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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 29 October 2024 has been considered 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 (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.
Claims 1-3, 8, 10, 15 & 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Umezaki et al. (JP 2015-204680).
Regarding claim 1, Umezaki teaches a rotor 4 comprising:
a shaft 8 defining a first circumferential keyway (circumferential key groove) 812 and a first axial keyway (key groove) 811, the first axial keyway extending from a first step (not numbered) in the shaft at least to the first circumferential keyway;
a first end (pressing/holding) plate 11 having a first internal key 111 located in the first circumferential keyway 812 to prevent axial movement of the first end plate; and
at least one rotor plate (rotor core thin plates) 7 rotationally fixed to the shaft 8 on a side of the first end plate opposite the first step in the shaft (i.e., after the key 111 of the holding plate 11 is inserted into the axial keyway portion 811 of the shaft 8, the holding plate [11] is rotated along the key groove return portion 813; English translation p.3; Figs.1-2).
Figs.1-2).
PNG
media_image1.png
460
363
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
399
398
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, the first circumferential keyway 812 extends only partially around the shaft (Fig.2).
Regarding claim 3, the first circumferential keyway 812 defines a notch (key groove return portion) 813 facing toward the first step in the shaft; and the first internal key 111 is located in the notch.
Regarding claim 8, a second end (base) plate 10 abuts a shoulder (not numbered) in the shaft 8 and wherein the first end plate 11 and the second end plate 10 are on opposite sides of the at least one rotor plate 7 (Fig.1).
Regarding claim 10, Umezaki teaches a method of assembling a rotor 4 comprising:
sliding at least one rotor plate 7 onto a shaft 8, the shaft having a first axial keyway 811 and a first circumferential keyway 812;
sliding a first end plate 11 onto the shaft, the first end plate having a first key 111 which slides within the first axial keyway 811; and
after sliding the first end plate 11 onto the shaft, rotating the first end plate such that the first key engages the first circumferential keyway (i.e, after the key 111 of the holding plate 11 is inserted into the axial keyway portion 811 of the shaft 8, the holding plate [11] is rotated along the key groove return portion 813; English translation p.3; Figs.1-2).
Regarding claim 15, though not explicitly described, it can be inferred from Fig.1 that Umezaki’s method comprises comprising sliding a second end plate 10 onto the shaft 8 prior to sliding the first end plate 11 and the at least one rotor plate 7 onto the shaft, such that the second end plate abuts a shoulder in the shaft.
Regarding claim 17, Umezaki teaches a motor comprising:
a stator 3; a rotor shaft 8 supported for rotation with respect to the stator; and a plurality of rotor plates 7, each having permanent magnets 9, fixed to the rotor shaft and axially compressed between a first end plate 11 and a second end plate 10; wherein the first end plate 11 has a first key 111 engaging a first circumferential keyway 812 in the rotor shaft (English translation p.3; Figs.1-2).
Regarding claim 18, the rotor shaft 8 defines a shoulder (not numbered); and the second end plate 10 abuts the shoulder (Fig.1).
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 4, 7, 13-14 & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umezaki.
Regarding claim 4, Umezaki teaches a second end plate 10…, wherein the first end plate 11 and the second end plate are on opposite sides of the at least one rotor plate 7, but does not teach the second end plate 10 has a second internal key located in a second circumferential keyway.
But, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to duplicate the internal key located in the circumferential keyway of Umezaki’s first end plate in the second end plate since it has been held that mere duplication of parts of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St.Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 7, duplication in the second end plate 10 of the internal key and corresponding circumferential keyway of Umezaki’s first end plate 11 necessarily results in the shaft 8 defining a second axial keyway extending from a second step in the shaft (not numbered) at least to the second circumferential keyway, the first step in the shaft and the second step in the shaft being on opposite ends of the shaft relative to the at least one rotor plate (Figs.1-2).
Regarding claim 13, Umezaki does not further teach sliding the second end plate 10 onto the shaft 8, the second end plate having a second key which slides within a second axial keyway in the shaft; and after sliding the second end plate onto the shaft, rotating the second end plate such that the second key engages a second circumferential keyway in the shaft.
But, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to duplicate the structure and method of the internal key located in the circumferential keyway of Umezaki’s first end plate 11 in the second end plate 10, such that the second end plate having a second key slides within a second axial keyway in the shaft; and after sliding the second end plate onto the shaft, rotating the second end plate such that the second key engages a second circumferential keyway in the shaft, since it has been held that mere duplication of parts of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St.Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 14, duplication of the internal key located in the circumferential keyway of Umezaki’s first end plate 11 in the second end plate 10 would necessarily result in a method wherein the first end plate 11 is slid onto the shaft from a first end of the shaft and the second end plate 10 is slid onto the shaft from a second end of the shaft opposite the first end of the shaft.
Regarding claim 20, as with respect to similar claims 4 & 13 above, it would have been obvious to duplicate the internal key located in the circumferential keyway of Umezaki’s first end plate 11 in the second end plate 10 so that the rotor shaft 8 defined a second circumferential keyway; the second end plate having a second key engaging the second circumferential keyway; the rotor shaft defining a first axial keyway extending from a first step in the shaft at least to the first circumferential keyway; and the rotor shaft defining a second axial keyway extending from a second step in the shaft at least to the second circumferential keyway.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umezaki in view of Yamagishi et al. (US Pat.Pub.2012/0139382).
Umezaki does not teach the first end plate is made of a different material than the at least one rotor plate.
But, Yamagishi teaches that it is known to form a first rotor end plate from a different material (i.e., non-magnetic metal such as aluminum or copper) than the at least one rotor plate (i.e., steel sheets) so the end plate has a high rigidity in order to apply a large pressing force to the rotor core (¶[0005]-¶[0006] & ¶[0009]).
It would thus have been obvious before the effective filing date to make Umezaki’s first end plate from a different material than the at least one rotor plate since Yamagishi teaches this would have provided the end plate with a high rigidity in order to apply a large pressing force to the rotor core.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umezaki in view of Itou et al. (US 8,860,280).
Umezaki does not further teach the at least one rotor plate has “a third key engaging the first axial keyway.”
But, Itou teaches a rotor comprising a core of laminated steel sheets 14 positioned on shaft 11 with respect to the circumferential direction by means of keys 15 engaging an axial keyway 16 (c.5:64-c.6:5; Figs.1&4).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to provide Umezaki’s rotor plate with a third key engaging the first axial keyway since Itou teaches this would have positioned the plate on the shaft with respect to the circumferential direction.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6, 11-12 & 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 prior art, in particular Umezaki, does not teach the claimed rotor including, inter alia, “the first axial keyway extends from the first step in the shaft to at least the second circumferential keyway” (claim 5); or
a method according to claim 10 further comprising the step of “…sliding a second end plate onto the shaft, the second end plate having a second key which slides within the first axial keyway; and after sliding the second end plate onto the shaft, rotating the second end plate such that the second key engages a second circumferential keyway in the shaft” (claim 11); or
“the rotor shaft defines a second circumferential keyway; the second end plate has a second key engaging the second circumferential keyway; and the rotor shaft defines an axial keyway extending from a first step in the shaft, past the first circumferential keyway, at least to the second circumferential keyway” (claim 19).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BURTON S MULLINS whose telephone number is (571)272-2029. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5. 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 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.
/BURTON S MULLINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights