Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/749,361

MOTOR, ELECTRIC DRIVE DEVICE, ELECTRIC DRIVE SYSTEM, AND ELECTRIC APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jun 20, 2024
Examiner
ELNAKIB, AHMED
Art Unit
2834
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
CONTEMPORARY AMPEREX TECHNOLOGY CO., LIMITED
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
447 granted / 568 resolved
+10.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+8.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
596
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
49.2%
+9.2% vs TC avg
§102
23.9%
-16.1% vs TC avg
§112
24.4%
-15.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 568 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Claims 1-20 of U.S. Application No. 18749361 filed on 06/20/2024 are presented for examination. 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 submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 06/20/2024, 01/27/2025, 07/10/2025, and 12/30/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. 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. Claims 13-14 recites the limitation " the first portion ", “ the first sealing”, “the outer casing”, “the second portion”, and “the second sealing assembly”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. 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. Claims 1-2, 12, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Jore et al. (US 2021/0351658; Hereinafter, “Jore”). Regarding claim 1: Jore discloses a motor (10d; fig. 3A, 6-7, 26) comprising a casing (16; para [0045-0046]) provided with a first accommodation cavity (35) inside (inside the casing), wherein the first accommodation cavity (35) is configured to accommodate a cooling medium (“coolant”, para [0045], [0049], [0069]); and a stator (30c) disposed in the first accommodation cavity (35), at least part of the stator being immersed in the cooling medium (fig. 26). Regarding claim 2/1: Jore discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses a rotor (20), a second accommodation cavity (annotated fig. 3A below) spaced apart from the first accommodation cavity (35) is further provided inside the casing (16), and the rotor (20) is disposed within the second accommodation cavity (annotated fig. 3A below). PNG media_image1.png 544 952 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 12/2/1: Jore discloses the limitations of claim 2 and further discloses that the second accommodation cavity comprises a third cavity body (annotated fig. 3A below) and a fourth cavity body (annotated fig. 3A below); the rotor (20) comprises a first rotor disposed (the upper rotor 20 in fig. 3A) in the third cavity body and a second rotor (the lower rotor 20 in fig. 3A) disposed in the fourth cavity body; and the first accommodation cavity (in which stator 30 is disposed) is formed between the third cavity body and the fourth cavity body (annotated fig. 3A below). PNG media_image2.png 546 899 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding claim 19/1: Jore discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses that the casing has a cooling medium inlet and a cooling medium outlet that are respectively in communication with the first accommodation cavity (35), the cooling medium inlet being located at a height (H1) smaller than a height of the cooling medium outlet (annotated fig. 3A below). Regarding claim 20/1: Jore discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses an electric drive device (traction motors for hybrid and electric vehicles; para [0002]) comprising a liquid supply mechanism (using pump 48 as seen in fig. 3A); and the motor (10d), wherein the liquid supply mechanism is in communication with the first accommodation cavity (35) to deliver the cooling medium (coolant) into the first accommodation cavity (35). PNG media_image3.png 765 595 media_image3.png Greyscale 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 (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. 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. Claims 3, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jore in view of Yao et al. (US 2020/0274410; Hereinafter, “Yao”). Regarding claim 3/2/1: Jore discloses the limitations of claim 2 and further discloses that the rotor (20) comprises a rotor shaft (11, 13, 15) and a rotor disk (20) connected to the rotor shaft. Jore does not disclose that the rotor shaft internally having a first cooling flow channel, and the first cooling flow channel being in communication with the first accommodation cavity. Yao discloses the rotor shaft internally having a first cooling flow channel (150; fig. 5), and the first cooling flow channel (150) being in communication with the first accommodation cavity (where stator 102 is disclosed). Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the motor of Jore to have the rotor shaft internally having a first cooling flow channel, and the first cooling flow channel being in communication with the first accommodation cavity as disclosed by Yao to use the natural centrifugal forces of the rotor rather than pumps, to simplify the cooling system, and to reduce the cost of making the motor. Regarding claim 16/1: Jore discloses the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses that the casing (16) has a cooling medium inlet (the inlet in left side of fig. 3A, close to pump 48) and a cooling medium outlet (the outlet from cavity 35 at the right side of the stator in fig. 3A) that are respectively in communication with the first accommodation cavity (35). the cooling medium inlet comprising a first inlet located at an inner peripheral side of the stator, and the cooling medium outlet being located at an outer peripheral side of the stator. Yao discloses the cooling medium inlet (156) comprising a first inlet located at an inner (radial inner periphery) peripheral side of the stator, and the cooling medium outlet (180) being located at an outer peripheral side of the stator (fig. 5). Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the motor of Jore to have the cooling medium inlet comprising a first inlet located at an inner peripheral side of the stator, and the cooling medium outlet being located at an outer peripheral side of the stator as disclosed by Yao to use the natural centrifugal forces of the rotor rather than pumps, to simplify the cooling system, and to reduce the cost of making the motor. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jore (the embodiment in fig. 3A) in view of Jore (the embodiment in fig. 2). Regarding claim 9/2/1: Jore discloses the limitations of claim 2 but does not disclose that the first accommodation cavity comprises a first cavity body and a second cavity body; the stator comprises a first stator disposed in the first cavity body and a second stator disposed in the second cavity body; and the second accommodation cavity is formed between the first cavity body and the second cavity body. Jore (in fig. 2) disclose the first accommodation cavity comprises a first cavity body and a second cavity body (annotated fig. 2 below); the stator (30) comprises a first stator (30) disposed in the first cavity body and a second stator (30) disposed in the second cavity body; and the second accommodation cavity (annotated fig. 2 below) is formed (at least partially) between the first cavity body and the second cavity body (annotated fig. 2 below). PNG media_image4.png 556 894 media_image4.png Greyscale Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the motor of Jore in fig. 3A to have the first accommodation cavity comprises a first cavity body and a second cavity body; the stator comprises a first stator disposed in the first cavity body and a second stator disposed in the second cavity body; and the second accommodation cavity is formed between the first cavity body and the second cavity body as in the embodiment in fig. 2 to increase the stator flux interacting with the rotor thus magnifying the output torque. Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jore in view of Yao, and in further view of Jore (the embodiment in fig. 2). Regarding claim 17/16/1: Jore in view of Yao discloses the limitations of claim 16 and Jore further discloses that a rotor (20), a second accommodation cavity (annotated fig. 3A below) spaced apart from the first accommodation cavity (35) is further provided inside the casing (16), and the rotor (20) is disposed within the second accommodation cavity (annotated fig. 3A below). PNG media_image1.png 544 952 media_image1.png Greyscale Jore (in the embodiment of fig. 3A) does not disclose the first accommodation cavity comprises a first cavity body and a second cavity body; the stator comprises a first stator disposed in the first cavity body and a second stator disposed in the second cavity body; and the second accommodation cavity is formed between the first cavity body and the second cavity body. Jore (the embodiment in fig. 2) disclose the first accommodation cavity comprises a first cavity body and a second cavity body (annotated fig. 2 below); the stator (30) comprises a first stator (30) disposed in the first cavity body and a second stator (30) disposed in the second cavity body; and the second accommodation cavity (annotated fig. 2 below) is formed (at least partially) between the first cavity body and the second cavity body (annotated fig. 2 below). PNG media_image4.png 556 894 media_image4.png Greyscale Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the motor of Jore in fig. 3A to have the first accommodation cavity comprises a first cavity body and a second cavity body; the stator comprises a first stator disposed in the first cavity body and a second stator disposed in the second cavity body; and the second accommodation cavity is formed between the first cavity body and the second cavity body as in the embodiment in fig. 2 to increase the stator flux interacting with the rotor thus magnifying the output torque. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4-8, 10-11, 15, 18 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AHMED ELNAKIB whose telephone number is (571)270-0638. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00AM-4:00PM. 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 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. /AHMED ELNAKIB/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 20, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601373
REFRIGERANT COMPRESSOR INCLUDING GROOVED AUXILIARY BEARING INTERFACE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597816
ROTOR, PERMANENT MAGNET MOTOR AND POWERTRAIN
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584521
HYBRID AIRFOIL BEARING WITH ACTIVE DAMPING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587064
ELECTRIC MOTOR SYSTEM, TURBO COMPRESSOR, AND REFRIGERATION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587071
DRIVE DEVICE
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
79%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+8.7%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 568 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