DETAILED ACTION
This is the first office action in response to U.S. Application 18/878,076. All claims are pending.
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 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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kawata (US 20210354746).
Regarding claim 1, Kawata teaches a drive device (electric drive device 1) comprising:
an electric motor unit including an electric motor (Fig. 8 motor 30); and
an electric motor control unit configured to supply a current to the electric motor ([0060] “The ECU 10 supplies a current to the motor 30 based on the calculated auxiliary steering command value”), wherein
the electric motor unit includes at least one device selected from a group of a decelerator, a brake, and a rotation position detector ([0061] discusses speed reducer 75 (decelerator) with a worm shaft that rotates integrally with the shaft of motor 30),
the electric motor control unit includes a substrate and a plurality of electric components fixed to the substrate ([0088] “the circuit board 20 includes a board body 21 and a plurality of electronic components mounted on the board body 21”), and
the electric motor control unit is coaxially fixed to an end portion of the electric motor unit in a direction of a rotation axis of the electric motor, and is formed so as to be detachable from the electric motor unit through an operation by an operator (Fig. 8 shows ECU 10 coaxially fixed to an end portion of motor 30 and can be detachable from the electric motor as seen by the fasteners above ECU 10 (exploded view)).
Regarding claim 2, Kawata teaches wherein the electric motor control unit is fixed to the end portion of the electric motor unit with a fastening member (Fig. 8 shows ECU 10 fixed to motor 30 and can be detachable from the electric motor as seen by the fasteners above ECU 10 (exploded view)).
Regarding claim 3, Kawata teaches comprising a wire body for connecting to an external device ([0065] discusses a wire harness that can be inserted in and removed from a connector CNT), wherein
the wire body includes a connecting member for connecting to the substrate ([0065] wire harness as shown in Fig. 8 connected to the substrate using connector CNT), and
the connecting member is formed so as to be attached to a member of the substrate or detached from the member of the substrate ([0065] wire harness as shown in Fig. 8 connected to the substrate using connector CNT).
Regarding claim 4, Kawata teaches wherein the connecting member includes a connector or a crimp terminal ([0065] wire harness as shown in Fig. 8 connected to the substrate using connector CNT).
Regarding claim 5, Kawata teaches wherein the substrate is formed larger than at least one device selected from a group of the electric motor, the decelerator, the brake, and the rotation position detector in a radial direction (Fig. 8 shows the substrate being larger in a radial direction than the electric motor and Fig. 2 shows the substrate being larger in a radial direction than the speed reducer (decelerator)).
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 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawata in view of Nagasaka (US 20090272585).
Regarding claim 6, Kawata teaches an electric motor control unit connected to an electric motor unit, but does not explicitly teach comprising a torque sensor configured to detect a torque output from the electric motor unit, wherein the torque sensor is arranged at an end portion on a side opposite to one end portion of the electric motor unit at which the electric motor control unit is arranged.
Nagasaka teaches comprising a torque sensor configured to detect a torque output from the electric motor unit, wherein the torque sensor is arranged at an end portion on a side opposite to one end portion of the electric motor unit at which the electric motor control unit is arranged ([0028] discusses a torque sensor that detects a torque output from the actuator with Fig. 3 shows the torque sensor arrange at an end portion on a side opposite to one end portion of the electric actuator).
Kawata teaches an electric motor control unit connected to an electric motor unit. Nagaska teaches an electrical motor unit utilizing torque sensors and rotation position detectors to operate the motors within a robot. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Kawata with the electrical motor unit of Nagaska as it utilizes each respective teaching in a conventional obvious to try manner such that no undue experimentation is required and yielded nothing more than predictable results, the predictable results being control of a motor in an electrical device.
Regarding claim 7, Kawata teaches an electric motor control unit connected to an electric motor unit, but does not explicitly teach wherein the electric motor unit has a configuration including a rotation position detector configured to detect a rotation position of an output shaft of the electric motor and not including a rotation position detector configured to detect a rotation position of an output shaft of the electric motor unit.
Nagasaka teaches wherein the electric motor unit has a configuration including a rotation position detector configured to detect a rotation position of an output shaft of the electric motor and not including a rotation position detector configured to detect a rotation position of an output shaft of the electric motor unit ([0064] discusses the actuator including an encoder for measuring a joint angle (rotation position)).
Kawata teaches an electric motor control unit connected to an electric motor unit. Nagaska teaches an electrical motor unit utilizing torque sensors and rotation position detectors to operate the motors within a robot. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Kawata with the electrical motor unit of Nagaska as it utilizes each respective teaching in a conventional obvious to try manner such that no undue experimentation is required and yielded nothing more than predictable results, the predictable results being control of a motor in an electrical device.
Regarding claim 8, Kawata teaches an electric motor control unit connected to an electric motor unit, but does not explicitly teach wherein the electric motor control unit is arranged for each electric motor.
Nagasaka teaches wherein the electric motor control unit is arranged for each electric motor (Fig. 5 shows each the actuator system including the control and motor for each motor at each joint of a robot).
Kawata teaches an electric motor control unit connected to an electric motor unit. Nagaska teaches an electrical motor unit utilizing torque sensors and rotation position detectors to operate the motors within a robot. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Kawata with the electrical motor unit of Nagaska as it utilizes each respective teaching in a conventional obvious to try manner such that no undue experimentation is required and yielded nothing more than predictable results, the predictable results being control of a motor in an electrical device.
Regarding claim 9, Kawata teaches an electric motor control unit connected to an electric motor unit, but does not explicitly teach a robot comprising: the drive device of claim 1; and a joint configured to rotate one component of the robot with respect to another component of the robot, wherein the drive device is arranged at the joint.
Nagaska teaches a robot comprising: the drive device of claim 1 (Fig. 5 shows a robot comprising actuators); and a joint configured to rotate one component of the robot with respect to another component of the robot, wherein the drive device is arranged at the joint (Fig. 5 shows the actuators being arranged at the joints of the robot to rotate the attached components (arms, legs, etc.)).
Kawata teaches an electric motor control unit connected to an electric motor unit. Nagaska teaches an electrical motor unit utilizing torque sensors and rotation position detectors to operate the motors within a robot. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Kawata with the electrical motor unit of Nagaska as it utilizes each respective teaching in a conventional obvious to try manner such that no undue experimentation is required and yielded nothing more than predictable results, the predictable results being control of a motor in an electrical device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Maeda (US 20130342152) teaches a motor drive device with separate control and power substrates and Motoda (US 20130069454) teaches a motor drive device with semiconductor modules connected with a substrate to control power to a motor.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIELLE M JACKSON whose telephone number is (303)297-4364. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00-4:30 MT.
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, Abby Lin can be reached at (571) 270-3976. 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.
/D.M.J./Examiner, Art Unit 3657 /ABBY LIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Prosecution Insights