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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 13-14, filed 12/18/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-2 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the claim amendments.
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 4 recites “a fourth coil winding,” which was already recited in claim 3.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 20 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 13. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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. Evidence that claim 1 fail(s) to correspond in scope with that which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA applications the applicant regards as the invention can be found in the reply filed 12/18/2025. In that paper, the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA applications the applicant has stated a first axial surface (118) and a second axial surface (119), and this statement indicates that the invention is different from what is defined in the claim(s) because the claim recites the third coil to be orthogonal to the first coil, but the first coil extends over the first axial surface and the third coil extends over the second axial surface, requiring the first and third coils to be parallel to each other, not orthogonal. Claim 3 recites a fourth coil which is orthogonal to the third coil, indicating the third coil does not extend over the inner radial surface.
For examination purposes, claim 1 will be examined as a third coil winding arranged orthogonal to the second coil winding instead of the first coil winding.
Claims 2-12 are rejected for depending upon claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-12 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Regarding claim 1, the specific limitation of “a first coil winding extending across a first portion of the first axial face;
a second coil winding extending across a first portion of the outer radial surface; and a third coil winding: extending across a first portion of the second axial face; and
arranged orthogonal to the first coil winding; and cooperating with the first coil winding and the second coil winding to define a throat extending around the outer radial surface, the first axial face, and the second axial face of the rotor; and
a shaft coupled to the rotor and coaxial with the motor axis” in the combination as claimed are neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
Walsh (US 2018/0166946 A1) discloses a coil winding (305) around a rotor (118), but fails to disclose the rotor attached to a shaft coaxial with the motor axis.
Claims 2-12 are allowable for depending upon claim 1.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 13, the specific limitation of “a second coil winding: cooperating with the first coil winding to form a first unitary structure defining a first L-shaped geometry extending partially across the first axial face and extending partially across the outer radial surface; and a shaft coupled to the body and aligned to the motor axis” in the combination as claimed are neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
Walsh (US 2018/0166946 A1) discloses a coil winding (305) around a rotor (118), but fails to disclose the rotor attached to a shaft coaxial with the motor axis.
Claims 14-19 are allowable for depending upon claim 13.
Conclusion
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 MINKI CHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-0521. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 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, 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.
/MINKI CHANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/OLUSEYE IWARERE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights