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 .
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)(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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Takemichi et al. US JP 2021/011934 A.
Regarding claim 1, Takemichi et al. teach, A motor control device that controls a motor M that drives an electric device, the motor control device comprising: a target current information acquisition unit that acquires target current information indicating a target current value of a current for energizing the motor (see paragraph 46, “target current setting unit 21; figure 1); an actual current information acquisition unit that acquires actual current information indicating an actual current value of a current actually flowing through the motor (paragraph 16, “current detection unit 28; figure 1); and a voltage value setting unit (see paragraph 17, where the target voltage setting unit 23 includes a feedback control unit 24b which calculates the feedback target voltage by PI control or PID control based on the difference between the target current Itag from the arithmetic processing unit 21 and the current Iem detected by the current detection unit 28) that sets a voltage value of a voltage to be applied to the motor, wherein the voltage value setting unit decreases the voltage value when the actual current value exceeds the target current value, and increases the voltage value when the actual current value falls below the target current value.
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takemichi et al. JP 2021/011934 A in view of Minoru JP 2012/102658 A.
Regarding claim 2, Takemichi et al. is silent on specifically teaching, the motor control device according to claim 1, further comprising: a torque information acquisition unit that acquires torque information indicating torque generated in an object to be driven by the electric device, wherein the voltage value setting unit increases the voltage value when the torque is a positive value, and decreases the voltage value when the torque is a negative value.
However, Minoru is in the same field of art and teach: a torque information acquisition unit that acquires torque information indicating torque generated in an object to be driven by the electric device, wherein the voltage value setting unit increases the voltage value when the torque is a positive value, and decreases the voltage value when the torque is a negative value
In view of Minoru’s teachings, it would’ve been obvious to one with the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, with the apparatus as taught by Takemichi et al. to include; a torque information acquisition unit that acquires torque information indicating torque generated in an object to be driven by the electric device, wherein the voltage value setting unit increases the voltage value when the torque is a positive value, and decreases the voltage value when the torque is a negative value, for the purpose of improving the control of the drive system.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takemichi et al. JP 2021/011934 A in view of Morino et al. US publication no.: US 2010/0019712 A1.
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Takemichi et al. teach, The motor control device according to claim 1, wherein the electric device is an electric valve opening and closing timing control device including a drive-side rotating body that rotates about a rotation axis in synchronization with a crankshaft of an internal combustion engine, a driven-side rotating body that is disposed coaxially with the rotation axis and inside the drive-side rotating body and rotates integrally with a camshaft for valve opening/closing of the internal combustion engine, and a phase adjustment mechanism that sets a relative rotation phase between the drive-side rotating body and the driven-side rotating body, and wherein the motor drives the phase adjustment mechanism.
However, Morino et al. is in the same field of art and teach: wherein the electric device is an electric valve opening and closing timing control device including a drive-side rotating body that rotates about a rotation axis in synchronization with a crankshaft of an internal combustion engine, a driven-side rotating body that is disposed coaxially with the rotation axis and inside the drive-side rotating body and rotates integrally with a camshaft for valve opening/closing of the internal combustion engine, and a phase adjustment mechanism that sets a relative rotation phase between the drive-side rotating body and the driven-side rotating body, and wherein the motor drives the phase adjustment mechanism (see figure 1 and paragraphs 5 and 22-36; claim 1).
In view of Morinno et al.’s teachings, it would’ve been obvious to one with the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, with the apparatus as taught by Takemichi et al. to include; wherein the electric device is an electric valve opening and closing timing control device including a drive-side rotating body that rotates about a rotation axis in synchronization with a crankshaft of an internal combustion engine, a driven-side rotating body that is disposed coaxially with the rotation axis and inside the drive-side rotating body and rotates integrally with a camshaft for valve opening/closing of the internal combustion engine, and a phase adjustment mechanism that sets a relative rotation phase between the drive-side rotating body and the driven-side rotating body, and wherein the motor drives the phase adjustment mechanism, for the purpose of providing a variant apparatus.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takemichi et al. JP 2021/011934 A in view of Morino et al. US publication no.: US 2010/0019712 A1 and further in view of Kasuya et al. US publication no.: US 2022/0003174 A1.
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Takemichi et al. as modified is silent on specifically teaching, the motor control device according to claim 3, wherein the voltage value setting unit decreases the voltage value immediately before the relative rotation phase is maximum.
However, Morino et al. is in the same field of art and teach: wherein the voltage value setting unit decreases the voltage value immediately before the relative rotation phase is maximum (see figure 1 and paragraphs 5 and 22-36; claim 1).
In view of Kasuya et al.’s teachings, it would’ve been obvious to one with the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, with the apparatus as taught by Takemichi et al. to include; wherein the voltage value setting unit decreases the voltage value immediately before the relative rotation phase is maximum, for the purpose of improving the control of the motor drive system.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZOHEB S IMTIAZ whose telephone number is (571)272-4308. The examiner can normally be reached 11am-730pm.
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, Eduardo Colon Santana can be reached at 571-272-2060. 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.
/ZOHEB S IMTIAZ/Primary Examiner , Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights