DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to the Applicant filing on 7.9.26. Claims 1,4-8,10-16 are pending and have been examined.
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 .
Response to Arguments and Amendments
Specification objection is withdrawn in light of descriptive title amendment.
Drawing objection and claim objection related to claim 12 is withdrawn in light of claim 12 amendment and clarification in Application remarks regarding common use of screws.
The Applicant has made amendment to the independent claim 1 by combining with claims 2,3, 9 and adding new limitation “radially extending flange” , amended claims 4-5,8,12, cancelled dependents 2,3,9 and added new claim 16 which will be examined below.
With respect to 35 U.S.C 102 and 103 rejections, the Applicant provides arguments to which the
Examiner will respond accordingly:
Applicant Argument 1: Claim 1 calls for the outer ring to have a shoulder which forms a radially extending flange which provides a stop. A non-limiting example of such a radially extending flange is illustrated in Figure 1 of the present application and identified by reference number 9. The cited references fail to teach or suggest such an advantageous structure. In Figure 4 of Reimnitz, the axial end face of the bearing race which the Examiner equates with the stop of claim 1 bears against a snap ring which must also engage the motor component on which bearing race is mounted.
Examiner Response 1: Applicant has amended independent claim 1 by combining with claims 2,3, 9 and adding new limitation “radially extending flange” which will be examined below.
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.
(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 1,5-8,10-13,15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Reimnitz et al (US20230378847A1), hereinafter Reimnitz.
Regarding Claim 1, Reimnitz discloses (Figs 1,4) an electric motor (1), comprising:
a stator (4);
a rotor (8); and
a shaft (7) attached to the rotor and being supported by a rolling bearing (9), wherein the rolling bearing is a double-row angular rolling bearing [0046](Fig 1),
wherein the angular rolling bearing (9) comprises two rows (Fig 1) of rolling elements (48,49), the two rows of rolling elements abutting different components on one radial side (16, Para 0046) and bearing against the same component (15) on an opposite side (Fig 1);
wherein the angular rolling bearing (9) comprises an outer ring (Fig 4,15, Cl) which extends over both rows of rolling elements (48,49), and an inner ring (16, 46b or 46d) which extends over only one (48 or 49) of the two rows of rolling elements; and
wherein the outer ring (15, 34) has a shoulder (34) which forms a radially extending flange (34) which provides a stop (34 interfaces against stator shoulder 5s) for axial positioning of the angular rolling bearing (9).
PNG
media_image1.png
698
628
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
452
588
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 5, Reimnitz discloses the electric motor according to claim 1. Reimnitz further discloses wherein the outer ring (15, 34)has a protrusion (15p) which protrudes between the two rows of rolling bearings (48,49) and which abuts the two rows of rolling bearings on opposite sides (S1,S2).
Regarding Claim 6, Reimnitz discloses the electric motor according to claim 5. Reimnitz further discloses wherein the shaft (7) has a stop (41) which, together with the protrusion (15p) of the outer ring (15), axially fixes (41 stops 35a which stops 46a of 16) one of the two rows (48) of rolling bearings.
Regarding Claim 7, Reimnitz discloses the electric motor according to claim 5. Reimnitz further discloses wherein the inner ring (16, 46b or 46d) has a stop (St1,St2) which, together with the protrusion (15p) of the outer ring (15), axially fixes (Figs 1,4) one of the two rows (48,49) of rolling bearings.
Regarding Claim 8, Reimnitz discloses the electric motor according to claim 1. Reimnitz further discloses wherein the inner ring (16) is fitted into a recess (7 has step into which 16 goes in Fig 4) in the shaft (7).
Regarding Claim 10, Reimnitz discloses the electric motor according to claim 1. Reimnitz further discloses wherein the angular rolling bearing (9) is a ball bearing [0046].
Regarding Claim 11, Reimnitz discloses the electric motor according to claim 1. Reimnitz further discloses wherein the angular rolling bearing (9) is fixed with a snap ring (34)[0044](There is no claim recitation whether snap ring is other than claim 1 limitation “radially extending flange).
Regarding Claim 12, Reimnitz discloses the electric motor according to claim 1. Reimnitz further discloses wherein the angular rolling bearing (9) is axially fixed relative to both the shaft and the rotor (Fig 1,36 which is a nut which keeps bearing fixed axially along with 34 and 32).
Regarding Claim 13, Reimnitz discloses the electric motor according to claim 1. Reimnitz further discloses wherein the shaft (7) is a hollow (Ho) shaft.
Regarding Claim 15, Reimnitz discloses the electric motor according to claim 1. Reimnitz further discloses wherein the angular rolling bearing (9) is surrounded over its entire length (27 which is part of stator 4) by the stator (4).
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 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.
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.
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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reimnitz in view of Mori (JP2008074357A English translation).
Regarding Claim 4, Reimnitz discloses the electric motor according to claim 3. Reimnitz does not explicitly disclose wherein one of the two rows of rolling bearings abuts the shaft and the other row of rolling bearings abuts the inner ring.
Mori discloses (Fig 1) wherein one (5a) of the two rows (5a,5b) of rolling bearings abuts the shaft (30) and the other row (5b) of rolling bearings abuts the inner ring (4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed electric motor of Reimnitz with shaft being part of inner raceway as taught by Mori in order to simplify assembly by reducing the number of press fit operation of the inner ring thereby additional operation and also improving quality by reducing burrs due to press fitting.
PNG
media_image3.png
563
442
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reimnitz in view of Takahashi(US20200161939A1).
Regarding Claim 14, Reimnitz discloses the electric motor according to claim 1. Reimnitz does not explicitly disclose wherein the rotor is an external rotor which surrounds the stator.
Takahashi discloses (Fig 2) wherein the rotor (40) is an external (Fig 2) rotor which surrounds the stator (50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed electric motor of Reimnitz with outer rotor configuration of Takahashi in order to take into account design considerations such as ability to retain magnets inside the rotor body without any detachment during rotation, thereby minimizing related structure.
PNG
media_image4.png
402
522
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reimnitz in view of Mori and Takahashi.
Regarding Claim 16, Reimnitz discloses the electric motor according to claim 1. Reimnitz further discloses wherein the outer ring (15, 34)has a protrusion (15p) which protrudes between the two rows of rolling bearings (48,49) and which abuts the two rows of rolling bearings on opposite sides (S1,S2);
wherein the shaft (7) has a stop (41) which, together with the protrusion (15p) of the outer ring (15), axially fixes (41 stops 35a which stops 46a of 16) one of the two rows (48) of rolling bearings.
wherein the inner ring (16, 46b or 46d) has a second stop (St1,St2) which, together with the protrusion (15p) of the outer ring (15), axially fixes (Figs 1,4) one of the two rows (48,49) of rolling bearings;
wherein the inner ring (16) is fitted into a recess (7 has step into which 16 goes in Fig 4) in the shaft (7);
wherein the angular rolling bearing (9) is axially fixed relative to both the shaft and the rotor (Fig 1,36 which is a nut which keeps bearing fixed axially along with 34 and 32), and
wherein the shaft (7) is a hollow (Ho) shaft but does not explicitly disclose wherein one of the two rows of rolling bearings abuts the shaft and the other row of rolling bearings abuts the inner ring and wherein the rotor is an external rotor which surrounds the stator.
Mori discloses (Fig 1) wherein one (5a) of the two rows (5a,5b) of rolling bearings abuts the shaft (30) and the other row (5b) of rolling bearings abuts the inner ring (4).
Takahashi discloses (Fig 2) wherein the rotor (40) is an external (Fig 2) rotor which surrounds the stator (50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed electric motor of Reimnitz with shaft being part of inner raceway as taught by Mori in order to simplify assembly by reducing the number of press fit operation of the inner ring thereby additional operation and also improving quality by reducing burrs due to press fitting and with outer rotor configuration of Takahashi in order to take into account design considerations such as ability to retain magnets inside the rotor body without any detachment during rotation, thereby minimizing related structure.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 VISWANATHAN SUBRAMANIAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4814. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Christopher M Koehler can be reached at 5712723560. 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.
/VISWANATHAN SUBRAMANIAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights