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
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 7, line 2 should read in part “flanged rib[[s]] comprises a plurality”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kurahashi (JP 2006006075).
See IDS filed 14 February 2025 for Kurahashi original and machine translation.
In Reference to Claim 1
(See Kura, Figures 2-6 and Figure 1 as annotated by Examiner below)
Kurahashi (Kura) discloses:
A blower, comprising:
a motor (1) including a motor shaft (7);
a centrifugal fan (10) connected to the motor shaft (7) and rotated about an axis (A) of the motor shaft (7) by output of the motor (1); and
a motor casing (11) including a cylindrical part (11a) covering the motor (1) from a side opposite to the centrifugal fan (10) in a direction of the axis (A), wherein
the motor casing (11) includes, outside of an outside surface of the cylindrical part (11a), a flanged rib (11d) extending outward in a radial direction of the axis (A) (See Kura, Paragraphs [0012]-[0016]) and
outside of the outside surface of the cylindrical part (11a), an outer circumferential rib (11b) that is annularly shaped when viewed from the direction of the axis (A) and extends in the direction of the axis (A) (See Kura, Paragraphs [0012]-[0016]), and
the outer circumferential rib (11b) includes a slit (B) penetrating the outer circumferential rib (11b) in the radial direction. (See Kura, Paragraphs [0012]-[0016]).
The Examiner notes that the circumferential rib has multiple radially extending (i.e.-outward) slits which penetrate the surface.
PNG
media_image1.png
592
856
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In Reference to Claim 2
(See Kura, Figures 2-6 and Figure 1 as annotated by Examiner above)
Kura discloses:
wherein the flanged rib (11d) extends in a direction perpendicular to the direction of the axis (A). (See Kura, Paragraphs [0012]-[0016]).
In Reference to Claim 3
(See Kura, Figures 2-6 and Figure 1 as annotated by Examiner above)
Kura discloses:
wherein the flanged rib (11d) is annularly shaped when viewed from the direction of the axis (A). (See Kura, Paragraphs [0012]-[0016]).
In Reference to Claim 5
(See Kura, Figures 2-6 and Figure 1 as annotated by Examiner above)
Kura discloses:
wherein the flanged rib (11d) is provided on the outer circumferential rib (11b) on an outermost side in the radial direction. (See Kura, Paragraphs [0012]-[0016]).
In Reference to Claim 7
(See Kura, Figures 2-6 and Figure 1 as annotated by Examiner above)
Kura discloses:
Wherein the flanged ribs (11d,C) comprises a plurality of flanged ribs. (See Kura, Paragraphs [0012]-[0016]).
In Reference to Claim 8
(See Kura, Figures 2-6 and Figure 1 as annotated by Examiner above)
Kura discloses:
Further comprising a scroll casing (12) including the centrifugal fan (10) incorporated, a suction port opening on a side opposite to the motor (1) across the centrifugal fan (10) in the direction of the axis (A), and a discharge port opening in a direction intersecting the direction of the axis (A). (See Kura, Paragraph [0017]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurahashi (JP 2006006075) in view of Kurahashi (JP 2004222484).
In Reference to Claim 9
Kura discloses the claimed invention except:
Wherein the flanged rib is provided at a position corresponding to a nose part of the scroll case.
Kurahashi et al. (Kura’484) discloses an air conditioner centrifugal fan structure. (See Kura’484, Abstract). Kura’484 discloses a scroll case with a nose part. (See Kura’484, Paragraph [0012]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the scroll case of Kura’484 as the scroll case of Kura, as both references are directed towards air conditioner centrifugal fan structures. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the scroll case structure shape of Kura’484 would have provided an effective radial discharge port for efficient airflow discharge to the vehicle unit. Additionally, as the flanged rib of the motor and centrifugal fan is positioned within the scroll case, the flanged rib is provided at a position corresponding to a nose part.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 27 October 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s arguments that Kura fails to teach or suggest “the outer circumferential rib includes a slit penetrating the outer circumferential rib in the radial direction”, the Office respectfully disagrees.
Applicant argues that Kura fails to teach or suggest “the outer circumferential rib includes a slit penetrating the outer circumferential rib in the radial direction”. Specifically, that the slit of Kura opens in the direction of the A axis but not in a radial direction. However, the slit (B) of Kura penetrates circumferential rib (11b) in both an axial direction and radial direction. (See Claim 1 Figure as annotated by Examiner above). The Examiner notes that the slit (55) of Applicant’s figure 4 also includes both an axial component of penetration and a radial component of penetration into the circumferential rib. (See Applicant’s Figure 4). Additionally, in response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “Water accumulated between the cylindrical part and the outer circumferential rib can be discharged to the outside of the outer circumferential rib through the slit. This prevents water accumulated between the cylindrical part and the outer circumferential rib from going beyond the cylindrical part and entering the inside of the motor”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Therefore, Kura discloses “the outer circumferential rib includes a slit penetrating the outer circumferential rib in the radial direction”.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art fails to teach or fairly suggest “wherein the motor casing further includes, a flange which is provided over the entire circumference of the outside surface of the cylindrical part and extends outward in the radial direction from the outside surface of the cylindrical part and a slope which is provided between the cylindrical part and the outer circumferential rib and is formed to extend in the circumferential direction, the outer circumferential rib extends in the direction of the axis from the flange, and the slope is formed so as to approach the flange in the direction of the axis as approaching the slit in a circumferential direction of the axis.” in claim 10.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kobayashi shows a centrifugal fan device with a circumferential rib and penetrating slit.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MATTHEW THOMAS LARGI whose telephone number is (571)270-3512. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 - 4:00 M-F.
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, Essama Omgba can be reached at (469) 295-9278. 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.
/MATTHEW T LARGI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746