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 disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
– Paragraph [0034] refers to “stator groove 5”; the stator groove is designated by reference character 6 (reference character 5 designates the stator teeth).
– Paragraph [0043] refers to “tooth flanks 4.1 of the respective stator groove 4”; the tooth flanks are designated 5.1 and the stator groove is designated 6 (reference character 4 designates the stator winding and 4.1 the winding overhang).
– Reference character 17 is referred to inconsistently as a “protrusion” and a “projection” (see, e.g., [0044]). Consistent terminology is required.
– The enamel insulation is designated “8.1” in [0033] but is labeled “8i” in the drawings. Consistent reference characters are required.
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.
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 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 15, the claim recites “the contact discs” are sheet metal blades for forming a laminated core. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1, from which claim 15 depends, introduces “stator discs (7),” and does not introduce any “contact discs.” It is therefore unclear whether “the contact discs” refers to the previously recited “stator discs (7)” or to a distinct structure.
Regarding claim 5, the claim recites “the projection (17).” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 4, from which claim 5 depends, introduces “a protrusion (17),” not “a projection.” It is unclear whether “the projection (17)” refers to the previously recited “protrusion (17)” or to a distinct element.
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, 2, 12, 14, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WATANABE(US2022/0393523A1) in view of LANGLARD(US2017/0040859A1).
Regarding claim 1, Watanabe teaches a stator of an electric machine([0034], stator 10 constituting a part of a motor),
comprising a stator body with a stator axis([0035], cylindrical stator core 20 having a center axis Z1)
and an electrical stator winding([0038], coil 40 comprising a plurality of coil wirings 42),
wherein stator grooves are formed in the stator body([0037], slots 30 in the inner circumferential surface; FIG. 1 depicting the stator teeth (5) between adjacent slots (30)),
wherein the stator winding comprises a plurality of interconnected conductor elements (8)([0038], segment conductors 50 connected to one another),
wherein in the stator grooves, pairs of conductor ends of multiple conductor elements are electrically contacted at a contact point in the respective stator groove for forming contact connections([0039], [0042], connecting portions 49/49a of the segment conductors located within the slots 30),
wherein contact surfaces of the pairs of conductor ends are contacted by contact forces([0042], the connecting portions are held in a pressed state and connected to one another by the applied pressure),
wherein the contact forces for forming the contact connections are generated by twisting at least one of the stator discs of the stator body([0006], [0050], the first intermediate portion, which is a part of the stator core, is rotated to form a protrusion that presses the connecting portions of the segment conductors together).
Watanabe describes the rotated element as an axial “intermediate portion” of the stator core and does not explicitly teach that the stator body comprises stator discs or expressly recite stator teeth.
However, in the analogous art of stators for rotary electric machines, Langlard teaches a stator body constituted of stator discs—a “packet of steel sheets” forming a laminated core—provided with stator teeth and stator grooves, the winding conductor ends being received and contacted within the slots (Langlard [0002], [0014]; tooth roots 17).
Watanabe and Langlard are in the same field of stators for rotary electric machines and address the same problem of forming in-slot electrical connections between winding conductor ends without welding. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the stator core of Watanabe as a packet of steel sheets forming a laminated, toothed core, as taught by Langlard, because a laminated toothed stator core is the conventional construction for the stator of a rotary electric machine and yields the predictable benefit of reduced eddy-current losses. In the combination, the rotated axial portion of Watanabe comprises at least one of the stacked stator discs, such that twisting that portion generates the contact forces by twisting at least one of the stator discs, as claimed. This is the application of a known technique (laminated toothed core construction) to a known device (Watanabe’s rotate-to-connect stator) to yield predictable results. KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416 (2007).
Regarding claim 2/1, Watanabe in view of Langlard teaches the stator of claim 1.
Watanabe further teaches wherein the twisted stator discs lie in an axial area of the respective contact point and at least indirectly push with tooth flanks in a circumferential direction against the contact surfaces, causing the contact surfaces of the respective contact connection to contact one another([0050], the intermediate portion is located in the axial region of the connecting portion and, upon rotation, protrudes at the slot side surface to press the connecting portions together in the circumferential direction).
Regarding claim 12/1, Watanabe in view of Langlard teaches the stator of claim 1.
Watanabe further teaches wherein the twisted stator discs are fixed in the stator body([0036], [0050], the rotated intermediate portion is fastened and thereby fixed within the stator core).
Regarding claim 14, Watanabe in view of Langlard teaches an electric machine with a stator according to claim 1, for the reasons set forth above with respect to claim 1 (Watanabe [0034], the stator constitutes a part of a motor).
Regarding claim 15/1, Watanabe in view of Langlard teaches the stator of claim 1.
Langlard further teaches wherein the [stator] discs are sheet metal blades for forming a laminated core(Langlard [0002], [0014], a packet of steel sheets forming the stator body).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the stator discs of the combination as sheet-metal blades forming a laminated core, as taught by Langlard, because a laminated core of stacked steel sheets is the conventional stator construction and yields the predictable benefit of reduced eddy-current losses. KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416 (2007).
Regarding claim 16/1, Watanabe in view of Langlard teaches the stator of claim 1.
Watanabe further teaches wherein the contact connections are generated by twisting individual stator discs or one or more groups of stator discs([0047], [0050], one or more intermediate portions of the stator core are rotated to form the connections).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 17, 18, 19, and 20 are 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.
Claim 5 would be allowable if the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth above is overcome and the claim is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 3/1, the prior art of record does not teach the limitation, “…wherein the conductor ends (8e) of at least one of the contact connections (11) are connected in a positive-locking manner”, in combination of the limitations of the base claim and the intervening claims.
Regarding claims 4/1, 5/4, and 17/4, the prior art of record does not teach the limitation, “…one of the two conductor ends (8e) of the respective contact connection (11) comprises a recess (16), and the other conductor end (8e) of the contact connection (11) has a protrusion (17) projecting into the recess (16) of the one conductor end (8e), wherein the recess (16) and the protrusion (17) of the respective contact connection (11) have corresponding contact surfaces (12).”, in combination of the limitations of the base claim and the intervening claims.
Regarding claim 6/1 and 18/6, the prior art of record does not teach the limitation, “…and that an additional connection element (19) is provided as a third contact partner of the respective contact connection (11), connecting the two conductor ends (8e) of the respective contact connection (11) together”, in combination of the limitations of the base claim and the intervening claims.
Regarding claim 7/1, the prior art of record does not teach the limitation, “…wherein an adhesive bonding agent is provided between the contact partners (8e,19) of the respective contact connection (11)”, in combination of the limitations of the base claim and the intervening claims.
Regarding claim 8/1, the prior art of record does not teach the limitation, “…wherein the contact surfaces (12) of the respective contact connection (11) are configured parallel or quasi-parallel to tooth flanks (5.1) of the respective stator groove (6)”, in combination of the limitations of the base claim and the intervening claims.
Regarding claim 9/1 and 19/9, the prior art of record does not teach the limitation, “wherein in the respective stator groove(6) an additional element(20) is provided for generating an additional contact force”, in combination of the limitations of the base claim and the intervening claims.
Regarding claim 10/1, the prior art of record does not teach the limitation, “…a groove insulation (21) is provided in an area of the contact points (10) between the respective stator groove (6) and the conductor elements (8) lying in the stator groove (6)”, in combination of the limitations of the base claim and the intervening claims.
Regarding claim 11/1, the prior art of record does not teach the limitation, “…wherein the conductor elements (8) of the stator winding (4) are made of flat or rectangular wire and each have a rectangular conductor cross section”, in combination of the limitations of the base claim and the intervening claims.
Regarding claim 13/1, the prior art of record does not teach the limitation, “…wherein the stator winding (4) is divided into at least two winding parts in an axial direction with respect to the stator axis (3.1), wherein each winding part is formed from a plurality of conductor elements (8), wherein each of the conductor ends (8e) of the one winding part are respectively contacted with one of the conductor ends (8e) of another winding part, forming one of the contact connections (11)”, in combination of the limitations of the base claim and the intervening claims.
Regarding claim 20/12, the prior art of record does not teach the limitation, “…wherein the twisted stator discs (7) are fixed in the stator body (3) by welding the twisted stator discs (7) with adjacent stator discs (7) or by a press fit between the stator body (3) and a stator housing”, in combination of the limitations of the base claim and the intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
ONUMA(JP2021097499A) – in-slot connection of segment conductors by a press-fit conductive connecting pin.
KOGA(JP2019134578A)– in-slot joining of the tip ends of segment conductors.
IMAMURA(JP2018164374A) – axially-divided stator core sections offset in the circumferential direction to clamp components within the slots.
SAWAHATA(JP2021013281A) – segment-conductor connection by axial pressing via a bolt and elastic member.
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
Prosecution Insights