in fig.1 showing fluid being sprayed in device and spinning rotor provides splashing, spraying inside rotor by arrows). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the motor of Yu wherein rotor disposed in the casing such that the oil contained in the oil tank is sprayed in the casing by the rotating rotor as suggested by Garriga so the fluid may be recirculated within the machine with no need to be removed from the machine, save cost and provide cooling and better structure (Garriga, P[0140-0141]). Claim 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu in view of Garriga et and in further view of Yoshizumi et al. (US PG pub 20140339934 hereinafter “Yoshizumi”). Re-claim 13, Yu as modified discloses electric machine as claimed in claim 12. Yu fails to explicitly teach further comprising a stator housing the rotor and comprising stator coils, the stator being disposed in the casing such that when the rotor is stopped, the oil contained in the oil tank at least partially covers a part of the stator coils. However, Yoshizumi teaches further comprising a stator housing (13,12) the rotor (11) and comprising stator coils (14a), the stator being disposed in the casing (10) such that when the rotor is stopped (typically fig.1 rotor is topped, 11), the oil contained in the oil tank (Lubricating oil in fig.1 in T1) at least partially covers a part of the stator coils (T2,T,14a, see fig.1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the motor of Yu wherein a stator housing the rotor and comprising stator coils, the stator being disposed in the casing such that when the rotor is stopped, the oil contained in the oil tank at least partially covers a part of the stator coils as suggested by Yoshizumi to provide cooling for the end coils and eliminate stagnation, of fluids (Yoshizumi, P[0049-0052]). PNG media_image4.png 646 511 media_image4.png Greyscale Claim 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu in view of Garriga, and in further view of Assaad (US Patent 20230036400A1 hereinafter “Assaad”). Re-claim 19, Yu discloses a method for cooling the electric machine as claimed in claim 12, the oil tank being filled with oil (21). Yu fails to explicitly teach the method comprising: rotating the rotor such that the rotor sprays the oil contained in the oil tank inside the casing; and activating the oil pump as soon as the temperature of the oil is greater than or equal to a control temperature such that the oil flows over the rotor. However, Assaad teaches the method comprising: rotating the rotor (14,14a) such that the rotor sprays the oil (via 14a, being sprayed) contained in the oil tank (21) inside the casing (10,11); and activating the oil pump (22,P[0043]) as soon as the temperature of the oil is greater than or equal to a control temperature (P[0044], oil temperature above predefined threshold, , P[0046], Toil is measured by sensor, therefore will turn on and off based on temperature being high, or low as needed, P[0047]) such that the oil flows over the rotor 9P[0047], oil level 21, oil-rotor contact). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the motor of Yu wherein the method comprising: rotating the rotor such that the rotor sprays the oil contained in the oil tank inside the casing; and activating the oil pump as soon as the temperature of the oil is greater than or equal to a control temperature such that the oil flows over the rotor as suggested by Assaad to provide cooling and lubrication for the rotor, and improve operation of device having reduced friction loss (Assaad, P[0014]). PNG media_image5.png 476 559 media_image5.png Greyscale PNG media_image6.png 295 522 media_image6.png Greyscale Re-claim 20, Yu discloses a method for cooling the electric machine as claimed in claim 13, the oil tank being filled with oil (21). Yu fails to explicitly teach the method comprising: rotating the rotor such that the rotor sprays the oil contained in the oil tank inside the casing; and activating the oil pump as soon as the temperature of the oil is greater than or equal to a control temperature such that the oil flows over the rotor. However, Assaad teaches the method comprising: rotating the rotor (14,14a) such that the rotor sprays the oil (via 14a, being sprayed) contained in the oil tank (21) inside the casing (10,11); and activating the oil pump (22,P[0043]) as soon as the temperature of the oil is greater than or equal to a control temperature (P[0044], oil temperature above predefined threshold, , P[0046], Toil is measured by sensor, therefore will turn on and off based on temperature being high, or low as needed, P[0047]) such that the oil flows over the rotor 9P[0047], oil level 21, oil-rotor contact). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the motor of Yu wherein the method comprising: rotating the rotor such that the rotor sprays the oil contained in the oil tank inside the casing; and activating the oil pump as soon as the temperature of the oil is greater than or equal to a control temperature such that the oil flows over the rotor as suggested by Assaad to provide cooling and lubrication for the rotor, and improve operation of device having reduced friction loss (Assaad, P[0014]). Claim 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu in view of Garriga, and in further view of Assaad, and Bertollat (WIPO Publication WO 2019166883a1 hereinafter “Bertollat”). Re-claim 21, Yu as modified discloses the method as claimed in claim 20, Yu fails to explicitly teach wherein when the oil of the oil tank at least partially covers a part of the stator coils when the rotor is stopped, the method comprises, prior to the rotating the rotor, powering of the stator coils to heat up the oil contained in the oil tank. However, Bertollat shows when the oil (400) of the oil tank (oil goes in oil tank) at least partially covers a part of the stator coils (300,the coolant oil is on top of the coils, when cooling them, so it partially covering parts of the coils) when the rotor is stopped (see disclosure of invention, P[2]), the method comprises, prior to the rotating the rotor, powering of the stator coils to heat up the oil contained in the oil tank PNG media_image7.png 328 588 media_image7.png Greyscale ). PNG media_image8.png 793 547 media_image8.png Greyscale Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the motor of Yu wherein when the oil of the oil tank at least partially covers a part of the stator coils when the rotor is stopped, the method comprises, prior to the rotating the rotor, powering of the stator coils to heat up the oil contained in the oil tank as suggested by Bertollat to reduce required torque for starting rotor, adjust temperatures and viscosity for cold start (Bertollat, P[0073]). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 14 is 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: Re-claim 14, recites “inter alia” combined with claims 11 and 12 limitations : “Claim 11. (New) A casing for an electric machine, comprising: an oil tank disposed on a lower part of the casing opposite an upper part of the casing; and, an oil pump disposed between the oil tank and the lower part, the oil tank comprising a funnel section oriented such that a smallest section is linked to a suction inlet of the oil pump and a largest section is configured to collect oil running down in the casing. Claim 12. (New) An electric machine comprising: the casing as claimed in claim 11; and a rotor disposed in the casing such that the oil contained in the oil tank is sprayed in the casing by the rotating rotor. Claim 14. (New) A cooling circuit comprising: the electric machine as claimed in claim 12; and at least one orifice linked to an oil supply duct and disposed in the upper part of the stator situated in the upper part of the casing, the supply duct being linked to a discharge outlet of the oil pump such that the oil discharged by the oil pump flows over the rotor.” PNG media_image9.png 570 534 media_image9.png Greyscale The combination of claim limitations of claim 14 recited with limitations of claims 11 and 12 combined together are unique. The prior art of record, ip.com npl and patent search report, ai search and global dossier search prior art alone or combined together fial to teach the limitations of combined claims 14, 12 and 11 altogether. Claim 14 with previous claims 11 and 12 combined limitations are unique and allowable, a case with top and bottom that encases the motor and pump and the pump between the oil and the motor and having inlets and outlets as indicated in claims 11,12 and 14 is not taught or suggested by any of the prior art recorded and is unique and allowable. Re-claims 15- 18, are objected to based on dependency from rejected claim 14. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure in PTO892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAGED M ALMAWRI whose telephone number is (313)446-6565. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christopher M. Koehler can be reached on 5712723560. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /MAGED M ALMAWRI/ Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 11, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603540
A ROTARY ELECTRIC MACHINE, WITH FLUID DISTRIBUTION CHAMBER BETWEEN STATOR AND HOUSING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597828
PERMANENT MAGNET GENERATOR WITH STATOR TEETH MADE OF SHEETS WITH ORIENTED GRAINS FOR ON-BOARD VEHICLE CHARGING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597817
ROTOR AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING ROTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592624
VIBRATION ACTUATOR WITH MOVABLE BODY AND FIXING BODY HAVING MAGNETIC CYLINDRICAL BODY OUTSIDE COIL WITH LENGTH
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587080
A Transducer for Producing Vibrational Movement
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+24.0%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 538 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month