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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following limitation must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
“the cooling surface of the cooling component of the first module is placed at a pass-through cavity provided in the cooling component of the second module, and vice versa” in claim 5,
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
The numbering of claims is not in accordance with 37 CFR 1.126 which requires the original numbering of the claims to be preserved throughout the prosecution. When claims are canceled, the remaining claims must not be renumbered. When new claims are presented, they must be numbered consecutively beginning with the number next following the highest numbered claims previously presented (whether entered or not).
The newly added claims 18, 19 on last page of the claim set have been assumed as numbered 20 and 21.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 5 recited:
“the cooling surface of the cooling component of the first module is placed at a pass-through cavity provided in the cooling component of the second module, and vice versa”.
However, the original disclosure doesn’t describe and/or show any pass-through cavity and lack any detail explanation of “of the cooling component of the first module is placed at a pass-through cavity” as claimed.
Therefore, claim 5 contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art.
Claim 14 is rejected for its dependency on claim 5
Claims 5, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 5 does not further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends because claim 5 depends on itself.
Claim 14 is rejected for its dependency on claim 5
Claim 15 does not further limit the subject matter of the claim 6 upon which it depends because claim 15 recited the same limitation as claim 6.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6, 11-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stahlhut et al. (US 2008/0100166 A1).
RE claim 1, Stahlhut teaches electric motor (Figs.1-4 and ¶ 22) comprising: a rotor 10 rotatable about a rotation axis (of shaft 22), a stator 12 provided with windings 14 (202) (see Fig.2 and ¶ 20) placed along a circumference, called here stator circumference (Fig.2), about said axis, each winding for creating a magnetic field by which to set the rotor into rotation (¶ 29), a circuit 308 (Fig.3) for circulating refrigerant fluid (¶ 24, 28), a cooling component having a cooling surface extending in a plane perpendicular to said axis (of shaft 22) to cover at least one circular crown, or one arc of circular crown, of the stator circumference equal substantially to at least ¼ or ⅓ or ½ of the area circumscribed by the stator circumference (see Figs.1, 3, the spiral surface of channel 308 cover more than ½ of stator circumference), wherein said cooling surface comprises at least one channel 308 which is part of the circuit and comprises an inlet 31, from which it is supplied with refrigerant fluid circulating in the circuit, and an outlet 32, from which it discharges heated fluid into the circuit (¶ 14).
RE claim 2/1, Stahlhut teaches by having only one rotor 10 (Fig.1), and said cooling surface 308 covers all or nearly all of the area circumscribed by the stator circumference (Figs.1-3).
RE claim 3/2, Stahlhut teaches said cooling surface of the component 308 extends in a plane perpendicular to said axis to cover a circular sector of the stator circumference substantially equal to at least ¼ or ⅓ or ½ of the area circumscribed by the stator circumference ((see Figs.1, 3, the spiral surface of channel 308 cover more than ½ of stator circumference).
RE claim 4/1, Stahlhut teaches having two independent rotors 10, 110 (Fig.5), and comprising: a first and second motor module (191, 193), each module comprising a rotor and a stator as defined in claim 1, a drive shaft 24 integral with the rotor, the rotor 10 and stator 12 of one module being coaxial to the rotor 10 and stator 12 of the other module (Fig.5), the drive shaft 24 of a module 191 being coaxial to the drive shaft 24 of the other module 193 and projecting from the motor in the opposite direction to the other shaft 24, a circuit for circulating refrigerant fluid (Fig.3), a cooling component 308 as defined in claim 1, mounted between and in contact with the two modules 191, 193 (Fig.5).
RE claim 6/1, Stahlhut teaches a or each channel 308 in the cooling surface extends from the respective inlet 31 along a path that follows an arc of a circumference having a radius less than that of said stator circumference (Figs.3, 4).
Claims 11/2, 12/3, 13/4 and 15/6 are rejected for the same reason as claim 6/1.
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.
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.
Claims 7 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stahlhut in view of Jore et al. (US 2021/0351658 A1).
RE claim 7/1, Stahlhut has been discussed above. Stahlhut does not teach the cooling component comprises two overlapping plates hermetically attached together and extending over a flat surface, the two plates being separated locally by a gap to form a or each said channel.
Jore teaches cooling component comprises two overlapping plates 47 hermetically attached together and extending over a flat surface (Fig.3A), the two plates being separated locally by a gap to form a or each said channel (see channel between fin of heat plate 47), doing so would improve cooling efficiency.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Stahlhut by duplicating the cooling component comprises two overlapping plates hermetically attached together and extending over a flat surface, the two plates being separated locally by a gap to form a or each said channel, as taught by Jore, for the same reasons as discussed above.
Furthermore, it has been held by the court held that mere duplication of part has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
Claims 16/2, 17/3 and 18/4 are rejected for similar reason as claim 7/1.
Claims 8 and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stahlhut in view of Miyama et al. (US 2014/0232217 A1).
RE claim 8/1, Stahlhut has been discussed above.
Stahlhut further teaches the cooling surface comprises the sequence of or consists of the sequence of: a first/second segment having a radius less than that of said stator circumference (discussed above).
Stahlhut further teaches a or each channel in the cooling surface comprises the sequence of or consists of the sequence of: a first segment extending from the respective inlet 31 along a path that follows a first arc of a circumference having a radius less than that of said stator circumference (Fig.3), a second segment, a third segment extending from the second segment to the respective outlet 32 along a path that follows a second arc of a circumference having a radius smaller than that of said circumference and different from the first arc (Fig.3).
Stahlhut does not teach the second segment that make a U-turn and the third segment extending from the second segment. In other words, Stahlhut does not teach a U-shape profile cooling surface.
Miyama teaches a or each channel in the cooling surface comprises the sequence of or consists of the sequence of: a first segment 43 (Fig.2) extending from the respective inlet (water supply), a second segment that makes a U-turn (flow approximately 360 degrees in a reverse direction), a third segment extending from the second (Figs.1, 2) for the purpose of suppressing temperature increases inside the motor (¶ 42, 43). Furthermore, the shape of the cooling surface can be adjusted to optimize cooling efficiency.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Stahlhut by having a U-shape profile cooling surface, as taught by Miyama, for the same reasons as discussed above.
Furthermore, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size or shape of a component. A change in size or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 E 3SPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Claim 19 is rejected for the same reason as claim 2.
Claims 20 and 21 (numbered as 18 and 19 on page 6 of the claim set) are rejected for similar reason as claims 8 and 19.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
RE claim 9/1, the prior-art does not teach, inter alia, the cooling component is mounted on a connecting flange comprising a circular attachment ring having a radius substantially equal to that of said stator circumference, the flange comprising a central portion integral with the circular ring configured to house a rotary encoder.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)270-5532. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-6PM EST.
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.
/THOMAS TRUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights