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 . This Office Action is responsive to the Applicant's communication filed on April 20, 2026. In view of this communication, claims 1-13 are now pending in the application.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1 in the reply filed on April 20, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 8-13 remain withdrawn because, as stated in the Restriction Requirement filed on February 19th, 2026; the product as claimed (claims 1-7) can be made by a materially different process such as any method not following the four steps outlined in method claim 8. Making the process dependent to the product does not overcome the restriction because the product as claimed can be made by another and materially different process (MPEP § 806.05(f)).
If claims 1-7 were directed to an allowable product. Pursuant to the procedures set forth in MPEP § 821.04(B), claim 8-13, directed to the process of making or using an allowable product, previously withdrawn from consideration as a result of a restriction requirement, could be hereby rejoined and fully examined for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the axial flux machine must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the stator's teeth". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-7 are rejected solely due to their dependency on claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KIL (KR 20210072186 A).
In regards to claim 1, KIL teaches:
A stator core (Fig 1; 14) of nanocrystalline material [0032]for an axial flux electric machine(axial flux machines are well known in the art and all of these practices are not specific to a circumferential machine), which comprises an encapsulated and machined nanocrystalline material for forming the stator's teeth(Fig 1; 15), characterized by the fact that the encapsulation (Fig 1; 12) comprises at least two distinct encapsulation materials (Fig 1; 20) ( heat dissipation filler and a polymer resin[0028])deposited over the nanocrystalline material(Fig 1; 14).
PNG
media_image1.png
481
399
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The Applicant should note, KIL discloses the claimed invention except for an axial machine. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use an axial machine over a circumferential one since it was known in the art that these are similar.
In regards to claim 2, KIL teaches the stator core, according to claim 1:
characterized by the fact that at least one of the distinct encapsulation materials is a material able to increase the mechanical rigidity of the stator core(the polymer resin works as a binder; which in turn increase rigidity of the machine [0025]).
In regards to claim 3, KIL teaches the stator core, according to claim 2:
characterized by the fact that the material able to increase the mechanical rigidity (polymer resin) of the stator core (Fig 1; 21) is an epoxy structural resin [0025]constituted by a quartz or silica filler with a percentage of 10% to 50% by mass(silicone resin[0064]).
The Applicant should note, KIL discloses the claimed invention except for the mass of an epoxy structural resin constituting quartz or silica filler by 10% to 50% by mass. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to be 10% to 50% by mass , since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 . It is well known in the art that epoxies can be used to support mechanical rigidity, examples are shows in the relevant art section.
In regards to claim 4, KIL teaches the stator core, according to claim 3:
characterized by the fact that the encapsulated stator core (Fig 1; 14)has, after machining thereof, about 10% to 90% by mass of epoxy structural resin encapsulation material(product by process)(Fig 1 shows a device that could reasonably be between 10%-90% by mass).
In regards to claim 5, KIL teaches the stator core, according to claim 1:
characterized by the fact that at least one of the distinct encapsulation materials is a material able to increase the thermal exchange capacity of the electric machine(the heat dispersion filler works to achieve the heat dissipation and EMI shielding effect together [0024]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6-7 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.
Regarding claim 6, The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: KIL teaches:
The stator core, according to claim 5, characterized by the fact that the material able to increase the thermal exchange capacity (the heat dispersion filler )of the electric machine is a thermal property epoxy resin (mixed with resin[0028])constituted by an alumina and silica filler[0014].
However, KIL does not teach:
an alumina and silica filler, with a percentage from 30% to 80% by mass, with minimum thermal conductivity of 0.5W/m.K. (The underlined is allowable subject matter.)
Claim 6 is objected to, and not rejected, because the limitation of an alumina and silica filler, with a percentage from 30% to 80% by mass, with minimum thermal conductivity of 0.5W/m.K. is too specific which makes it novel in this application.
Claims 6-7 are objected to, and not rejected, because they depend from a claim that contains allowable subject matter.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS L SETZER whose telephone number is (571)272-3021. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 8am-5pm 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, Oluseye 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.
/N.L.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/OLUSEYE IWARERE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights