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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 4 & 7-9 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 11, change “pressuized” to –pressurized--.
In claim 4, line 2, delete “being”.
In claims 7-9, change “is comprised of” to –comprises--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 5 & 8-9 are 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.
Claim 5 depends from itself and is hence indefinite. For purposes of examination, it will be presumed to depend from claim 4.
Claims 8-9 are indefinite. In claims 8-9, “at least one bearing” lacks antecedent basis. Also, it is unclear how a “plain” bearing distinguishes from a “rolling” bearing, and vice versa.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-3, 6-7 & 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Iijima et al. (US 4,799,564).
Regarding claim 1, Iijima teaches a wheel-end electric motor comprising:
a stator 404; a rotor 408 extending along an axis and movably disposed within said stator to define a gap (not numbered) therebetween;
a central shaft 409 extending along said axis and outwardly from said rotor into operably connected relationship with a wheel 428 of a vehicle;
at least one bearing element (not numbered) disposed in supporting relationship with said central shaft 409 to provide bearing support of said rotor 408 within said stator 404;
a pump 414 disposed in fluid communication with said gap for introducing a pressurized lubricant (oil) into said gap (via oil path f in shaft 409; c.10:51-c.11:2); and
said pressurized lubricant disposed in said gap continuously between said rotor 408 and said stator 404 to establish auxiliary lubricant support of said rotor within said stator to complement the bearing support provided by the at least one bearing element (function is inherent since oil passes between the stator 404 and the rotor 408; c.10:64-66; Fig.19).
PNG
media_image1.png
426
482
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, said at least one bearing element includes a plurality of bearing elements (not numbered; Fig.19).
Regarding claim 3, said central shaft 409 extends outwardly from opposing axial sides of said rotor 408 and said plurality of bearing elements include a pair of bearing elements each disposed adjacent one of said axially opposite sides of said rotor in supporting relationship with a respective portion of said central shaft (Fig.19).
Regarding claim 6, said central shaft 409 of said rotor is operably interconnected to a drive assembly (reduction gear) 412 for coupling the wheel-end electric motor to the wheel of a vehicle and establishing the operably coupled relationship.
Regarding claim 7, said drive assembly 412 is comprised of a planetary gear reducer 416.
Regarding claim 9, said at least one bearing is comprised of a “rolling bearing” [sic], i.e., the bearing comprises balls and races (Fig.19).
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, 6-7 & 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murata et al. (US 7,828,095) in view of Macks (US 2,937,294).
Regarding claim 1, Murata teaches a wheel-end electric motor comprising:
a stator 702; a rotor 706 extending along an axis and movably disposed within said stator to define a gap (not numbered) therebetween;
a central shaft 710 extending along said axis and outwardly from said rotor into operably connected relationship with a wheel 10 of a vehicle;
at least one bearing element 820 disposed in supporting relationship with said central shaft 710 to provide bearing support of said rotor within said stator;
a pump 300 disposed in fluid communication with said gap for introducing a pressurized lubricant into said gap (i.e., indirectly, via distribution holes 933 in oil delivery 930 that supplies oil to inside of the motor case; c.9:38-42; c.10:61-64; c.14:1-7; Fig.5).
PNG
media_image2.png
665
422
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Murata does not specifically teach the pressurized lubricant is “disposed in said gap continuously between said rotor and said stator to establish auxiliary lubricant support of said rotor within said stator to complement the bearing support provided by the at least one bearing element.”
But Macks teaches a dynamoelectric device with a fluid supported rotor 11 including a pump 24 disposed in fluid communication (via conduit 27, passages 14 and recesses/apertures 12/13) with a gap (fluid dynamic film region) R for introducing a pressurized lubricant into said gap (said pressurized lubricant disposed in said gap continuously between the rotor 11 and stator 10 to establish auxiliary lubricant support of said rotor within said stator (c.1:15-19; c.1:36-38; c.1:44-50; c.2:15-19; c.4:72-c.5:17; Fig.1).
PNG
media_image3.png
178
352
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to modify Murata and dispose lubricant in the gap continuously between said rotor and said stator to establish auxiliary lubricant support of said rotor within said stator to complement the bearing support provided by the at least one bearing element since Macks teaches this would have provided support of the rotor for rotation. Further, the Macks’ fluid support complements the bearing support provided by the at least one bearing element of Murata.
Regarding claim 2, Murata’s at least one bearing element includes a plurality of bearing elements 820, 830 (Fig.1).
Regarding claim 3, Murata’s central shaft extends outwardly from opposing axial sides of said rotor and said plurality of bearing elements include a pair of bearing elements 820, 830 each disposed adjacent one of said axially opposite sides of said rotor in supporting relationship with a respective portion of said central shaft (Fig.5).
Regarding claim 6, Murata’s central shaft of said rotor is operably interconnected to a drive assembly (reduction mechanism) 200 for coupling the wheel-end electric motor to the wheel of a vehicle and establishing the operably coupled relationship.
Regarding claim 7, Murata’s drive assembly is comprised of a planetary gear reducer 220.
Regarding claim 9, Murata’s at least one bearing 820 is comprised of a “rolling bearing” [sic], i.e., the bearing comprises balls and races (Fig.5).
Regarding claim 10, in Macks the stator 10 defines a passageway 13/14 disposed in fluid communication with said gap and said pump 24 for establishing the fluid communication between said pump and said gap (Fig.1).
Regarding claim 11, in Murata the pump 300 is fluidly coupled to a heat exchanger (knuckle) 400 for removing heat from said lubricant (c.10:66-c.11:2).
Claims 1-7 & 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishioka et al. (EP 1,961,602) in view of Macks (US 2,937,294).
Regarding claim 1, Nishioka teaches a wheel-end electric motor comprising:
a stator 10S; a rotor 10R extending along an axis and movably disposed within said stator to define a gap (not numbered) therebetween;
a central shaft 10b extending along said axis and outwardly from said rotor into operably connected relationship with a wheel 2 of a vehicle;
at least one bearing element 10j disposed in supporting relationship with said central shaft to provide bearing support of said rotor within said stator (Fig.9).
PNG
media_image4.png
655
567
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Nishioka does not teach “a pump disposed in fluid communication with said gap for introducing a pressurized lubricant into said gap; and said pressurized lubricant disposed in said gap continuously between said rotor and said stator to establish auxiliary lubricant support of said rotor within said stator to complement the bearing support provided by the at least one bearing element.”
But, Macks teaches a dynamoelectric device with a fluid supported rotor 11 including a pump 24 disposed in fluid communication (via conduit 27, passages 14 and recesses/apertures 12/13) with a gap (fluid dynamic film region) R for introducing a pressurized lubricant into said gap (said pressurized lubricant disposed in said gap continuously between the rotor 11 and stator 10 to establish auxiliary lubricant support of said rotor within said stator (c.1:15-19; c.1:36-38; c.1:44-50; c.2:15-19; c.4:72-c.5:17; Fig.1).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to modify Nishioka and provide a pump disposed in fluid communication with said gap for introducing a pressurized lubricant into said gap; and said pressurized lubricant disposed in said gap continuously between said rotor and said stator to establish auxiliary lubricant support of said rotor within said stator
since Macks teaches this would have provided support of the rotor for rotation. Further, Macks’ fluid support complements the bearing support provided by the at least one bearing element of Nishioka.
Regarding claim 2, Nishioka’s at least one bearing element includes a plurality of bearing elements 10j (Fig.9).
Regarding claim 3, Nishioka’s central shaft 10b extends outwardly from opposing axial sides of said rotor and said plurality of bearing elements include a pair of bearing elements 10j, 10j each disposed adjacent one of said axially opposite sides of said rotor in supporting relationship with a respective portion of said central shaft (Fig.9).
Regarding claim 4, Nishioka’s central shaft 10b of said rotor extends to a wheel hub mount 3 being “integral” [sic] with said central shaft and configured to receive the wheel 2 of the vehicle to establish the operably coupled relationship (Fig.9).
Regarding claim 5, as best understood, Nishioka’s central shaft 10b includes a wavy spring (flexible coupling) 12 disposed between said at least one bearing and said rotor (Fig.9).
Regarding claim 6, Nishioka’s central shaft 10b of said rotor is operably interconnected to a drive assembly (reduction gear mechanism) 11 for coupling the wheel-end electric motor to the wheel of a vehicle and establishing the operably coupled relationship (Fig.8).
Regarding claim 7, Nishioka’s drive assembly is comprised of a planetary gear reducer 11a/11b (Fig.8).
Regarding claim 9, Nishioka’s at least one bearing 10j is comprised of a “rolling bearing” [sic], i.e., the bearing comprises balls and races (Fig.9).
Regarding claim 10, in Macks the stator 10 defines a passageway 13/14 disposed in fluid communication with said gap and said pump 24 for establishing the fluid communication between said pump and said gap (Fig.1).
Claim 8, as best understood, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over any of Iijima, Murata & Macks or Nishioka & Macks as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Fournier et al. (US 4,387,937).
Iijima teaches at least one “rolling bearing” supporting the shaft in that it comprises balls and races (Fig.19). Iijima does not teach a “plain bearing” [sic] understood as bushings, for instance. Murata & Macks or Nishioka & Macks also do not teach “plain bearings”, either.
But, Fournier teaches an assembly in which a rotor 2 is rotatably mounted by way of bearings 3, 4 in a frame 1 (c.3:51-54; Fig.1). The bearings comprise ball bearings, roller bearings or plain bearings (c.5:50-55).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to configure the “rolling bearing” of Iijima, Murata & Macks or Nishioka & Macks as a “plain bearing” since Fournier teaches these were known equivalents for purposes of mounting a rotor.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BURTON S MULLINS whose telephone number is (571)272-2029. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5. 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 C Patel can be reached on 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.
/BURTON S MULLINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights