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 . This Office Action is responsive to the Applicant' s communication filed July 8, 2026. In view of this communication, claims 1 and 5-9 are now pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 6, ¶ 2, filed July 8, 2026, with respect to the specification have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of April 8, 2026 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 6, ¶ 3 – Page 7, ¶ 2, filed July 8, 2026, with respect to claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of April 8, 2026 has been withdrawn.
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.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim 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.
Regarding Claim 9, the limitation “wherein plurality of second coils” is recited in line 2. It is unclear whether this limitation refers to “the plurality of second coils” as recited in Page 2, Line 1 of claim 1, or a separate “plurality of second coils”. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as reading “wherein the plurality of second coils”, consistent with the language of claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 5-8 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding Claim 1, allowability resides, at least in part, with the prior art not showing or fairly teaching the specific limitation of:
-- the position sensor (P1-3) is disposed between two of the second coils (V1/U2/W2/V3/U4/V4) adjacent to each other in the circumferential direction, and does not overlap the two of the second coils (V1/U2/W2/V3/U4/V4) in the direction of the rotation axis. (see Figure 6 below) – in the combination as claimed.
PNG
media_image1.png
604
596
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claims 5-8 are allowed due to their dependence on claim 1.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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 CHARLIE FRANK MANN whose telephone number is (703)756-1275. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30AM - 4:30PM PST.
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, Oluseye 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.
/C.F.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/ALEXANDER A SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights