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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The bare title “MOTOR” does not particularly point out the nature of the invention and is of no assistance in classifying or searching the application. A more indicative title is required. The Examiner suggests:
— MOTOR WITH BEARING HOLDING MEMBER.
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 1-5 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 1 — “distance.” Claim 1 recites “in a radial direction, a distance between the first bearing and the holding member is smaller than a distance between the second bearing and the holding member.” The term “a distance between the [bearing] and the holding member” is indefinite. It cannot be determined whether “distance” denotes (i) the radial clearance or gap between the radial outer surface of the bearing and the opposing inner surface of the holding member, (ii) the radial position of the holding-member inner surface relative to the central axis, or (iii) some other radial measure. The specification at ¶ [0033] describes a radial clearance, but claim 1 is not so limited, and the claim language standing alone does not apprise one of ordinary skill in the art of the metes and bounds of the limitation. Clarification is required, for example by reciting that the “distance” is the radial clearance between the bearing and the holding member. Because claim 1 is indefinite as to “distance,” the limitation is given its broadest reasonable interpretation for purposes of the prior-art rejection below. See MPEP § 2173.06. The § 112(b) and § 102 rejections of claim 1 travel together; resolving the indefiniteness
Claim 3 — “the other side.” Claim 3 recites that an adhesive material is disposed at the other side in the axial direction of the first bearing. “The other side” lacks proper antecedent basis. Claim 1 introduces “one side in an axial direction of the shaft” and “another side in the axial direction of the shaft”; claim 3 then recites “the other side in the axial direction of the first bearing” — a definite article applied to a phrase not previously introduced, with the reference object shifted from the shaft to the first bearing. Clarification of the recited side, and consistent reference, is required.
Claim 4 — “the one side.” Claim 4 recites that an adhesive material is disposed at the one side in the axial direction of the first bearing. “The one side” lacks proper antecedent basis for the same reason: claim 1’s “one side” is referenced to the shaft, not to the first bearing, and claim 4 introduces a definite article without a prior recitation of “one side … of the first bearing.” Clarification and consistent reference are required.
Claims 2–5 — dependency. Claims 2–5 each depend from claim 1 and therefore incorporate and inherit the indefiniteness of paragraph (a) above. See MPEP § 2173.05(g).
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, 2, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by OYAMA(JP2019134526A).
Regarding claim 1, Oyama discloses: a motor (motor 10) comprising a shaft(¶ [0019]; FIG. 3, shaft 21);
a first bearing disposed at one side in an axial direction of the shaft(¶ [0032]; FIG. 4, first bearing 41 — upper);
a second bearing disposed at another side in the axial direction of the shaft(¶ [0032]; FIG. 4, second bearing 42 — lower);
a holding member configured to hold the first bearing and the second bearing(¶¶ [0027], [0032], [0037]; FIG. 4, bearing holder portion 33 — first bearing 41 fixed to inner surface 331, second bearing 42 fixed to inner surface 333, coil spring 43 axially between bearings);
and in a radial direction, a distance between the first bearing and the holding member is smaller than a distance between the second bearing and the holding member(¶ [0028]; FIG. 4, inner surface 331 positioned radially inward of inner surface 333 — radial distance from central axis J to 331 shorter than to 333).
Under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the indefinite term “distance” (see the § 112(b) rejection above), the radial position of the first-bearing mounting surface 331 reads on the smaller “distance,” and the second-bearing mounting surface 333 reads on the larger “distance.” Every limitation of claim 1 is thus met. See MPEP §§ 2131, 2173.06.
Regarding claim 2/1, Oyama teaches the motor according to claim 1.
Oyama further teaches wherein in the radial direction, a width of a surface, opposing the first bearing, of the holding member is larger than a width of a surface, opposing the second bearing, of the holding member(¶ [0028]; radial thickness of first cylindrical portion 330 greater than radial thickness of second cylindrical portion 332).
Regarding claim 5/1, Oyama teaches the motor according to claim 1.
Oyama further teaches wherein the second bearing and the holding member are bonded to each other by an adhesive material(¶¶ [0079], [0082]; adhesive 45 applied to inner surface 333 bonds radial outer surface 421 of second bearing 42 to bearing holder portion 33).
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 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being anticipated by OYAMA(JP2019134526A) in view OZAWA(JP2000262004A).
Regarding claims 3/1 and 4/1, Oyama teaches the motor according to claim 1.
Oyama further teaches wherein the first bearing and the holding member are bonded to each other by an adhesive material (¶¶ [0078]–[0079]; adhesive 45 applied to inner surface 331 bonds the radial outer surface of first bearing 41 to bearing holder portion 33).
Oyama is silent wherein an adhesive material is disposed at the [one / other] side in the axial direction of the first bearing.
However, Ozawa teaches an adhesive material … disposed at the [one / other] side in the axial direction of the first bearing, the first bearing and the holding member being bonded thereby (¶¶ [0031]–[0032]; FIG. 2, cylindrical bearing holder 5b with receiving surfaces at both ends — outer ring 3b of first bearing 3 fixed with adhesive, its axially-outward end face in contact with the holder receiving surface, under applied preload).
Ozawa and Oyama are in the same field of motor bearing holders that hold a pair of bearings under preload and address the same problem of fixing a bearing to its holder. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to dispose Oyama’s bonding adhesive at an axial side of the first bearing 41, against the holder, as taught by Ozawa. One would be motivated to do this in order to fix the first bearing’s end face to the holder and thereby secure it against axial displacement while maintaining the spring preload. This is the application of a known bonding technique to a known bearing-holder structure to yield predictable results. KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416 (2007).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
HAKODA(JP2019143516A) — fan-motor manufacturing / center-of-gravity balancing; a housing (6) holds both bearings with a preload spring, the second bearing fixed by adhesive filling the radial space (¶¶ [0019]–[0022]). Silent on a differential first-versus-second radial clearance.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMED QURESHI whose telephone number is (571)-272-8310. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 AM - 6:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tulsidas 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pairdirect. uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/MOHAMMED AHMED QURESHI/ Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/TULSIDAS C PATEL/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights