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 . This Office Action is responsive to the Applicant' s communication filed December 23, 2024. In view of this communication, claims 1-20 are now pending in the application.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on December 23, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 4-7, and 16-19 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.
Regarding Claim 4, the limitation “a cylindrical face of the rotor” is recited in line 2. It is unclear whether this “cylindrical face of the rotor” is the same “a cylindrical face of the rotor” recited in line 15 of claim 1, or a different instance of “a cylindrical face of the rotor”. For the purpose of examination, these limitations are being interpreted as the same limitation.
Claims 5-7 are rejected due to their dependence on claim 4.
Regarding Claim 16, the limitation “a cylindrical face of the rotor” is recited in line 2. It is unclear whether this “cylindrical face of the rotor” is the same “a cylindrical face of the rotor” recited in line 15 of claim 1, or a different instance of “a cylindrical face of the rotor”. For the purpose of examination, these limitations are being interpreted as the same limitation.
Claims 17-19 are rejected due to their dependence on claim 16.
Regarding Claim 17, the limitation “a cylindrical face of the rotor” is recited in line 2. It is unclear whether this “cylindrical face of the rotor” is the same “a cylindrical face of the rotor” recited in line 2 of claim 16, line 15 of claim 1, or a different instance of “a cylindrical face of the rotor”. For the purpose of examination, these limitations are being interpreted as the same limitation.
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 1-3, and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adams et al. (US 20130118695 A1, hereafter referred to as Adams) in view of Nishimura et al. (US 20120267975 A1, hereafter referred to as Nishimura).
Regarding Claim 1, Adams discloses (see Figures 1 and 4) an electromechanical actuator (40, ¶ [0023]) for actuating a blackout device such as a roller shutter or a blind (16, ¶ [0010]), comprising a casing (41, ¶ [0023]), a head (82, ¶ [0040]) intended to be fastened to a fixed structure, a motor (42, ¶ [0025]), a speed reducer (44, ¶ [0023]) and a control unit (50, ¶ [0038]) of the motor, the motor (42, ¶ [0025]), the speed reducer (44, ¶ [0023]) and the control unit (50, ¶ [0038]) being inserted into the casing (41, ¶ [0023]) of the electromechanical actuator (40, ¶ [0023]), the motor (42, ¶ [0025]) comprising:
a rotor (¶ [0024]: “Brushless DC motors, however, have a wound stator surrounding a permanent-magnet rotor, which is an inverse arrangement to that of a brushed DC motor.” “Brushed DC motors are presently readily available in large varieties and, therefore, are presently preferred for economic reasons.”),
permanent magnets (¶ [0024]: “Brushless DC motors, however, have a wound stator surrounding a permanent-magnet rotor, which is an inverse arrangement to that of a brushed DC motor.”) associated with the rotor (¶ [0044]) and forming magnetic poles,
a stator (¶ [0024]: “Brushless DC motors, however, have a wound stator surrounding a permanent-magnet rotor,”), arranged coaxially about the rotor (¶ [0024]: “Brushless DC motors, however, have a wound stator surrounding a permanent-magnet rotor, which is an inverse arrangement to that of a brushed DC motor.”), and
a coil (¶ [0024]: “Brushless DC motors, however, have a wound stator surrounding a permanent-magnet rotor,”) forming a winding, characterized in that:
the stator has an external diameter smaller than 55 mm (¶ [0022]: “According to one embodiment, the drive assembly is received within an interior of a roller tube having a diameter of less than 2 inches”).
PNG
media_image1.png
266
476
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
394
532
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Adams does not explicitly disclose that the motor is of a permanent magnet synchronous type, the rotor is of cylindrical shape, the stator is of cylindrical shape, a plurality of teeth extending radially towards the rotor, that the coil forms a winding around each of the plurality of teeth of the stator, and that the rotor comprises recesses formed about a longitudinal axis of the rotor and extending to a cylindrical face of the rotor, and the permanent magnets are inserted into the recesses of the rotor.
However, Nishimura, in the same field of technology, does disclose (see Figure 3) that the motor (20, ¶ [0037]) is of a permanent magnet synchronous type (¶ [0034]: “The embedded permanent magnet electric motor 1 that is configured in this manner operates as a four-pole, six-slot synchronous motor.”), the rotor (5A, ¶ [0037]) is of cylindrical shape, the stator (2, ¶ [0037]) is of cylindrical shape, a plurality of teeth (3b, ¶ [0037]) extending radially towards the rotor (5A, ¶ [0037]), that the coil (4a, ¶ [0038]) forms a winding around each of the plurality of teeth (3b, ¶ [0037]) of the stator (2, ¶ [0037]), and that the rotor (5A, ¶ [0037]) comprises recesses (¶ [0037]: “Four permanent magnets 9A are formed into rectangular shapes that have circular arc-shaped cross sections, and are embedded into an outer circumferential side inside the rotor core 6A”) formed about a longitudinal axis of the rotor (5A, ¶ [0037]) and extending to a cylindrical face of the rotor (5A, ¶ [0037]), and the permanent magnets (9A, ¶ [0037]) are inserted into the recesses of the rotor (5A, ¶ [0037]).
PNG
media_image3.png
328
344
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electromechanical actuator disclosed by Adams such that the motor is of a permanent magnet synchronous type, the rotor is of cylindrical shape, the stator is of cylindrical shape, a plurality of teeth extending radially towards the rotor, that the coil forms a winding around each of the plurality of teeth of the stator, and that the rotor comprises recesses formed about a longitudinal axis of the rotor and extending to a cylindrical face of the rotor, and the permanent magnets are inserted into the recesses of the rotor, as disclosed by Nishimura, in order to reduce inductance and reduce eddy current formation (¶ [0010]: “The present invention aims to solve the above problems and an object of the present invention is to provide an embedded permanent magnet electric motor that facilitates mounting of a stator coil, that enables stator coil inductance to be reduced, and that also enables eddy currents that arise in permanent magnets to be reduced.”).
Regarding Claim 2/1, Adams in view of Nishimura has been discussed above.
Additionally, Nishimura discloses (see Figure 3) that the rotor (5A, ¶ [0037]) comprises four magnetic poles each comprising one of the permanent magnets (9A, ¶ [0037]) (¶ [0037]: “Four permanent magnets 9A are formed into rectangular shapes that have circular arc-shaped cross sections, and are embedded into an outer circumferential side inside the rotor core 6A”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electromechanical actuator disclosed by Adams in view of Nishimura such that the rotor comprises four magnetic poles each comprising one of the permanent magnets, as further disclosed by Nishimura, in order to reduce inductance and reduce eddy current formation (¶ [0010]: “The present invention aims to solve the above problems and an object of the present invention is to provide an embedded permanent magnet electric motor that facilitates mounting of a stator coil, that enables stator coil inductance to be reduced, and that also enables eddy currents that arise in permanent magnets to be reduced.”).
Regarding Claim 3/1, Adams in view of Nishimura has been discussed above.
Additionally, Nishimura discloses (see Figure 3 above) that the stator (2, ¶ [0037]) comprises six teeth (3b, ¶ [0037]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electromechanical actuator disclosed by Adams in view of Nishimura such that the stator comprises six teeth, as further disclosed by Nishimura, in order to reduce inductance and reduce eddy current formation (¶ [0010]: “The present invention aims to solve the above problems and an object of the present invention is to provide an embedded permanent magnet electric motor that facilitates mounting of a stator coil, that enables stator coil inductance to be reduced, and that also enables eddy currents that arise in permanent magnets to be reduced.”).
Regarding Claim 12/1, Adams in view of Nishimura has been discussed above.
Additionally, Nishimura discloses that the rotor (2, ¶ [0037]) and/or the stator (5A, ¶ [0037]) are formed by an assembly of sheet metal plates (¶ [0030]: “The stator 2 is formed by laminating and integrating a large number of electromagnetic steel plates”) (¶ [0031]: “The rotor 5 is formed by laminating and integrating a large number of electromagnetic steel plates”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electromechanical actuator disclosed by Adams in view of Nishimura such that the rotor and/or the stator are formed by an assembly of sheet metal plates, as further disclosed by Nishimura, in order to reduce the occurrence of eddy currents (¶ [0010]: “The present invention aims to solve the above problems and an object of the present invention is to provide an embedded permanent magnet electric motor that facilitates mounting of a stator coil, that enables stator coil inductance to be reduced, and that also enables eddy currents that arise in permanent magnets to be reduced.”).
Regarding Claim 13/1, Adams in view of Nishimura has been discussed above.
Additionally, Adams discloses that the motor has a power less than or equal to 300 W ¶ [0026]: “The maximum motor speed for motor 42 is approximately 4200 rpm and the maximum motor torque capability is approximately 122 m-Nm.”).
Regarding Claim 14/1, Adams in view of Nishimura has been discussed above.
Additionally, Adams discloses (see Figure 4 above) a blackout device of the roller shutter or blind type (Abstract: “A motorized roller tube for reeling and unreeling a flexible member between fully open and fully closed conditions operates with minimized sound level.”), comprising an actuator (40, ¶ [0023]) according to claim 1.
Regarding Claim 15/2/1, Adams in view of Nishimura has been discussed above.
Additionally, Nishimura discloses (see Figure 3 above) that the stator (2, ¶ [0037]) comprises six teeth (3b, ¶ [0037]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electromechanical actuator disclosed by Adams in view of Nishimura such that the stator comprises six teeth, as further disclosed by Nishimura, in order to reduce inductance and reduce eddy current formation (¶ [0010]: “The present invention aims to solve the above problems and an object of the present invention is to provide an embedded permanent magnet electric motor that facilitates mounting of a stator coil, that enables stator coil inductance to be reduced, and that also enables eddy currents that arise in permanent magnets to be reduced.”).
Claims 4-7, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adams in view of Nishimura as applied to claim 1 and 2 above, and further in view of Lin et al. (CN 111224486 A, hereafter referred to as Lin).
Regarding Claim 4/1, Adams in view of Nishimura has been discussed above.
Adams in view of Nishimura does not explicitly disclose that the rotor comprises a first rotor groove extending on a cylindrical face of the rotor facing each of the permanent magnets, the first rotor groove being centered on a line located outside a first median plane of the permanent magnet, passing through the longitudinal axis of the rotor.
However, Lin, in the same field of technology, does disclose (see Figures 3-4) that the rotor (1, Page 3, ¶ 13) comprises a first rotor groove (8(R2), Page 4, ¶ 3) extending on a cylindrical face of the rotor facing each of the permanent magnets (5, Page 4, ¶ 3), the first rotor groove (8(R2), Page 4, ¶ 3) being centered on a line located outside a first median plane of the permanent magnet (5, Page 4, ¶ 3), passing through the longitudinal axis of the rotor (1, Page 3, ¶ 13) (see Figures 3-4, the rotor grooves are equidistant from a line passing through the center of the magnet).
PNG
media_image4.png
396
349
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
384
346
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electromechanical actuator disclosed by Adams in view of Nishimura such that that the rotor comprises a first rotor groove extending on a cylindrical face of the rotor facing each of the permanent magnets, the first rotor groove being centered on a line located outside a first median plane of the permanent magnet, passing through the longitudinal axis of the rotor, as disclosed by Lin, in order to reduce torque ripple and cogging torque (Abstract: “The beneficial effects of the invention are as follows: in each magnetic pole of the rotor adopts the structure of double-layer V-shaped groove for improving the salient pole ratio and reluctance torque and reduce the quantity of permanent magnet to reduce cost, each magnetic pole of the rotor outer circle surface is provided with 4 different R diameter arc gap so that between it and the stator forms a non-uniform air gap of, effectively eliminating harmonic, reduce torque ripple and cogging torque, rotor adopts straight laminating technique to replace the traditional chute laminating process, simplifies the production process and improves the production efficiency and reduces the production cost.”).
Regarding Claim 5/4/1, Adams in view of Nishimura and Lin has been discussed above.
Additionally, Lin discloses (see Figures 3-4 above) that the rotor (1, Page 3, ¶ 13) comprises a second rotor groove (8(R3), Page 4, ¶ 3) extending on a cylindrical face of the rotor (1, Page 3, ¶ 13) facing each of the permanent magnets (5, Page 4, ¶ 3).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electromechanical actuator disclosed by Adams in view of Nishimura and Lin such that the rotor comprises a second rotor groove extending on a cylindrical face of the rotor facing each of the permanent magnets, as further disclosed by Lin, in order to reduce torque ripple and cogging torque (Abstract: “The beneficial effects of the invention are as follows: in each magnetic pole of the rotor adopts the structure of double-layer V-shaped groove for improving the salient pole ratio and reluctance torque and reduce the quantity of permanent magnet to reduce cost, each magnetic pole of the rotor outer circle surface is provided with 4 different R diameter arc gap so that between it and the stator forms a non-uniform air gap of, effectively eliminating harmonic, reduce torque ripple and cogging torque, rotor adopts straight laminating technique to replace the traditional chute laminating process, simplifies the production process and improves the production efficiency and reduces the production cost.”).
Regarding Claim 6/5/4/1, Adams in view of Nishimura and Lin has been discussed above.
Additionally, Lin discloses (see Figures 3-4 above) that the first (8(R2), Page 4, ¶ 3) and second rotor grooves (8(R3), Page 4, ¶ 3) are arranged symmetrically with respect to the first plane.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electromechanical actuator disclosed by Adams in view of Nishimura and Lin such that the first and second rotor grooves are arranged symmetrically with respect to the first plane, as further disclosed by Lin, in order to reduce torque ripple and cogging torque (Abstract: “The beneficial effects of the invention are as follows: in each magnetic pole of the rotor adopts the structure of double-layer V-shaped groove for improving the salient pole ratio and reluctance torque and reduce the quantity of permanent magnet to reduce cost, each magnetic pole of the rotor outer circle surface is provided with 4 different R diameter arc gap so that between it and the stator forms a non-uniform air gap of, effectively eliminating harmonic, reduce torque ripple and cogging torque, rotor adopts straight laminating technique to replace the traditional chute laminating process, simplifies the production process and improves the production efficiency and reduces the production cost.”).
Regarding Claim 7/5/4/1, Adams in view of Nishimura and Lin has been discussed above.
Additionally, Lin discloses (see Figures 3-4 above) that the first (8(R2), Page 4, ¶ 3) or second rotor groove (8(R3), Page 4, ¶ 3) or each of the first (8(R2), Page 4, ¶ 3) and second rotor grooves (8(R3), Page 4, ¶ 3) has at least one of the following characteristics: an angular position about the longitudinal axis of the rotor with respect to the first plane of between 0 and 35°, a semi-circular section (see Figure 4, all rotor grooves appear semicircular), and a semi-circular section having a radius of between 0.4 and 1.8 mm.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electromechanical actuator disclosed by Adams in view of Nishimura and Lin such that the first or second rotor groove or each of the first and second rotor grooves has at least one of the following characteristics: an angular position about the longitudinal axis of the rotor with respect to the first plane of between 0 and 35°, a semi-circular section, and a semi-circular section having a radius of between 0.4 and 1.8 mm, as disclosed by Lin, in order to reduce torque ripple and cogging torque (Abstract: “The beneficial effects of the invention are as follows: in each magnetic pole of the rotor adopts the structure of double-layer V-shaped groove for improving the salient pole ratio and reluctance torque and reduce the quantity of permanent magnet to reduce cost, each magnetic pole of the rotor outer circle surface is provided with 4 different R diameter arc gap so that between it and the stator forms a non-uniform air gap of, effectively eliminating harmonic, reduce torque ripple and cogging torque, rotor adopts straight laminating technique to replace the traditional chute laminating process, simplifies the production process and improves the production efficiency and reduces the production cost.”).
Regarding Claim 16/15/2/1, Adams in view of Nishimura has been discussed above.
Adams in view of Nishimura does not explicitly disclose that the rotor comprises a first rotor groove extending on a cylindrical face of the rotor facing each of the permanent magnets, the first rotor groove being centered on a line located outside a first median plane of the permanent magnet, passing through the longitudinal axis of the rotor.
However, Lin, in the same field of technology, does disclose (see Figures 3-4) that the rotor (1, Page 3, ¶ 13) comprises a first rotor groove (8(R2), Page 4, ¶ 3) extending on a cylindrical face of the rotor (1, Page 3, ¶ 13) facing each of the permanent magnets (5, Page 4, ¶ 3), the first rotor groove (8(R2), Page 4, ¶ 3) being centered on a line located outside a first median plane of the permanent magnet (5, Page 4, ¶ 3), passing through the longitudinal axis of the rotor (1, Page 3, ¶ 13) (see Figures 3-4, the rotor grooves are equidistant from a line passing through the center of the magnet).
PNG
media_image4.png
396
349
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
384
346
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electromechanical actuator disclosed by Adams in view of Nishimura such that the rotor comprises a first rotor groove extending on a cylindrical face of the rotor facing each of the permanent magnets, the first rotor groove being centered on a line located outside a first median plane of the permanent magnet, passing through the longitudinal axis of the rotor, as disclosed by Lin, in order to reduce torque ripple and cogging torque (Abstract: “The beneficial effects of the invention are as follows: in each magnetic pole of the rotor adopts the structure of double-layer V-shaped groove for improving the salient pole ratio and reluctance torque and reduce the quantity of permanent magnet to reduce cost, each magnetic pole of the rotor outer circle surface is provided with 4 different R diameter arc gap so that between it and the stator forms a non-uniform air gap of, effectively eliminating harmonic, reduce torque ripple and cogging torque, rotor adopts straight laminating technique to replace the traditional chute laminating process, simplifies the production process and improves the production efficiency and reduces the production cost.”).
Regarding Claim 17/16/15/2/1, Adams in view of Nishimura and Lin has been discussed above.
Additionally, Lin discloses (see Figure 4 above) that the rotor (1, Page 3, ¶ 13) comprises a second rotor groove (8(R3), Page 4, ¶ 3) extending on a cylindrical face of the rotor (1, Page 3, ¶ 13) facing each of the permanent magnets (5, Page 4, ¶ 3).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electromechanical actuator disclosed by Adams in view of Nishimura and Lin such that the rotor comprises a second rotor groove extending on a cylindrical face of the rotor facing each of the permanent magnets, as further disclosed by Lin, in order to reduce torque ripple and cogging torque (Abstract: “The beneficial effects of the invention are as follows: in each magnetic pole of the rotor adopts the structure of double-layer V-shaped groove for improving the salient pole ratio and reluctance torque and reduce the quantity of permanent magnet to reduce cost, each magnetic pole of the rotor outer circle surface is provided with 4 different R diameter arc gap so that between it and the stator forms a non-uniform air gap of, effectively eliminating harmonic, reduce torque ripple and cogging torque, rotor adopts straight laminating technique to replace the traditional chute laminating process, simplifies the production process and improves the production efficiency and reduces the production cost.”).
Regarding Claim 18/17/16/15/2/1, Adams in view of Nishimura and Lin has been discussed above.
Additionally, Lin discloses (see Figure 4 above) that the first (8(R2), Page 4, ¶ 3) and second rotor grooves (8(R3), Page 4, ¶ 3) are arranged symmetrically with respect to the first plane.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electromechanical actuator disclosed by Adams in view of Nishimura and Lin such that the first and second rotor grooves are arranged symmetrically with respect to the first plane, as further disclosed by Lin, in order to reduce torque ripple and cogging torque (Abstract: “The beneficial effects of the invention are as follows: in each magnetic pole of the rotor adopts the structure of double-layer V-shaped groove for improving the salient pole ratio and reluctance torque and reduce the quantity of permanent magnet to reduce cost, each magnetic pole of the rotor outer circle surface is provided with 4 different R diameter arc gap so that between it and the stator forms a non-uniform air gap of, effectively eliminating harmonic, reduce torque ripple and cogging torque, rotor adopts straight laminating technique to replace the traditional chute laminating process, simplifies the production process and improves the production efficiency and reduces the production cost.”).
Regarding Claim 19/18/17/16/15/2/1, Adams in view of Nishimura and Lin has been discussed above.
Additionally, Lin discloses (see Figure 4 above) that the first (8(R2), Page 4, ¶ 3) or second rotor groove (8(R3), Page 4, ¶ 3) or each of the first (8(R2), Page 4, ¶ 3) and second rotor grooves (8(R3), Page 4, ¶ 3) has at least one of the following characteristics: an angular position about the longitudinal axis of the rotor with respect to the first plane of between 0 and 35°, a semi-circular section (see Figure 4, all rotor grooves appear semicircular), and a semi-circular section having a radius of between 0.4 and 1.8 mm.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electromechanical actuator disclosed by Adams in view of Nishimura and Lin such that the first or second rotor groove or each of the first and second rotor grooves has at least one of the following characteristics: an angular position about the longitudinal axis of the rotor with respect to the first plane of between 0 and 35°, a semi-circular section, and a semi-circular section having a radius of between 0.4 and 1.8 mm, as further disclosed by Lin, in order to reduce torque ripple and cogging torque (Abstract: “The beneficial effects of the invention are as follows: in each magnetic pole of the rotor adopts the structure of double-layer V-shaped groove for improving the salient pole ratio and reluctance torque and reduce the quantity of permanent magnet to reduce cost, each magnetic pole of the rotor outer circle surface is provided with 4 different R diameter arc gap so that between it and the stator forms a non-uniform air gap of, effectively eliminating harmonic, reduce torque ripple and cogging torque, rotor adopts straight laminating technique to replace the traditional chute laminating process, simplifies the production process and improves the production efficiency and reduces the production cost.”).
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adams in view of Nishimura as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Islam et al. (US 20080024028 A1, hereafter referred to as Islam).
Regarding Claim 8/1, Adams in view of Nishimura has been discussed above.
Adams in view of Nishimura does not disclose that each tooth of the stator comprises a stator groove formed in a free end of the tooth.
However, Islam, in the same field of technology, does disclose (see Figure 2) that each tooth (19, ¶ [0032]) of the stator (12, ¶ [0029]) comprises a stator groove (¶ [0032], Figure 2) formed in a free end of the tooth (19, ¶ [0032]).
PNG
media_image6.png
274
396
media_image6.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electromechanical actuator disclosed by Adams in view of Nishimura such that each tooth of the stator comprises a stator groove formed in a free end of the tooth, as disclosed by Islam, in order to minimize cogging torque (Abstract: “the slot opening height h.sub.o, the channel height w.sub.n, and the channel width w.sub.b, are selected so as to minimize or reduce cogging torque.”).
Regarding Claim 9/8/1, Adams in view of Nishimura and Islam has been discussed above.
Additionally, Islam discloses (see Figure 2 above) that the stator groove (¶ [0032], Figure 2) formed in each tooth (19, ¶ [0032]) of the stator (12, ¶ [0029]) has at least one of the following characteristics: it is centered on a second median plane (135, ¶ [0033]) of the tooth (19, ¶ [0032]) and passing through a longitudinal axis of the stator (12, ¶ [0029]), it has a width of 0.2 to 3 mm, and it has a depth of 0.2 to 6 mm.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electromechanical actuator disclosed by Adams in view of Nishimura such that the stator groove formed in each tooth of the stator has at least one of the following characteristics: it is centered on a second median plane of the tooth and passing through a longitudinal axis of the stator, it has a width of 0.2 to 3 mm, and it has a depth of 0.2 to 6 mm, as further disclosed by Islam, in order to minimize cogging torque (Abstract: “the slot opening height h.sub.o, the channel height w.sub.n, and the channel width w.sub.b, are selected so as to minimize or reduce cogging torque.”).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adams in view of Nishimura as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Legranger et al. (US 20170279320 A1, hereafter referred to as Legranger).
Regarding Claim 10/1, Adams in view of Nishimura has been discussed above.
Adams in view of Nishimura does not explicitly disclose that the permanent magnets have a parallelepiped shape, and/or are made of ferrite or plastoferrite.
However, Legranger, in the same field of technology, does disclose (see Figure 1) that the permanent magnets (37, ¶ [0056]) have a parallelepiped shape (¶ [0056]: “Each magnet 37 has a parallelepiped form”), and/or are made of ferrite (¶ [0058]: “The magnets 37 are preferably made of ferrite.”) or plastoferrite.
PNG
media_image7.png
266
335
media_image7.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electromechanical actuator disclosed by Adams in view of Nishimura such that the permanent magnets have a parallelepiped shape, and/or are made of ferrite or plastoferrite, as disclosed by Legranger, in order to minimize torque undulations (¶ [0002]: “The invention relates to a rotary electrical machine with a configuration which minimises torque undulations.”)
Claims 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adams in view of Nishimura and Legranger as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Nashiki et al. (US 20100123426 A1, hereafter referred to as Nashiki).
Regarding Claim 11/10/1, Adams in view of Nishimura and Legranger has been discussed above.
Adams in view of Nishimura and Legranger does not explicitly disclose that the control unit applies a sinusoidal or trapezoidal control to the motor.
However, Nashiki, in the same field of technology, does disclose that the control unit applies a sinusoidal or trapezoidal control to the motor (¶ [0393]: “Specifically, in the control device illustrated in FIG. 123, when an induced voltage in each stator winding becomes a value close to the voltage of the battery 84D and a three-phase sinusoidal current is supplied to the three-phase stator windings so that a peak current of the three-phase sinusoidal current is substantially equivalent to a maximum current through each power transistor, output power of the motor equivalent to the output power P2 can be obtained independently of the phase of each of the three-phase sinusoidal currents.”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electromechanical actuator disclosed by Adams in view of Nishimura and Legranger such that the control unit applies a sinusoidal or trapezoidal control to the motor, as disclosed by Nashiki, in order to equalize motor output across different phases (¶ [0393]: “Specifically, in the control device illustrated in FIG. 123, when an induced voltage in each stator winding becomes a value close to the voltage of the battery 84D and a three-phase sinusoidal current is supplied to the three-phase stator windings so that a peak current of the three-phase sinusoidal current is substantially equivalent to a maximum current through each power transistor, output power of the motor equivalent to the output power P2 can be obtained independently of the phase of each of the three-phase sinusoidal currents.”).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adams in view of Nishimura and Lin as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Islam et al. (US 20080024028 A1, hereafter referred to as Islam).
Regarding Claim 20/19/18/17/16/15/2/1, Adams in view of Nishimura and Lin has been discussed above.
Adams in view of Nishimura and Lin does not explicitly disclose that each tooth of the stator comprises a stator groove formed in a free end of the tooth.
However, Islam, in the same field of technology, does disclose (see Figure 2) that each tooth (19, ¶ [0032]) of the stator (12, ¶ [0029]) comprises a stator groove (¶ [0032], Figure 2) formed in a free end of the tooth (19, ¶ [0032]).
PNG
media_image6.png
274
396
media_image6.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the electromechanical actuator disclosed by Adams in view of Nishimura such that each tooth of the stator comprises a stator groove formed in a free end of the tooth, as disclosed by Islam, in order to minimize cogging torque (Abstract: “the slot opening height h.sub.o, the channel height w.sub.n, and the channel width w.sub.b, are selected so as to minimize or reduce cogging torque.”).
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kirby et al. (US 9598901 B2) discloses relevant prior art in Figures 1-3.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLIE FRANK MANN whose telephone number is (703)756-1275. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30AM - 4:30PM PST.
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, Oluseye 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.
/C.F.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/ALEXANDER A SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights