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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 25 June 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the combination of Cox and Toide does not explicitly disclose the permanent magnet plastic material forming: radially extending portions disposed between the laminate sections; and an internal ring portion located radially inward from the laminate sections, as required by claim 1 and similarly recited in claim 9. Applicant specifically argues that Toide merely discloses permanent magnet plastic material within slits of the rotor core. However, Toide is cited to teach a permanent magnet plastic material is known. As Toide further teaches that the permanent magnet material forms a better bond with the rotor core (akin to the laminate sections), the skilled artisan would find it obvious to modify the regular plastic sections of Cox to be the permanent magnet plastic, resulting in the claimed configuration. Note, the claim does not make a distinction as to whether the laminate section is magnetic or not. It appears, a bit of the disagreement in the interpretation of the prior art is the laminate sections of Cox (Pr) are magnetic. Thus, the permanent magnetic plastic material of Toide is still cited to teach modifying the plastic material of Cox.
Lastly, though not required for the rejection below, it is suggested for Applicant to consider Ionel et al. (US 2005/0088052) as it teaches a permanent magnet plastic material (paragraph 0012) forming radially extending portions (62a, Fig. 6) and an internal ring (62b, paragraph 0026).
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4-8, 11-13, 16-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cox (US 3,502,914), in view of Toide et al. (“Toide”; US 6,225,724).
Regarding claim 1: Cox discloses a molded internal permanent magnet rotor (both rotor and stator having laminated pole pieces fixed in proper spatial position by means of assembly rings which hold the pieces as assembled with a rigid plastic material molded into the interstitial spaces to provide a unitary structure,
abstract; see Figs. 1 and 2 showing internal permanent magnet rotor R), comprising:
a plurality of laminate sections (rotor pole pieces Pr, Figs. 1 and 3) disposed circumferentially around the rotor (see Fig. 1 showing rotor pole pieces Pr disposed circumferentially around rotor R; rotor and stator have equal numbers of uniformly spaced laminated pole pieces, abstract);
a plastic material molded between the laminate sections (plastic material 24, Fig. 1; a rigid plastic material is molded into the interstices of the pole pieces to connect them and to form a unitary structure, Col.2, lines 22-24), wherein the plastic material forms:
radially extending portions disposed between the laminate sections (see Fig. 1 showing plastic material 24 extending radially between laminated rotor pole pieces Pr; The spaces between the rotor pole pieces Pr arc filled with a rigid plastic material 24, Col.2, lines 68-70); and
an internal ring portion located radially inward from the laminate sections (The plastic material also occupies the space between shaft 10 and inner edges 26 (Fig. 3) of the rotor pole pieces Pr, Col.2, lines 70-72);
wherein the plastic material, once cured, engages the laminate sections to restrict radial displacement (The plastic material also occupies the space between shaft 10 and inner edges 26 (Fig. 3) of the rotor pole pieces Pr and secures the pole pieces Pr and rings 20 and 22 to the shaft, Col.2, line 70-Col.3, line 1).
Cox does not explicitly disclose a permanent magnetic plastic material injection molded between the laminate sections.
However, Toide teaches a permanent magnetic plastic material injection molded between the laminate sections (As described in reference of Fig. 1, it is necessary to use a means of injection molding or the like for filling by injecting bond magnets 2 into the slits 11, Col.6, lines 36-38).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the material injection molded between the laminate sections of Cox to include a permanent magnetic plastic material, as taught by Toide, for the purpose of providing firm contact between permanent magnets and a rotor core (Col.6, lines 57-61).
Regarding claim 2: Cox further discloses wherein the laminate sections each include circumferentially extending retaining features (rings 20 and 22 comprising ribs 16 and 18, respectively, as shown in Fig. 2 for engaging notches 12 and 14, respectively, of rotor pole pieces Pr, as shown in Fig. 3; see Figs. 1-3 showing rotor pole pieces Pr each including notches 12 and 14 for engaging circumferentially extending rings 20 and 22 via ribs 16 and 18) that engage the cured magnetic plastic material to secure the laminate sections in place (The plastic material also occupies the space between shaft 10 and inner edges 26 (Fig. 3) of the rotor pole pieces Pr
and secures the pole pieces Pr and rings 20 and 22 to the shaft, Col.2, line 70-Col.3, line 1).
Regarding claim 4: Cox discloses the molded internal permanent magnet rotor, but Cox does not explicitly disclose wherein the laminate sections are silicon steel laminate sections.
However, Toide further teaches wherein the laminate sections are silicon steel laminate sections (The diameter of the rotor core 1 is 60 mm and formed by laminating thirty rotor core plates punched out of a silicon steel plate, Col.3, lines 47-49).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the laminate sections of Cox to include silicon steel laminate sections, as taught by Toide, for the purpose of providing laminate sections having magnetic properties for interacting with the magnetic material within the permanent magnetic plastic material injection molded between the laminate sections.
Regarding claim 5: Cox further discloses wherein the laminate sections arc configured with outer ends separated by gaps, and the magnetic plastic material at least partially fills the gaps between adjacent laminate sections (see Fig. 1 showing rotor pole pieces Pr having radially outer ends separated by gaps which are filled with plastic
material 24; both rotor and stator having laminated pole pieces fixed in proper spatial position by means of assembly rings which hold the pieces as assembled with a rigid plastic material molded into the interstitial spaces to provide a unitary structure, abstract).
Regarding claim 6: Cox further discloses wherein the internal ring portion of the permanent magnetic plastic material defines an opening for installation of a shaft (see Fig. 1 showing the internal ring portion of plastic material 24 defining an opening for installation of a shaft such as shaft 10).
Regarding claim 7: Cox discloses the molded internal permanent magnet rotor, but Cox does not explicitly disclose wherein the magnetic plastic material is selected from materials including one or more of ferrite and NdFeB magnetic plastics.
However, Toide further teaches wherein the magnetic plastic material is selected from materials including one or more of ferrite and NdFeB magnetic plastics (Magnets made of a matrix polymer having powdered material of permanent magnets 2 (hereinbelow referred to as bond magnets) dispersed therein are embedded in the slits 11, Col.3, lines 34-37; The material of permanent magnet may be powders of ferrite
or powders of neodymium system or samarium cobalt system, Col.4, lines 31-33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the priority date to have modified the magnetic plastic material of Cox to include one or more of ferrite and NdFeB magnetic plastics, as taught by Toide, for the purpose of providing a plastic material having high magnetic properties which is also resistant to demagnetization, thereby increasing the lifespan of the molded rotor.
Regarding claim 8: Cox further discloses wherein the laminate sections are configured to form predefined voids between the laminate sections for injection of the magnetic plastic material into the voids, wherein the magnetic plastic material fills a shape of the defined voids (see Fig. 1 showing rotor pole pieces Pr forming predefined
voids between rotor pole pieces Pr wherein plastic material 24 fills a shape of the defined voids; both rotor and stator having laminated pole pieces fixed in proper spatial position by means of assembly rings which hold the pieces as assembled with a rigid plastic material molded into the interstitial spaces to provide a unitary structure, abstract).
Regarding claim 11: Cox further discloses wherein the rotor is configured for use in an electronically commutated DC motor (Col.2, lines 10-12).
Regarding claim 12: Cox discloses a method of manufacturing a molded internal permanent magnet rotor (both rotor and stator having laminated pole pieces fixed in proper spatial position by means of assembly rings which hold the pieces as assembled with a rigid plastic material molded into the interstitial spaces to provide a unitary structure, abstract; see Figs. 1 and 2 showing internal permanent magnet rotor R), comprising:
disposing a plurality of laminate sections (rotor pole pieces Pr, Figs. 1 and 3) circumferentially around a central rotational axis (see Fig. 1 showing rotor pole pieces Pr disposed circumferentially around a central rotational axis extending through a center of shaft 10; rotor and stator have equal numbers of uniformly spaced laminated pole pieces, abstract);
molding a plastic material between the laminate sections (plastic material 24, Fig. 1; a rigid plastic material is molded into the interstices of the pole pieces to connect them and to form a unitary structure, Col.2, lines 22-24), wherein molding the plastic material forms:
radially extending portions disposed between the laminate sections (see Fig. 1 showing plastic material 24 extending radially between laminated rotor pole pieces Pr; The spaces between the rotor pole pieces Pr are filled with a rigid plastic material 24, Col.2, lines 68-70); and
an internal ring portion located radially inward from the laminate sections (The plastic material also occupies the space between shaft 10 and inner edges 26 (Fig. 3) of the rotor pole pieces Pr, Col.2, lines 70-72);
wherein the plastic material, once cured, engages the laminate sections to restrict radial displacement (The plastic material also occupies the space between shaft 10 and inner edges 26 (Fig. 3) of the rotor pole pieces Pr and secures the pole pieces Pr and rings 20 and 22 to the shaft, Col.2, line 70-Col.3, line 1).
Cox does not explicitly disclose injection molding a permanent magnetic plastic material between the laminate sections and selectively magnetizing the permanent magnetic plastic material.
However, Toide teaches injection molding a permanent magnetic plastic material between the laminate sections and selectively magnetizing the permanent magnetic plastic material (As described in reference of Fig. 1, it is necessary to use a means of injection molding or the like for filling by injecting bond magnets 2 into the slits 11, Col.6, lines 36-38).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the material injection molded between the laminate sections of Cox to include a permanent magnetic plastic material, as taught by Toide, for the purpose of providing firm contact between permanent magnets and a rotor core (Col.6, lines 57-61).
Regarding claim 13: Cox further discloses wherein each of the plurality of laminate sections include a circumferentially extending retaining feature (rings 20 and 22 comprising ribs 16 and 18, respectively, as shown in Fig. 2 for engaging notches 12 and 14, respectively, of rotor pole pieces Pr, as shown in Fig. 3; see Figs. 1-3 showing rotor pole pieces Pr each including notches 12 and 14 for engaging circumferentially extending rings 20 and 22 via ribs 16 and 18) that engages with cured injection molded permanent magnetic plastic material to secure the laminate sections in place (The plastic material also occupies the space between shaft 10 and inner edges 26 (Fig. 3) of the rotor pole pieces Pr and secures the pole pieces Pr and rings 20 and 22 to the shaft, Col.2, line 70-Col.3, line 1).
Regarding claim 16: Cox further discloses wherein injecting molding the permanent magnetic plastic material further forms an opening centered on the central rotational axis for installation of a shaft (see Fig. 1 showing the molded plastic material 24 forming an opening centered on the central rotational axis for installation of a shaft, such as shaft 10).
Regarding claim 17: Cox discloses molding the permanent magnet material, but Cox does not explicitly disclose wherein injection molding the permanent magnetic plastic material comprises injection molding magnetic plastic material comprising one or more of ferrite and NdFeB magnetic plastics.
However, Toide further teaches wherein injection molding the permanent magnetic plastic material comprises injection molding magnetic plastic material comprising one or more of ferrite and NdFcB magnetic plastics (Magnets made of a matrix polymer having powdered material of permanent magnets 2 (now referred to as bond magnets) dispersed therein are embedded in the slits 11, Col.3, lines 34-37; The material of permanent magnet may be powders of ferrite or powders of neodymium system or samarium cobalt system, Col.4, lines 31-33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the magnetic plastic material of Cox to include one or more of ferrite and NdFeB magnetic plastics, as taught by Toide, for the purpose of providing a plastic material having high magnetic properties which is also resistant to demagnetization, thereby increasing the lifespan of the molded rotor.
Regarding claim 18: Cox further discloses forming predefined isolated voids between the laminate sections for injection of the magnetic plastic material into the voids, wherein the magnetic plastic material fills a shape of the predefined voids (see Fig. 1 showing rotor pole pieces Pr forming predefined voids between rotor pole pieces Pr wherein plastic material 24 fills a shape of the predefined voids; both rotor and stator having laminated pole pieces fixed in proper spatial position by means of assembly rings which hold the pieces as assembled with a rigid plastic material molded into the interstitial spaces to provide a unitary structure, abstract).
Regarding claim 20: Cox discloses configuring a shape of the plurality of laminate sections to control one or more of harmonics and sub-harmonics (in that this is claiming the end result without explicitly requiring a specific structure, it is inherent that the shape of the laminate sections of Cox will “control” the harmonics or sub-harmonics in some capacity, as “control” is not defined in the claim either).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cox and Toide as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of KSB (JP 2020-501500, English translation attached).
Regarding claim 9: Cox discloses the molded internal permanent magnet rotor of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose one or more radially extending end plates disposed on or more corresponding transverse ends of the rotor.
However, KSB teaches one or more radially extending end plates disposed on or more corresponding transverse ends of the rotor (see Fig. 2 showing an end plate 13 disposed on each transverse end of rotor core 100 and Fig. 3 showing end plate 13 extending radially; Fig.2 illustrates a side view of the rotor core 100 according to the present invention, and the end plate 13 to which the lamination core 100 is attached in the axial direction is additionally provided on an end surface of the lamination core 100, middle paragraphs of page 2 of the translation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the molded internal permanent magnet rotor of Cox to include radially extending end plates disposed on ends of the rotor, as taught by KSB, for the purpose of providing injection channels to inject the permanent magnetic plastic material between the laminate sections without requiring the use of further injection apparatus (KSB, The end plate 13 has individual injection channels 14 that pass axially through the end plate 13 and, as a result, form inlet channels to the flux barriers 11 of the rotor core 100 on their backside, middle paragraphs of page 2 of the translation).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 10, 14-15, and 19 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 of record, alone or in combination does not explicitly teach, suggest, or render obvious, at least to the skilled artisan, the rotor of claim 3, specifically comprising:
wherein each of the circumferentially extending retaining features of the laminate sections comprise a central through-hole for engagement with an alignment pin during injection molding, in the context of the other components in the claim.
The prior art of record, alone or in combination does not explicitly teach, suggest, or render obvious, at least to the skilled artisan, the rotor of claim 10, specifically comprising:
wherein the one or more radially extending end plates comprise a Halbach array made from permanent magnet plastic material, in the context of the other components in the claim.
The prior art of record, alone or in combination does not explicitly teach, suggest, or render obvious, at least to the skilled artisan, the method of claim 14, specifically comprising:
wherein each of the circumferentially extending retaining features of the laminate sections comprise a pin-retaining through hole, in the context of the other components in the claim.
Claim 15 is allowable due to its dependency on claim 14.
The prior art of record, alone or in combination does not explicitly teach, suggest, or render obvious, at least to the skilled artisan, the method of claim 19, specifically comprising:
disposing one or more radially extending end plates on or more corresponding transverse ends of the rotor, wherein the one or more radially extending end plates comprise a Halbach array made from permanent magnet plastic material, in the context of the other components in the claim.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN GUGGER whose telephone number is (571)272-5343. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9:00am - 5:00pm EST.
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, 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.
/SEAN GUGGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights