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 .
Interview Practice
Beginning October 2025, the USPTO is implementing an updated interview practice for patent examination: One interview per new application or RCE (Request for Continued Examination, see 37 CFR 1.114 and MPEP 706.07(h)) will generally be granted. Additional interview(s) which serve to advance prosecution may be granted with supervisory approval.
Applicants are encouraged to avail themselves of the interview available, as discussions between an Applicant and an Examiner are often indispensable to advance the prosecution of a patent application by improving the mutual understanding of specific issues therein.
To request an interview, Applicant may, preferably, contact the Examiner at the telephone number provided at the end of this Office Action and/or Applicant may file an Applicant Initiated Interview Request (AIR) form (PTOL-413A), which may be found here: https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/forms.
It may be useful to also file an Authorization for Internet Communications form (PTO/SB/439, also found at the link provided above), which would allow the Examiner to substantively respond to Applicant using electronic communication (i.e., via email).
If an interview is desired, it is advisable to request the interview sufficiently ahead of the due date of any response to an outstanding Office Action, to allow adequate time to schedule, prepare for, and hold the interview. Submission of an Interview Agenda by Applicant is also generally required (see MPEP 713.01(IV)).
Requests for interviews after final rejection may be denied and generally will be denied in cases where the interview is merely to restate arguments of record or to discuss new limitations which would require more than nominal reconsideration or new search (see MPEP 713.09).
Preliminary Formalities
Claims 1-12, 14-20 are pending; Claims 7-12, 14-20 are withdrawn.
Claims 1-6, drawn to the elected embodiment (see below) are presented for examination.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, Species 1 (as illustrated in Figures 1-4F) in the reply filed on 08/12/2026 is acknowledged.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
A certified copy of CN 202322636474.2, filed 12 Sept 2024, has been received.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 09/18/2024. These drawings are not acceptable.
The drawings are objected to because of the following informalities.
Appropriate correction is required.
The examiner notes that the following may not be an exhaustive list of informalities. It is suggested that the applicant thoroughly review the drawings.
Regarding Figures 1-4F, the drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
- “an axial direction,” “a radial direction,” “a circumferential direction” (claim 1): none are shown, it is suggested to clearly indicate a coordinate system in one or more of the drawings illustrating the elected embodiment.
- an “aperture configured to receive a wire end” (claim 4): neither the “aperture” nor the “wire end” appear to be shown and/or labeled.
N.B. – If the features noted above are currently shown, but not labeled, in the Figure drawn to the elected invention, they should be labeled accordingly.
However, if any of the features above are not shown, and are subsequently added, support should be given from the disclosure as originally filed so as to obviate any future objection under 35 U.S.C. § 132(a).
Regarding Figures 4A, 4C, 4E, the drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “152” has been used to designate three different elements.
Regarding Figures 4C, 4E, the drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “162” has been used to designate two different elements.
Regarding Figures 4C, 4E, the drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters “170” and “162” have both been used to designate the same element.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-6 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, lines 14-16, the limitation “wherein the main body portion of the terminal contacts the end cap portion and is generally planar and extends away from the end cap portion in an axial direction of the electric motor” (emphasis added) is vague and indefinite.
First, the term “generally” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “generally planar” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Second, the phrase “wherein the main body portion of the terminal contacts the end cap portion and is generally planar and extends away […]” is narrative, grammatically incorrect, and, thus, unclear. Initially, only a single “and” should be used but the limitation could be more clearly phrased by explicitly reciting which of the several features recited (i.e., the “main body portion,” the “terminal,” and the “end cap portion”) is “planar” and which feature “extends away”
Regarding claim 1, lines 20-21, the limitation “wherein the phase connection portion extends away from the main body portion in a circumferential direction that is perpendicular to the axial direction” is vague and indefinite. The term “circumferential” is a relative term which renders the limitation indefinite. The claim fails to clearly set forth a point or plane of reference by which to define the term “circumferential direction”—e.g., to what “circumferenc[e]” is reference intended?
Regarding claim 2, the limitation “the phase connection portion is generally planar and forms an obtuse angle with the main body portion” is vague and indefinite. The term “generally” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “generally planar” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Regarding claim 5, the limitation “the elongated wire further forming a crossover portion that extends about at least a portion of a circumference of the end cap portion to electrically connect the first coil with the second coil” is vague and indefinite. The limitation is generally narrative and thus unclear. Furthermore, the phrase “that extends about at least a portion” simply doesn’t make sense.
Regarding claims 2-6, they are dependent on claim 1 and thereby inherit the deficiencies thereof.
For the purpose of expediting prosecution, prior art will be applied in reference to the claims as best understood by the examiner.
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 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.
(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 1-3, 5, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jefferies et al. (US 2022/0247251 A1, hereinafter “Jefferies”).
Regarding claim 1, as best understood, Jefferies discloses a power tool (power tool 10) comprising:
a housing (housing 12) having a motor housing portion (motor housing 102) and a handle portion (not separately labeled; area of housing 12 around paddle switch 20; see Fig. 1);
an electric motor (motor 100/300) supported within the motor housing portion (see Fig. 1) and having a rotor (rotor assembly 120/320) and a stator (stator assembly 110/310), the rotor being coupled to a motor shaft (rotor shaft 122/322), the motor shaft having a spindle portion that supports an output unit (including, e.g., fan 108/308 and/or gear case 14/54);
wherein the stator includes
a core (stator core 312),
an insulator (e.g., rear end/routing insulator 360) coupled (via 396, 398) to the core and including an end cap portion (see, e.g., Figs. 32, 33) positioned at an axial end of the stator (see Fig. 32),
a winding forming a coil (stator windings 314), and
a terminal (e.g., stator terminals 390) configured to electrically connect the winding to a power source (e.g., battery pack connected via battery receptacle 16), the terminal being supported by the end cap portion (supported by, e.g., support posts 363; see Fig. 32) and including a main body portion (e.g., second portion 392 of main body), a tang (tang portion 394), and a phase connection portion (e.g., first portion 391 of main body);
wherein the main body portion of the terminal contacts the end cap portion and is generally planar (see, e.g., Figs. 32, 33: portion 392 is generally planar) and extends away from the end cap portion in an axial direction of the electric motor (see, e.g., Figs. 32, 33);
wherein the tang (tang portion 394) extends away from the main body portion in a radial direction of the electric motor and bends toward the axial direction (see, e.g., Figs. 32, 33), the tang being configured to mechanically and electrically connect to the winding (see, e.g., Figs. 32, 33 illustrating mechanical connection; see also, e.g., Abstract: tang portion receives a portion of a magnet wire to make an electrical connection with at least one of the stator windings; and ¶ 205: tang portions 394 are pressed against the cross-over portions 318 of the magnet wire and the cross-over portions 318 are fused to make electrical connections with the respective tang portions 394); and
wherein the phase connection portion (first portion 391) extends away from the main body portion (second portion 392) in a circumferential direction that is perpendicular to the axial direction (see Figs. 32, 33), the phase connection portion being configured to mechanically and electrically (via terminal pin 395) connect to a phase wire that is configured to supply power from the power source (via circuit board 382; see, e.g., ¶ 221).
Regarding claim 2, as best understood, Jefferies further discloses that the phase connection portion (first portion 391) is generally planar (see Fig. 32, ¶ 202: first portion 391 may be planar shaped) and forms an obtuse angle (see, e.g., Fig. 32, ¶ 202: second portion 392 that extends angularly-inwardly from the first portion 391 at a 10 to 30 degree angle—that is, the interior angle between portions 391 and 392 would be 180° minus (10°-30°) = 170°-150°, which would be an obtuse angle) with the main body portion (second portion 392).
Regarding claim 3, Jefferies further discloses that the obtuse angle is between 110 degrees and 170 degrees (interior angle between portions 391 and 392 would be 150-170°, see discussion above).
Regarding claim 5, as best understood, Jefferies further discloses that
the coil (stator windings 314 wound about teeth 317) is a first coil, and the stator further comprises a second coil located opposite from the first coil with respect to a longitudinal axis of the of the electric motor (see, e.g., Figs. 29, 34); and
the winding comprises an elongated wire (magnet wire, not separately numbered) that is wound about the insulator to form each of the first coil and the second coil (see, e.g., Fig. 34), the elongated wire further forming a crossover portion (cross-over portions 318) that extends about at least a portion of a circumference of the end cap portion to electrically connect the first coil with the second coil (see Fig. 33).
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 of this title, 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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jefferies et al. (US 2022/0247251 A1) in view of Tong et al. (US 2023/0238850 A1, hereinafter “Tong”).
Regarding claim 4, Jefferies discloses the invention as set forth in claim 1, upon which claim 4 is dependent. However, Jefferies appears to use a pin-based connection (terminal pins 395) to electrically connect the phase connection portion (first portion 391) to a power source (power wires 389; see Fig. 44) and appears to be silent regarding the possibility that an aperture-based connection may be used.
On the other hand, Tong (Figures 20A-21) discloses an electric motor including a terminal (electrical connectors 1722) having a phase connection portion (connector extension 1866), the phase connection portion (connector extension 1866) defining an aperture (fusing aperture 1874) configured to receive a wire end of a phase wire (see, e.g., ¶ 69: fusing aperture 1874 may receive fuse wires from the printed circuit board assembly that are fused to the connector extension 1866 to electrically connect the magnet wires to the printed circuit board assembly through the electrical connector 1722).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the motor of Jefferies with the explicit use of an aperture configured to receive a wire end, as taught by Tong, where Jefferies appears silent regarding the possibility of using an aperture-based rather than a pin-based connection, and Tong teaches a suitable aperture-based connection, where the selection of a known configuration based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP § 2144.07).
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references cited each disclose a motor having a stator with similar winding and terminal structures to the disclosed invention and illustrate known variations in the art.
Applicant, in preparing a response, should fully consider each of the references in its entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention.
Conclusion
The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action 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 claims, other passages and figures may apply.
Applicant, in preparing a response, should fully consider each of the references in its entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention.
Applicant should, in response to this Office Action, provide support for all language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. See MPEP 2163(II)(A). That is, Applicant should specifically note the page(s) and line number(s) in the original specification and/or feature(s) in the original drawing figure(s) where support for newly added claim language may be found. No new matter may be added. See 35 U.S.C. §132(a).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to S. MIKAILOFF whose telephone number is (571) 270-7894. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Thurs. 10am - 6pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, T.C. PATEL can be reached at (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 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.
/S. MIKAILOFF/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
October 9, 2026
/TULSIDAS C PATEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights