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 .
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 23, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on page 7-8 of the remarks that, “Nishida describes a pendulum damper (6) disposed between a disconnecting clutch (5) and a motor (2) (e.g., see FIG. 1). Nishida states pendulum damper (6) is "disposed downstream of the disconnecting clutch 5" (par. [0055]) and "disposed upstream of the motor 2" (par. [0050]). While the pendulum damper may be connected to the rotor (2b) as shown in FIG. 3 and described in par. [0064], the pendulum damper (6) is not integrated into the rotor (2b) such that a plurality of pendular mass dampers is disposed within an end plate of the rotor, as required by claims 1 and 10. Accordingly, Applicant submits claims 1 and 10 are patentable over Nishida.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees, because the pendulum damper (6) is considered integrated into the rotor assembly. When two distinct parts like a pendulum damper and a rotor shaft are combined to function as a single, cohesive unit, they are described as being integrated. They work together to achieve a shared goal that neither could accomplish alone (e.g., the rotor shaft transmits torque while the pendulum damper actively cancels out torsional vibrations). It is also well known that CPVAs commonly use four pendulum masses. Therefore , Nishida teaches the limitations “a centrifugal pendulum vibration absorber (CPVA) assembly integrated into the rotor assembly” and “a plurality of pendular mass dampers.”
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-8 of the remarks, filed June 23, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 10 under 35 USC § 102 arguing, “Nishida fails to describe or suggest "wherein the CPVA assembly comprises a plurality of pendular mass dampers disposed within an end plate of the rotor assembly," 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 Nishida (US 2019/0070948) and Bai (US 2011/0186395).
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7 of the remarks filed June 23, 2026, with respect to figure 3, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of the drawings has been withdrawn.
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.
Claims 1, 3-5, 10, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishida (US 2019/0070948), in view of Bai (US 2011/0186395).
Regarding claim 1, Nishida discloses an electric motor/generator (2 of Figures 1-9; Para. 0042) configured to couple to an output of an internal combustion engine (1 of Figure 1-14; Para. 0042) and generate power for an electrified vehicle (Ve of Figures 1-14), the motor/generator comprising:
a stator assembly (2a of Figure 1-9);
a rotor assembly (2b of Figure 1-9); and
a centrifugal pendulum vibration absorber (CPVA) assembly (6 of Figure 1-14; Para. 0054-0055) integrated into the rotor assembly and configured to absorb one or more vibrations and/or noise orders over an entire speed range of the electric motor/generator.
Nishida does not explicitly disclose wherein the CPVA assembly comprises a plurality of pendular mass dampers (CPVAs commonly use four pendulum masses) disposed within an end plate of the rotor assembly.
Bai discloses wherein the CPVA assembly (10 of Figure 1 and 4) comprises a plurality of pendular mass dampers (14 of Figure 1 and 4) disposed within an end plate (12 of Figure 1 and 4) of the rotor assembly (Para. 0013).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing of the claimed invention to have the plurality of mass dampers of Nishida be disposed within an end plate of the rotor assembly, as taught by Bai, to provide a CPVA having a pendulum mass path that is stable during rapid engine speed changes and that provides maximum vibration reduction [Bai: Para. 0005].
Regarding claim 3, Nishida discloses all of the elements of the current invention as mentioned above, however does not explicitly disclose wherein each pendular mass damper (6 of Figure 1-14; Para. 0054) includes a mass disposed within a slot (Para. 0054, implied with rolling member) formed in the end plate.
Bai discloses wherein each pendular mass damper (14 of Figure 1 and 4) includes a mass (32 of Figure 4) disposed within a slot (30A, 30B of Figure 4) formed in the end plate (12 of Figure 1 and 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing of the claimed invention to have the pendular mass damper of Nishida disposed within a slot formed in the end plate, as taught by Bai, to provide a CPVA having a pendulum mass path that is stable during rapid engine speed changes and that provides maximum vibration reduction [Bai: Para. 0005].
Regarding claim 4, Nishida discloses wherein the each pendular mass damper is a spherical pendulum (6 of Figure 1-14; Para. 0054, implied with rolling member).
Regarding claim 5, Nishida discloses wherein the each pendular mass damper is a roller pendulum (6 of Figure 1-14; Para. 0054, implied with rolling member).
Regarding claim 10, Nishida discloses an electric vehicle (Ve of Figures 1-14), comprising:
an electric drive module (EDM) configured to drive the electric vehicle (Para. 0042);
a high voltage battery system configured to power the EDM (Para. 0042);
an internal combustion engine (1 of Figure 1-14; Para. 0042);
a motor/generator (2 of Figures 1-9; Para. 0042) coupled to an output of the internal combustion engine and configured to selectively generate power to charge the high voltage battery system and/or provide power directly to the EDM (Para. 0042); and
a centrifugal pendulum vibration absorber (CPVA) assembly (6 of Figure 1-14; Para. 0054-0055) integrated into a rotor assembly (2b of Figure 1-9) of the motor/generator and configured to absorb one or more vibrations and/or noise orders over an entire speed range of the motor/generator.
Nishida does not explicitly disclose wherein the CPVA assembly comprises a plurality of pendular mass dampers (CPVAs commonly use four pendulum masses) disposed within an end plate of the rotor assembly.
Bai discloses wherein the CPVA assembly (10 of Figure 1 and 4) comprises a plurality of pendular mass dampers (14 of Figure 1 and 4) disposed within an end plate (12 of Figure 1 and 4) of the rotor assembly (Para. 0013).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing of the claimed invention to have the plurality of mass dampers of Nishida be disposed within an end plate of the rotor assembly, as taught by Bai, to provide a CPVA having a pendulum mass path that is stable during rapid engine speed changes and that provides maximum vibration reduction [Bai: Para. 0005].
Regarding claim 13, Nishida discloses all of the elements of the current invention as mentioned above, however does not explicitly disclose wherein each pendular mass damper (6 of Figure 1-14; Para. 0054) includes a mass disposed within a slot (Para. 0054, implied with rolling member) formed in the end plate.
Bai discloses wherein each pendular mass damper (14 of Figure 1 and 4) includes a mass (32 of Figure 4) disposed within a slot (30A, 30B of Figure 4) formed in the end plate (12 of Figure 1 and 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing of the claimed invention to have the pendular mass damper of Nishida disposed within a slot formed in the end plate, as taught by Bai, to provide a CPVA having a pendulum mass path that is stable during rapid engine speed changes and that provides maximum vibration reduction [Bai: Para. 0005].
Regarding claim 14, Nishida discloses wherein the each pendular mass damper is a spherical pendulum (6 of Figure 1-14; Para. 0054, implied with rolling member).
Regarding claim 15, Nishida discloses wherein the each pendular mass damper is a roller pendulum (6 of Figure 1-14; Para. 0054, implied with rolling member).
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishida (US 2019/0070948) and Bai (US 2011/0186395) as applied to claims 3 and 13 above respectively, and further in view of Shaw (US 5,495,924).
Regarding claims 6, 16, Nishida discloses all of the elements of the current invention as mentioned above, however does not explicitly disclose wherein the each pendular mass damper is a laminated bifilar pendulum.
Shaw discloses wherein the each pendular mass damper is a laminated bifilar pendulum (abstract; Col. 1:7-12, Col. 4:13-19).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing of the claimed invention to use a laminated bifilar pendulum in the vehicle of Nishida, as taught by Shaw, so that the frequency of small oscillation is NQ/2 producing half-order absorber pairs capable of total elimination of a torque harmonic in a rotating element wherein N is the number of torque pulses per rotation and Q is the nominal rate of rotation [Shaw: Col. 2:11-19].
Claims 7-9 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishida (US 2019/0070948) and Bai (US 2011/0186395) as applied to claims 1 and 10 above respectively, and further in view of Morozumi (US 2012/0098359).
Regarding claims 7, 17, Nishida discloses all of the elements of the current invention as mentioned above, however does not explicitly disclose wherein the rotor assembly (2b of Figure 1-9) includes opposed first and second end plates (each end of the rotor), wherein the CVPA assembly (6 of Figure 1-14; Para. 0054-0055) is integrated into the first end plate.
Morozumi discloses wherein the rotor assembly (10 of Figure 1-3) includes opposed first and second end plates (16, 18 of Figure 1-3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing of the claimed invention to have the rotor assembly of Nishida includes opposed first and second end plates, as taught by Morozumi, to restrict the axial movement of the permanent magnets any other components on the rotor [Morozumi: Para. 0045].
Bai discloses wherein the CVPA assembly (10 of Figure 1 and 4) is integrated into the first end plate (12 of Figure 1 and 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing of the claimed invention to have the CVPA assembly of Nishida integrated into a first end plate of the rotor assembly, as taught by Bai, to provide a CPVA having a pendulum mass path that is stable during rapid engine speed changes and that provides maximum vibration reduction [Bai: Para. 0005].
Regarding claims 8, 18, Nishida discloses a side of the rotor assembly (2b of Figure 1-9) closest to the internal combustion engine (1 of Figure 1-14; Para. 0042).
Nishida does not explicitly disclose a first end plate.
Bai discloses a first end plate (12 of Figure 1 and 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing of the claimed invention to have Nishida comprise a first end plate, as taught by Bai, to provide a CPVA having a pendulum mass path that is stable during rapid engine speed changes and that provides maximum vibration reduction [Bai: Para. 0005].
Regarding claims 9, 19, Nishida discloses all of the elements of the current invention as mentioned above, however does not explicitly disclose wherein the CPVA assembly includes a plurality of pendular mass dampers (6 of Figure 1-14; Para. 0054-0055; CPVAs commonly use four pendulum masses) arranged circumferentially about an outer perimeter of the first end plate.
Bai discloses wherein the CPVA assembly (10 of Figure 1 and 4) includes a plurality of pendular mass dampers (14 of Figure 1 and 4) arranged circumferentially about an outer perimeter of the first end plate (12 of Figure 1 and 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing of the claimed invention to have the plurality of mass dampers of Nishida arranged circumferentially about an outer perimeter of the first end plate, as taught by Bai, to provide a CPVA having a pendulum mass path that is stable during rapid engine speed changes and that provides maximum vibration reduction [Bai: Para. 0005].
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 CHARLES H REID whose telephone number is (571)272-9248. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-4:45 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, Tulsidas Patel can be reached at 571-272-2098. 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.
/Charles Reid Jr./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights