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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 16-24) in the reply filed on 5/12/2026 is acknowledged.
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 16-17, 19, and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE 102019217974 A1 to Hofer et al.
Regarding claim 16, Hofer et al. discloses cooling ring comprising:
a cavity cooling volume (Fig. 2: 8) which encloses the winding head (2); and
a plastics material casing component (7) which forms a winding head cooling duct (7) that seals the cavity cooling volume (8) in relation to the winding head (2) and in relation to an environment of the winding head (area outside of 7).
Regarding claim 17, Hofer et al. discloses the plastics material casing component forms an entire wall (Fig. 2: 7) of the winding head cooling duct.
Regarding claim 19, Hofer et al. discloses the cavity cooling volume contains at least one bounding geometry (Fig. 2: 6) of the winding head (2) in terms of a circumferential direction and a longitudinal axis of the active part.
Regarding claim 21, Hofer et al. discloses an active part core-proximal wall of the cooling ring (Fig. 1: 4) is formed on an appendage of the windings (2) of the winding head on an active part core (12).
Regarding claim 22, Hofer et al. discloses an active part core-proximal part of a wall of the cooling ring for heat transmission is thermally connected to an axial lateral wall of the active part core (Fig. 1: flanges of 4 connecting to 12).
Regarding claim 23, Hofer et al. discloses an active part cooling assembly comprising:
an active part having an active part core (Fig. 1: 12) and, on both sides of the active part core, in each case, one winding head (2 and 3) which extends so as to proceed from the active part core; and
the cooling ring according to claim 16 on at least one of the winding heads (4 and 5).
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.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 102019217974 A1 to Hofer et al. in view of JP 2011244512 A to Matsumoto.
Regarding claim 18, Hofer et al. discloses a cooling ring as described above.
However, it fails to disclose the limitations from claim 18.
Matsumoto teaches the plastics material casing component is formed integrally by a rotational molding method ([0028]: “the rotation in which the resin 9 is applied to the stator winding 7 and the end bracket 6 is molded into the resin 9 Even in the machine, an excessive temperature rise can be suppressed”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of the rotational molding method as disclosed by Matsumoto to the cooling ring disclosed by Hofer et al.
One would have been motivated to do so to suppress excessive temperature rise.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 102019217974 A1 to Hofer et al.
Regarding claim 20, Hofer et al. discloses a cooling ring as described above including the cooling volume (Fig. 2: 8) extends beyond an overall extent of the winding head (2) by part of this extent in a radial direction of the active part (stator) toward an inside and/or an outside, and/or in an axial direction of the active part (stator) away from an active part core (12).
However, it fails to disclose the cooling volume extends in the radial direction by at least 5% and/or in the axial direction by at least 25%.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the cooling volume extends in the radial direction by at least 5% and/or in the axial direction by at least 25%, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
One would have been motivated to do so to optimize cooling.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 102019217974 A1 to Hofer et al. in view of DE 102020102776 A1 to Barany et al.
Regarding claim 24, Hofer et al. discloses an active part cooling assembly as described above.
However, it fails to disclose the limitations from claim 24.
Barany et al. teaches a heat pipe (Fig. 2: 46) that extends in the active part core (42) and in the cooling ring (20), and is thermally connected to the active part core and the cooling ring for heat transmission.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of the heat pipe as disclosed by Barany et al. to the cooling assembly disclosed by Hofer et al.
One would have been motivated to do so to increase cooling in the stator core.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VIET P NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9457. The examiner can normally be reached M, T, Th, F from 12pm-8pm.
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, Tulsidas 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.
/VIET P NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights