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 .
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 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.
Examiner's Note.
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs and/or columns and line numbers and/or figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
The Examiner notes that it has been held that a recitation that a structural element is "adapted to", “configured to”, “capable of”, “arranged to”, “intended to”, "so as" or “operable to” perform a function does not limit the claim to a particular structure and thus only requires the ability to so perform the function. (See In re Hutchison, 69 USPQ 138. See also, MPEP 2111.04) As such, under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims and the prior art, the recitations of "adapted to", “configured to”, “capable of”, “arranged to”, “intended to”, "so as" or “operable to” will be deemed met by an element in the prior art capable of performing the function recited in connection with "adapted to", “configured to”, “capable of”, “arranged to”, “intended to”, "so as" or “operable to”.
The Examiner has cited particular paragraphs or columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested of the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. SEE MPEP 2141.02 [R-07.2015] VI. PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS: A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert, denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984). See also MPEP §2123.
Reference of prior art
Chong. (US 20220238779, Electrical Machine And Power Electronics Converter).
Billmann et al. (US 20110043082, CONVERTER MOTOR).
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 9, 14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by Chong.
Re claim 1 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Chong discloses:
An aircraft propulsion unit, the propulsion unit comprising:- an electrical motor (12) which comprises an annular stator (122) around a longitudinal axis (R) and a rotor arranged, at least in part, radially inside the stator (121), in order to be rotated around the longitudinal axis (R)
an electric-power module (¶ 0060, 0066, item 131) suited for supplying the electric motor (12) with electricity, where the electric-power module (item 131) comprises an annular housing (13) which extends along the longitudinal axis (R), and where the housing (13) of the electric- power module comprises a first end arranged longitudinally opposite a first end of the stator of the electric motor (left end of item 13 and right end of item 122);
means for cooling the electric motor and the electric-power module (¶ 0073, item 16, 17 and Q), where the cooling means comprise a heatsink (Q and/or 16) inserted longitudinally between the first end of the stator of the electric motor and the first end of the housing of the electric-power module (Q and 16 between 13 and 122).
Re claim 14 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Chong, discloses: The propulsion unit according to claim 9, wherein the rotor comprises a shaft extending along the longitudinal axis, where the shaft continues radially inside the housing of the electric-power module, and where the heatsink comprises an opening through which the shaft of the rotor extends (item 14).
Re claim 19 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Chong, discloses: The propulsion unit according to claim 9, wherein the cooling means comprises at least one cooling circuit arranged on the periphery of the stator of the motor and/or on the periphery of the housing of the electric-power module and wherein a cooling fluid circulates to produce an exchange of heat with, as applicable, the stator of the motor and/or the housing of the electric-power module (¶ 73-0075 and item 17).
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.
Claim(s) 10-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chong and further in view of Billmann.
Re claim 10 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Chong fails to teach as disclosed by Billmann: The propulsion unit according to claim 9, wherein the heatsink comprises a disk which extends perpendicularly to the longitudinal axis, where the disk comprises at least one first surface bearing on the first end of the stator of the electric motor and at least one second surface, longitudinally opposite the first surface, bearing on the first end of the housing of the electric-power module (¶ 0020, fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to add the Billmann teachings of the heatsink comprises a disk which extends perpendicularly to the longitudinal axis, where the disk comprises at least one first surface bearing on the first end of the stator of the electric motor and at least one second surface, longitudinally opposite the first surface, bearing on the first end of the housing of the electric-power module into the Chong, to dissipate the unwanted heat.
Re claim 11 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Chong, as modified above, discloses: The propulsion unit according to claim 10, wherein the heatsink comprises at least one fin extending radially outward from the periphery of the disk (¶ 0020, fig. 1).
Re claim 12 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Chong, as modified above, discloses: The propulsion unit according to the claim 11, wherein the heatsink (30) comprises a plurality of fins (32) uniformly distributed around the longitudinal axis (X).
Re claim 13 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Chong, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention except the fins of the heatsink are arranged in groups of at least two fins. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to include the fins of the heatsink are arranged in groups of at least two fins to increase the space between fins for better heat dissipation, since applicant has not disclosed that the heatsink are arranged in groups of at least two fins solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally as well with the heatsink of the prior art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-18 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, and overcome all the rejections above.
The prior art of record including the disclosures above neither anticipates nor renders obvious the above recited combination.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP ~ 707.07(a).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEDHAT BADAWI whose telephone number is (571)270-5983. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri during office hours. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JOSHUA MICHENER can be reached on 571-272-1467. 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://pair-direct.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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MEDHAT BADAWI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights