Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/752,150

PERMANENT MAGNET ARRANGEMENT FOR AN AXIAL FLUX MACHINE OF A DOOR DRIVE AND AXIAL FLUX MACHINE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jun 24, 2024
Examiner
TRUONG, THOMAS
Art Unit
2834
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Dormakaba Deutschland GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
920 granted / 1260 resolved
+5.0% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
1301
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
50.2%
+10.2% vs TC avg
§102
23.4%
-16.6% vs TC avg
§112
22.5%
-17.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1260 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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. 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 following limitation must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. “a curvature of the first side surface increasing from the inner surface to the outer surface”, in claim 2 “a curvature of the second side surface increases from the inner surface to the outer surface” in claim 4 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 § 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. Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeshita et al. (JP 2021182812 A) in view of Saito et al. (US 2024/0235283 A1) and Jan et al. (WO 2022063972 A1). RE claim 1, Takeshita teaches an axial flux machine 100 with a permanent magnet 32 arrangement for use as a rotor 3 or stator of the axial flux machine 100, wherein the permanent magnet arrangement 32 has a plurality of permanent magnets 32a, 32b arranged in a ring-shaped manner around a machine axis (of shaft 4), wherein permanent magnets arranged adjacent to one another each have an oppositely aligned polarization (see translation page 3, 3rd ¶), wherein each permanent magnet 32 extends away from an inner surface (Ari) of the permanent magnet facing the machine axis to an outer surface (Aro) of the permanent magnet (Figs.2, 3, 6), wherein each permanent magnet 32 has a first side surface (Ca) and a second side surface (Cb) opposite the first side surface (Ca), wherein the two side surfaces (Ca, Cb) connect the inner surface and the outer surface to one another, wherein the first side surface (Ca) of each permanent magnet 32 is aligned in the direction of the second side surface (Cb) of a respectively immediately adjacent permanent magnet 32, wherein each first side surface has a continuously curved course from the inner surface to the outer surface (Fig.2b), such that the course of the first side surface is either concave or convex (Fig.2b). Takeshita does not teach: each permanent magnet 32 is magnetized in an axial direction running parallel to the machine axis The motor being utilized in a door drive, RE (i) above, Saito teaches each permanent magnet 95 (Figs.11, 12) is magnetized in an axial direction running parallel to the machine axis (¶ 126), doing so allow the rotating magnetic field generated by stator causes magnets to repeat attraction and repulsion with respect to each tooth, thereby rotating rotor (¶ 126). Furthermore, such configuration allows the loss can be easily reduced. In rotary electric machine, torque ripple can be easily reduced. Rotary electric machine having a small torque ripple can easily reduce noise and vibration (¶ 127). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Takeshita by having each permanent magnet 32 is magnetized in an axial direction running parallel to the machine axis, as taught by Saito, for the same reasons as discussed above. RE (ii) above, Jan suggests that axial flux motor is well-known to have smaller axial length compared to other type of electrical machine (see translation page 4, last ¶) therefore can be utilized in application such as door wing, window, sliding door or resolving door drive (see translation page 9, 5th ¶). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the axial motor disclosed by Takeshita in any applicable application such as door, as suggested by Jan, for the same reasons as discussed above. RE claim 2/1, Takeshita in view of Saito and Jan has been discussed above. Takeshita further teaches a curvature of the first side surface (Ca) increases from the inner surface (Ari) to the outer surface (Aro) (see Fig.6) RE claim 3/1, Takeshita in view of Saito and Jan has been discussed above. Takeshita further teaches each second side surface (Cb) has a continuously curved course from the inner surface (Ari) to the outer surface (Aro), such that the course of the second side surface is either convex or concave (Fig.2b). RE claim 4/1, Takeshita in view of Saito and Jan has been discussed above. Takeshita further teaches a curvature of the second side surface (Cb) increases from the inner surface (Ari) to the outer surface (Aro) (see Fig.6). RE claim 5/3, Takeshita in view of Saito and Jan has been discussed above. Takeshita further teaches the course of the second side surface (Cb) is concave when the course of the first side surface (Ca) is convex and vice versa (Figs.2, 6). RE claim 6/1, Takeshita in view of Saito and Jan has been discussed above. Takeshita further teaches a distance between the first side surface (Ca) and the second side surface (Cb) of each permanent magnet 32 from one another, which is determined in a circumferential direction of the permanent magnet arrangement, increases from the inner surface (Ari) to the outer surface (Aro) (Figs.2, 6). RE claim 7/1, Takeshita in view of Saito and Jan has been discussed above. Takeshita further teaches all cut surfaces of each permanent magnet 32 are congruent through section planes perpendicular to the machine axis (Figs.2b, 6). RE claim 8/1, Takeshita in view of Saito and Jan has been discussed above. Takeshita further teaches the inner surface (Ari) of each permanent magnet 32 runs in sections along an inner ring circumference of the permanent magnet arrangement and the outer surface (Aro) of each permanent magnet 32 runs in sections along an outer ring circumference of the permanent magnet arrangement (Fig.3). RE claim 9/1, Takeshita in view of Saito and Jan has been discussed above. Takeshita further teaches a length of the outer surface (Aro) in the circumferential direction is greater than a length of the inner surface (Ari) (Figs.3, 6). RE claim 10/1, Takeshita in view of Saito and Jan has been discussed above. Takeshita further teaches the permanent magnets 32 are configured and the inner surfaces (Ari) and the outer surfaces (Aro) of each permanent magnet 32 are aligned with one another (Figs.3, 6) such that, in at least one section plane perpendicular to the machine axis, a beam running radially from the machine axis through an inner distance center point of the inner surface (Ari) of each permanent magnet 32 intersects the outer surface (Aro) (Figs.3, 6) and/or the outer ring circumference of the respective permanent magnet at a distance from an outer distance center point, wherein the inner distance center point and the outer distance center point are determined by the average path length between end points of the respective inner surface and the respective outer surface. RE claim 11/1, Takeshita in view of Saito and Jan has been discussed above. Takeshita further teaches the permanent magnets 32 are configured and aligned relative to each other such that in at least one section plane perpendicular to the machine axis (of shaft 4), a beam running radially from the machine axis through an outermost point, in the circumferential direction, of the outer surface of a first permanent magnet 32 runs in sections in the corresponding section plane of a second permanent magnet 32 arranged immediately adjacent to the first permanent magnet 32 (Figs.2, 3, 6). RE claim 12/1, Takeshita in view of Saito and Jan has been discussed above. Takeshita further teaches the axial flux machine 100 (Fig.1) with a coil arrangement 23 and with a permanent magnet arrangement 32, wherein the coil arrangement 23 has a plurality of electrical machine coils 23 arranged adjacent to one another in a ring-shaped manner around the machine axis (Fig.1b), wherein the coil arrangement 23 is arranged axially displaced adjacent to the permanent magnet arrangement 32 (Fig.1). RE claim 13/12, Takeshita in view of Saito and Jan has been discussed above. Takeshita further teaches the inner ring circumference and the outer ring circumference of the permanent magnet 32 arrangement correspond substantially to corresponding ring circumferences of the coil arrangement 23 (Fig.1). RE claim 14/12, as discussed above, Jan teaches the axial flux machine is used in a swing leaf door, a sliding door, or a revolving door drive (discussed above, see Jan’s translation page 9, 5th ¶). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)270-5532. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-6PM 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, Seye 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. /THOMAS TRUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 24, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592610
Flywheel Energy Storage Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587045
MOTOR AND CONTROL DEVICE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587050
FLUX CONCENTRATE TYPE ROTOR HAVING ARC TYPE PERMANENT MAGNETS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587051
PERMANENT-MAGNET ROTOR RESISTANT TO THERMAL EXPANSION AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580435
SELECTIVE PERMEABILITY ROTOR SLEEVE FOR INTERIOR PERMANENT MAGNET MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
89%
With Interview (+16.2%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1260 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