Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/719,821

IN-WHEEL MOTOR

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 13, 2024
Examiner
KENERLY, TERRANCE L
Art Unit
2834
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
DENSO CORPORATION
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
828 granted / 1129 resolved
+5.3% vs TC avg
Strong +15% interview lift
Without
With
+15.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
1162
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
55.7%
+15.7% vs TC avg
§102
28.8%
-11.2% vs TC avg
§112
11.2%
-28.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1129 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1, 2, and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kamiya et al. (JP 2005337355). [Claim 1] Kamiya et al. teach: An in-wheel motor 50 of an outer-rotor type (fig 2), the in-wheel motor comprising: a stator 53 that includes a coil 56; and a rotor 51 that includes a magnet 52 and rotates around a motor axis RC1 with respect to the stator, the magnet facing the coil (fig 2), wherein: the rotor further includes: a rotor case 51a that holds the magnet; and a brake disc 61 that is connected to an inner end part of the rotor case (see ref numeral S1, fig 2) in a wheel assembly 31 width direction and rotates together with the rotor case (since it is a brake disc, MPEP 2112), and the rotor case and the brake disc are connected to each other via a heat capacity member 66 (see fig 5). PNG media_image1.png 470 381 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 614 610 media_image2.png Greyscale [Claim 2] Kamiya et al. teach: The in-wheel motor according to claim 1, wherein the heat capacity member is a drive plate 66 that rotates integrally with the rotor case and the brake disc (figs above). [Claim 4] Kamiya et al. teach: The in-wheel motor according to claim 1, wherein the heat capacity member includes a heat radiation structure (evidenced by the arrows, figs 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. 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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamiya et al. in view of Hasuda et al. (JP 2015083440). [Claim 3] Kamiya et al. has been discussed above, re claim 2; but does not explicitly teach that the stator further includes: a spindle shaft that forms the motor axis; and a stator body that is disposed on an outer side of the spindle shaft in a radial direction, and the drive plate is pivotally supported by the stator body. Hasuda et al. teach that the stator 81 further includes: a spindle shaft 21 that forms the motor axis Z; and a stator body 51 that is disposed on an outer side of the spindle shaft in a radial direction (fig 1 below) allows for positions sensors 82/83 and bearings 110 to improve the service life of the in-wheel motor. Since Matsuda et al. discloses that the drive plate is between the brake disc and stator, it would be intuitive when applying Hasuda et al. to have thew drive plate pivotally supported by the stator body. As a result, it would have been obvious to a person havening ordinary skill in the art prior to the invention of Matsuda et al. being effectively filed to modify it such that the stator further includes: a spindle shaft that forms the motor axis; and a stator body that is disposed on an outer side of the spindle shaft in a radial direction, and the drive plate is pivotally supported by the stator body, as taught by Hasuda et al. so as to improve the service life of the in-wheel motor. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TERRANCE L KENERLY whose telephone number is (571)270-7851. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-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, Christopher Koehler can be reached at 5712723560. 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. /TERRANCE L KENERLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 13, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603539
HEAT EXCHANGER AND ENERGY CONVERSION DEVICE ASSEMBLY INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603545
AXIALLY SECURING A SHAFT COMPONENT OF AN ELECTRIC MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597818
ROTOR FOR ROTATING ELECTRIC MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590619
DRIVE SYSTEM COMPRISING AT LEAST ONE DRIVE UNIT, IN PARTICULAR FOR APPLICATIONS WITH HIGH ROTATIONAL SPEED, AND METHOD FOR OPERATING A DRIVE SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588579
UNIVERSAL JOINT SHAFT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
73%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+15.1%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1129 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