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 . Claims 1 and 3-10 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 6/14, filed 06/02/2026, with respect to objection to drawing and claims and rejection of claims under 35 USC 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection to the drawing and the claims, and rejection of the claims under 35 USC 112(b) have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed on 06/02/2026 with respect to rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC 112(a)(1) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s main argument is that Okita et al., the cited reference for rejection of claims 1-5, does not disclose a claw connection because Okita discloses a U-shaped connection. Examiner notices that a claw connection has two parallel arms forming a U-shape and under broadest reasonable interpretation, a claw portion is a U-shaped portion.
If Applicant further amends claim 1 to distinguish the claw portion, claim 1 would still not be allowable because selecting an electrical connection for connecting wires is within the skills of a person having ordinary skills in the art, and additionally, in the instant application, Applicant has not shown any unexpected improvement or result for using a claw portion over the other connection types.
Finally, Applicant has further argued that because Okita et al. does not disclose a claw portion, which was just rejected, Okita can’t disclose “in a cross section perpendicular to the axial direction, the projection of one of protrusions at least partially overlaps with a projection of one of the claw portion.” However, as shown in the next section in annotated fig. 9, Okita discloses each protrusion and each claw portion overlap in the radial and axial directions and because of this radial-axial overlap, the following limitation is met: in a cross section perpendicular to the axial direction, the projection of one of protrusions at least partially overlaps with a projection of one of the claw portion (and vice versa).
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 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.
Claims 1 and 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Okita et al. (WO 2019082708 A1).
PNG
media_image1.png
497
520
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
573
642
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
388
532
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Okita discloses a motor (1, figs. 1 and 2) comprising:
a casing (casing, annotated fig. 2) including an outer circumferential wall (outer wall, annotated fig. 2) that extends circumferentially around a central axis (J, fig. 2), an opening portion on one axial side of the outer circumferential wall (top, annotated fig. 2), and a bottom on another axial side of the outer circumferential wall (bottom, annotated fig. 2); and
a stator assembly which is molded (“The mold resin portion 35 is manufactured, for example, by insert molding in which molten resin is poured and solidified in a mold in which the stator core 20, the insulator 50, the coil 40, the support member 31, and the bus bar terminal 43 are inserted. The melted resin is poured into one side of the mold in the axial direction. That is, the resin flows around the stator core 20, the insulator 50 and the coil 40, and then reaches around the support member 31 and the bus bar terminal 43.”, see the Machine Translation copy); wherein the stator assembly includes:
a stator (stator, annotated fig. 2);
a busbar assembly (busbar assembly, annotated figs. 1, 3 and 9); and
a molded resin (molded resin, annotated figs. 1 and 2);
PNG
media_image4.png
484
497
media_image4.png
Greyscale
the busbar assembly is supported on the stator (see busbar support 31 on top of stator in fig. 3);
the molded resin covers the busbar assembly in an axial direction (see the quotation above);
the busbar assembly includes a metal busbar (metal busbar, annotated fig. 9);
the busbar includes claw portions (claw portions, annotated fig. 9) that clamp a coil lead wire of the stator (lead wire, annotated fig. 9);
the molded resin is located on one axial side of the stator (top side) and includes
protrusions (protrusions, annotated fig. 1; the three protrusions cover the busbar assembly) that protrude toward one axial side;
in a cross section perpendicular to the axial direction, a projection of the busbar at least
partially overlaps with a projection of one of the protrusions (see figs. 1 and 2; implied because protrusions are formed by over-molding of the busbar assembly; see also annotated fig. 9 wherein each claw portion and each protrusion overlap radially and extend axially);
in a cross section perpendicular to the axial direction, the projection of the one of the protrusions at least partially overlaps with a projection of one of the claw portions (see annotated fig. 9 wherein each claw portion and each protrusion overlap radially and axially); and
the molded resin fills in between the busbar and the protrusions (implied due to over-molding by the molded resin).
Regarding claim 3, Okita discloses the motor according to claim 1, wherein the claw portion extends into one of the protrusions in the axial direction (see annotated fig. 9).
Regarding claim 4, Okita discloses the motor according to claim 1, wherein a number of the claw portions is two or more (three are disclosed) and the claw portions are equidistantly distributed in a circumferential direction (implied due to uniform distribution of the protrusions, see fig. 1).
Regarding claim 5, Okita discloses the motor according to claim 4, wherein the number of the claw portions is three (see figs. 1 and 9; there are three protrusions).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-10 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.
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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure listed on form PTO-892.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MASOUD VAZIRI whose telephone number is (571)272-2340. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 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, the examiner’s supervisor, SEYE IWARERE can be reached on (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.
/MASOUD VAZIRI/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/OLUSEYE IWARERE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights