DETAILED ACTION
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to since the word weight is misspelled as weigh. Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
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 concave surface, concave surface (claim 8); first end portion, second end portion (claim 9); circumferential end portion (claim 10); circumferential end portion (claims 13-14) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 § 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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tanaka et al. (herein Tanaka) (JP 2002317775, English translation previously appended).Regarding Claim 1:In Figures 4-5B and 8, Tanaka discloses a compressor (11) comprising: a casing (2); a compression mechanism unit (3) provided in the casing; and a motor (6) provided in the casing (2) to drive the compression mechanism unit (see paragraph [0003] of the translation), the motor (6) including a rotor (61) having a cylindrical shape (as mentioned in paragraph [0014], the rotor has a diameter indicating it is cylindrical in shape as also seen in Figure 4), and a balance weight (8) provided on an end surface (top end surface of rotor seen in Figure 8) of the rotor (61) in an axial direction (as seen in Figure 4) and having an annular outer peripheral surface (AS, see annotated Figure A below), and the balance weight (8) including an end surface (ES, see Figure A) facing the rotor (as seen in Figure 4), a recessed portion (83) provided on the end surface (as seen in Figure 4), a wall portion (WP, see Figure A) provided between the recessed portion (83) and the outer peripheral surface (as seen in Figure A), and a communication path (84 and 812) provided on the wall portion and allowing a space of the recessed portion (denoted as 83 in Figure 5A) and a space on an outer side of the wall portion (space outside WP) in a radial direction to communicate with each other through the communication path (oil enters the communication path 812 and is radially directed to the outside space as mentioned in paragraph [0043]), the communication path (84 and 812) being provided at an upper end (upper end surface 81, see paragraph [0043]) of the wall portion (as seen in Figure 5B, the communication path 812 is provided on the upper end 81 of WP).
PNG
media_image1.png
680
309
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2:In Figures 4-5B and 8, Tanaka discloses the compressor (11), wherein the communication path (84 and 812) includes a plurality of paths (84, 812) formed on the wall portion (WP) of the balance weight radially around a center axis of the rotor (as seen in Figure 5A and 5B, the wall portion has 3 holes 84 and also includes the outer portions of the grooves 812 forming communication paths).Regarding Claim 3:In Figures 4-5B and 8, Tanaka discloses the compressor (11), wherein the communication path includes a groove (812, see Figure 5B) provided at an upper end (81) of the wall portion (WP) of the balance weight (as seen in Figure A above, at least a portion of each groove 812 is formed in the wall).Regarding Claim 4:In Figures 4-5B and 8, Tanaka discloses the compressor (11), wherein the communication path (84 and 812) includes a through hole (84) provided in the wall portion (WP) of the balance weight (as seen in Figure A).Regarding Claim 5:In Figures 4-5B and 8, Tanaka discloses the compressor (11), wherein a drain hole (any one of the holes 84 can act as a drain hole) is provided in a bottom of the recessed portion of the balance weight (as seen in Figure 5A, 84 is at the bottom of the recessed portion 83).Note: The wall portion (WP) forms the boundary of the recessed portion as seen in Figure 5A and so the bottom of the wall portion is considered the bottom of the recessed portion as well. Regarding Claim 6:In Figure 8, Tanaka discloses a refrigeration apparatus (refrigeration cycle unit, see paragraph [0055]) including a refrigerant circuit (refrigerant circuit shown in Figure 8 and described in paragraph [0055]) using a compressor (11) according to claim 1 (as evident from Figures 4 and 8 and see rejection of claim 1 above).Regarding Claim 11:In Figures 4-5B and 8, Tanaka discloses the compressor (11), wherein the groove (812) includes a lower end (bottom of any groove 812) located above a bottom of the recessed portion of the balance weight (groove 812 is located in the upper surface 81 and so would be above the bottom of the recessed portion 83).Regarding Claim 12:In Figures 4-5B and 8, Tanaka discloses the compressor (11), wherein the drain hole (any one of the holes 84 can act as a drain hole) is adjacent to the communication path in the radial direction (the communication path could include all the surfaces of the recessed portion 83 since oil could flow across these surfaces and so this drain hole 84 would be connected to and adjacent to these surfaces).Regarding Claims 13-14:In Figures 4-5B and 8, Tanaka discloses the compressor (11), wherein the recessed portion has an arc shape in a plan view (as seen in Figure 5A, the recessed portion 83 has an outer arc shape in plan view), and the drain hole (any one of the holes 84 can act as a drain hole) is provided at a circumferential end portion of the bottom (as seen in Figure 5A, 84 is located at the circumferential end portion of the bottom of the recess).
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(s) 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka et al. (herein Tanaka) (JP 2002317775, English translation previously appended).
Regarding Claim 7:In Figures 4-5B and 8, Tanaka discloses the compressor (11), including a balance weight (63) disposed below the rotor (see Figure 8). Tanaka fails to disclose that this balance weight is the same as the balance weight mentioned in claim 1. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have rearranged the balance weights attached to the rotor such that that the first balance weight (8) was disposed below the rotor and the second balance weight (63) was disposed above the rotor, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.Regarding Claim 8:In Figures 4-5B and 8, Tanaka discloses the compressor (11), wherein the recessed portion (83) includes a radially outward surface (curved inner surface of recess 83). This radially curved surface forms only one concave surface and does not include a convex surface. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to change the shape of the radially outward surface to include a convex surface and a concave surface being adjacent to the convex surface in a circumferential direction, the concave surface being located radially outward relative to the convex surface, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in form or shape [JSH1] is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47. A change in aesthetic (ornamental) design generally will not support patentability. In re Seid, 73 USPQ 431.Regarding Claim 9:Tanaka as modified discloses the compressor (11), wherein the communication path (84 and 812) includes a first end portion (84) connected with the concave surface (as seen in Figure 5A, 84 connects to the concave portion and this connection could be maintained even after the shape modification) and a second end portion (812) connected with the annular outer peripheral surface of the balance weight (as seen in Figure A above, 812 connects to AS).Regarding Claim 10:Tanaka as modified discloses the compressor (11), wherein the concave surface could be provided at a circumferential end portion (end of curved portion of recessed portion 83) of the radially outward surface (based on the change of shape modification discussed above).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/26/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Firstly, applicant argues that the grooves (812) do not appear to be communicating with the recess (83). However, this is not true. As one of ordinary skill knows, viscous oil entering the grooves (812) flows outwards (as mentioned in Tanaka’s paragraph [0043]) and would flow down the outer wall of the recess (82) towards the holes (84) such that the space within the recess and a space on an outer side of the wall portion (WP) would communicate with each other (i.e. oil from 84 flowing outwards would connect to the oil flowing from 812 at the outer surface of the wall portion). In other words, the communication path (84 and 812) includes portions that are located on the upper end (81) of the wall portion that allow for oil communication as claimed. The rejection of claim 1 has been amended to address these amendments but otherwise remains unchanged. Hence these arguments are not persuasive and this rejection is not being withdrawn.
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 DOMINICK L PLAKKOOTTAM whose telephone number is (571)270-7571. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 12 pm -8 pm ET.
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, Essama Omgba can be reached at 469-295-9278. 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.
/DOMINICK L PLAKKOOTTAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746