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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: ROTATING ELECTRICAL MACHINE WITH STATOR WITH ELASTIC DEFORMABLE MEMBER, MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFOR, COMPRESSOR, BLOWER, AND REFRIGERATION DEVICE EQUIPPED WITH ROTATING ELECTRICAL MACHINE.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1, 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lambert (DE 102020202062 A1).
As to claim 1, Lambert shows (FIG. 5-7) A rotating electrical machine comprising:
a rotor configured to be rotatable around a rotation axis of the rotor; and
a stator 32 facing the rotor in a radial direction, the stator 32 including a stator iron core including
a first core portion 13,
a second core portion 12 facing the first core portion 13 in the radial direction,
an elastically deformable member 14 between the first core portion 13 and the second core portion 12, and
a tooth 9 provided opposite to the second core portion 12 with respect to the first core portion 13 and extending radially from the first core portion 13, a winding being wound around the tooth 9 of the stator iron core,
the first core portion 13, the second core portion 12, the elastically deformable member 14, and the tooth 9 being integrated together,
a mechanism 33, 36 configured to reduce an axial displacement of the tooth during winding of the winding around the tooth being provided (motor with rotor para [0013]; winding para [0018]; iron para [0021]; elastic 14 para [0022]; mold material 33 damps vibrations para [0036],[0037] ) .
As to claim 8, Lambert shows (FIG. 5-7) A manufacturing method for a rotating electrical machine including:
a rotor configured to be rotatable around a rotation axis of the rotor; and
a stator 32 facing the rotor in a radial direction, the stator 32 including a stator iron core
including
a first core portion 13, a second core portion 12 facing the first core portion 13 in the radial direction,
an elastically deformable member 14 between the first core portion 13 and the second core portion 12, and
a tooth 9 provided opposite to the second core portion 12 with respect to the first core portion 13 and extending radially from the first core portion 13, a winding being wound around the tooth 9 of the stator iron core,
the first core portion 13, the second core portion 13, the elastically deformable member 14, and the tooth 9 being integrated together,
the method comprising:
causing a mechanism 33,36 configured to reduce an axial displacement of the tooth 9 during winding of the winding around the tooth 9 to work (motor with rotor para [0013]; winding para [0018]; iron para [0021]; elastic 14 para [0022]; mold material 33 damps vibrations para [0036],[0037] ).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 7-9, 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto (JP 2007181292 A) in view of Kataoka (JP 2003343439 A).
As to claim 1, Matsumoto shows (FIG. 1) A rotating electrical machine comprising:
a rotor 4 configured to be rotatable around a rotation axis of the rotor 4; and
a stator facing the rotor 4 in a radial direction, the stator including a stator iron core 2 including
a first core portion 7,
a second core portion 14 facing the first core portion 7 in the radial direction,
an elastically deformable member 8 between the first core portion 7 and the second core portion 14, and
a tooth 6 provided opposite to the second core portion 14 with respect to the first core portion 7 and extending radially from the first core portion 7, a winding being wound around the tooth 6 of the stator iron core 2,
the first core portion 7, the second core portion 14, the elastically deformable member 8, and the tooth 6 being integrated together (machine para [0013]; coil para [0021]; steel para [0031]),
Matsumoto does not show a mechanism configured to reduce an axial displacement of the tooth during winding of the winding around the tooth being provided.
Kataoka shows a mechanism 37,38 configured to reduce an axial displacement of the tooth during winding of the winding around the tooth being provided (end plates 37, 38 para [0025];[0035]; is capable of performing the claimed function).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the stator iron core 2 of Matsumoto to have a mechanism 37,38 configured to reduce an axial displacement of the tooth 6 during winding of the winding around the tooth 6 being provided as taught by Kataoka, for the advantageous benefit of holding the teeth 6 as taught by Kataoka (para [0035]).
As to claim 2/1, Matsumoto in view of Kataoka was discussed above with respect to claim 1 except for wherein the mechanism includes a rigid member disposed at an axial end of the stator iron core and overlapping with the first core portion and the second core portion as viewed in an axial direction.
Kataoka shows wherein the mechanism 37,38 includes a rigid member disposed at an axial end of the stator iron core and overlapping with the first core portion and the second core portion as viewed in an axial direction (end plates 37, 38 cover entire stator para [0035]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the stator iron core 2 of Matsumoto to have the mechanism 37,38 includes a rigid member disposed at an axial end of the stator iron core 2 and overlapping with the first core portion 7 and the second core portion 14 as viewed in an axial direction as taught by Kataoka, for the advantageous benefit of holding the teeth 6 as taught by Kataoka (para [0035]).
As to claim 3/2/1, Matsumoto in view of Kataoka was discussed above with respect to claim 2 except for wherein the stator further includes an insulator interposed between the tooth and the winding at the axial end, and the rigid member is the insulator.
Kataoka shows wherein the stator further includes an insulator 37, 38 interposed between the tooth and the winding at the axial end, and the rigid member 37, 38 is the insulator 37, 38 (end plates 37, 38 cover entire stator para [0025],[0035]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the stator iron core 2 of Matsumoto to have the stator further includes an insulator 37, 38 interposed between the tooth 6 and the winding at the axial end, and the rigid member 37, 38 is the insulator 37, 38 as taught by Kataoka, for the advantageous benefit of holding the teeth 6 as taught by Kataoka (para [0035]).
As to claim 5/1, Matsumoto in view of Kataoka was discussed above with respect to claim 1 except for wherein the mechanism is provided on a region located radially from the tooth.
Kataoka shows wherein the mechanism 37, 38 is provided on a region located radially from the tooth (end plates 37, 38 cover entire stator para [0025],[0035]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the stator iron core 2 of Matsumoto to have wherein the mechanism 37,38 is provided on a region located radially from the tooth as taught by Kataoka, for the advantageous benefit of holding the teeth 6 as taught by Kataoka (para [0035]).
As to claim 7/1, Matsumoto in view of Kataoka was discussed above with respect to claim 1 and Matsumoto further shows wherein the tooth 6 extends radially inward from the first core portion 7 (FIG. 1).
As to claim 8, Matsumoto shows (FIG. 1) A manufacturing method for a rotating electrical machine including:
a rotor 4 configured to be rotatable around a rotation axis of the rotor 4; and
a stator facing the rotor in a radial direction, the stator including a stator iron core 2
including
a first core portion 7, a second core portion 14 facing the first core portion 7 in the radial direction,
an elastically deformable member 8 between the first core portion 7 and the second core portion 14, and
a tooth 6 provided opposite to the second core portion 14 with respect to the first core portion 7 and extending radially from the first core portion 7, a winding being wound around the tooth 6 of the stator iron core 2,
the first core portion 7, the second core portion 14, the elastically deformable member 8, and the tooth 6 being integrated together (machine para [0013]; coil para [0021]; steel para [0031]).
Matsumoto does not show causing a mechanism configured to reduce an axial displacement of the tooth during winding of the winding around the tooth to work.
Kataoka shows causing a mechanism 37,38 configured to reduce an axial displacement of the tooth 6 during winding of the winding around the tooth to work (end plates 37, 38 para [0025];[0035]; is capable of performing the claimed function).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the stator iron core 2 of Matsumoto to have causing a mechanism 37,38 configured to reduce an axial displacement of the tooth 6 during winding of the winding around the tooth to work as taught by Kataoka, for the advantageous benefit of holding the teeth 6 as taught by Kataoka (para [0035]).
As to claim 9/1, Matsumoto in view of Kataoka was discussed above with respect to claim 1 except for a compressor including the rotating electrical machine of claim 1 .
Kataoka shows a compressor (para [0027]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the machine of Matsumoto to have a compressor including the rotating electrical machine of claim 1 as taught by Kataoka, for the advantageous benefit providing high pressure refrigerant Kataoka (para [0038]).
As to claim 11/1, Matsumoto in view of Kataoka was discussed above with respect to claim 1 except for a refrigeration apparatus including the rotating electrical machine of claim 1 .
Kataoka shows a refrigeration apparatus (para [0027]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the machine of Matsumoto to have a refrigeration apparatus including the rotating electrical machine of claim 1 as taught by Kataoka, for the advantageous benefit providing high pressure refrigerant Kataoka (para [0038]).
As to claim 12/2/1, Matsumoto in view of Kataoka was discussed above with respect to claim 2 except for wherein the mechanism is provided on a region located radially from the tooth.
Kataoka shows wherein the mechanism 37, 38 is provided on a region located radially from the tooth (end plates 37, 38 cover entire stator para [0025],[0035]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the stator iron core 2 of Matsumoto to have wherein the mechanism 37,38 is provided on a region located radially from the tooth as taught by Kataoka, for the advantageous benefit of holding the teeth 6 as taught by Kataoka (para [0035]).
As to claim 13/3/2/1, Matsumoto in view of Kataoka was discussed above with respect to claim 3 except for wherein the mechanism is provided on a region located radially from the tooth.
Kataoka shows wherein the mechanism 37, 38 is provided on a region located radially from the tooth (end plates 37, 38 cover entire stator para [0025],[0035]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the stator iron core 2 of Matsumoto to have wherein the mechanism 37,38 is provided on a region located radially from the tooth as taught by Kataoka, for the advantageous benefit of holding the teeth 6 as taught by Kataoka (para [0035]).
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto (JP 2007181292 A) in view of Kataoka (JP 2003343439 A) and Agnes (US 20030117028 A1).
As to claim 10/1, Matsumoto in view of Kataoka was discussed above with respect to claim 1 except for A fan including the rotating electrical machine of claim 1.
Agnes shows a fan including the rotating electrical machine (FIG. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the machine of Matsumoto in view of Kataoka to have fan including the rotating electrical machine of claim 1 as taught by Agnes, for the advantageous benefit of cooling the machine as taught by Agnes (para [0030]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 6, 14-18 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art does not show or suggest the recited fixture retaining portion recited in claim 4 or the plurality of mechanisms independent of one another recited in claims 6, 15-18.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT E MATES whose telephone number is (571)270-5293. The examiner can normally be reached M to F 12:00pm to 8pm.
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, TULSIDAS 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.
/ROBERT E MATES/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/TULSIDAS C PATEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights