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)(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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Horii (WO 2015019402, submitted by applicant).
As to claim 1, Horii discloses a rotor structure that supplies an oil to a cooling target part inside a synchronous motor in which a rotor rotates in synchronization with a rotating magnetic field generated by a stator (Fig. 1), characterized by being configured such that: the rotor comprises a plurality of permanent magnets (Fig. 1), which are one of the cooling target parts (Fig. 1), and a cylindrical rotor core in which a plurality of axially extending magnet holes are formed in which the respective permanent magnets are embedded (Fig. 2), and an oil flows axially inside the rotor core through the plurality of magnet holes (Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
620
685
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
514
557
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horii and in view of Pydin (CN 110784033).
As to claim 2, Horii discloses the rotor structure according to claim 1, characterized by being configured such that: an annular one-side end plate that is attached concentrically with an axis center of the rotor core to the end on one axial side of the rotor core (Fig. 1), the one-side end plate has a chamber space formed having an annular shape as viewed in the axial direction concentrically with the axis center of the rotor core (Fig. 1), and at the one-side end plate (Fig. 1), an oil is filled into the chamber space from an oil passage in the rotor shaft and the oil is distributed from the chamber space to the plurality of magnet holes (Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
620
685
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Horii fails to disclose a rotor shaft that is inserted into the rotor core so as not to rotate relative to the rotor core.
Pydin discloses a rotor shaft that is inserted into the rotor core so as not to rotate relative to the rotor core (“The shaft body 13 is fixed so that it cannot rotate with respect to the rotor core 20”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the structure of Horii with a rotor shaft that is inserted into the rotor core so as not to rotate relative to the rotor core, to maintain consistent alignment.
As to claim 3, the combination of Horii and Pydin discloses the rotor structure according to claim 2, characterized in that: the one-side end plate has a plurality of radial oil passages formed that extend radially on an other axial side than the chamber space (Fig. 1), whose radially inner end communicates with the chamber space, and whose radially outer end communicates with a plurality of the magnet holes, and in each of the radial oil passages (Fig. 1), a surface that defines the radial oil passage on one axial side and a surface that defines the radial oil passage on the radially outer side are connected in an R-shape when viewed in a circumferential direction (Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
620
685
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 4, the combination of Horii and Pydin discloses the rotor structure according to claim 2, characterized in that: the one-side end plate has a plurality of radial oil passages formed that extend radially on an other axial side than the chamber space (Fig. 1), whose radially inner end communicates with the chamber space (Fig. 1), and whose radially outer end communicates with a plurality of the magnet holes (Fig. 1), and the radially outer end of each of the radial oil passages is in communication with a radially inner portion of each of the magnet holes (Fig. 1).
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horii, Pydin, and in view of Matsuoka (JP 2011083139, submitted by applicant).
As to claim 5, the combination of Horii and Pydin discloses the rotor structure according to claim 2, characterized in that: the one-side end plate is disposed so as to overlap, as viewed in a radial direction, a coil end on one axial side, which is one of the cooling target parts, of a stator coil attached to the stator (Fig. 1), the one-side end plate has a plurality of first diffusion oil passages formed that extend radially on one axial side than the chamber space (24; Fig. 2), whose radially inner end communicates with the chamber space (Fig. 2), and that open on an outer peripheral surface of the one-side end plate (Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
620
685
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
514
483
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Horii fails to disclose each of the first diffusion oil passages is formed so that its cross-sectional area increases toward the radially outer side.
Matsuoka discloses each of the first diffusion oil passages is formed so that its cross-sectional area increases toward the radially outer side (Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image4.png
382
533
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the structure of Horii with each of the first diffusion oil passages is formed so that its cross-sectional area increases toward the radially outer side, to control the flow of oil.
As to claim 6, the combination of Horii, Pydin, and Matsuoka discloses the rotor structure according to claim 5, characterized in that: the rotor further comprises an annular other-side end plate attached concentric with the axis center of the rotor core to the end on an other axial side of the rotor core (Fig. 1 Horii), the other-side end plate is disposed so as to overlap, as viewed in a radial direction, the coil end on the other axial side (Fig. 1 Horii), which is one of the cooling target parts, of the stator coil, the other-side end plate has a plurality of second diffusion oil passages formed that extend radially (Fig. 2 Horii), whose radially inner end communicates with a plurality of the magnet holes, that open on the outer peripheral surface of the other end plate (Fig. 2 Horii), and whose cross- sectional area increases toward the radially outer side (Fig. 2 Matsuoka).
PNG
media_image1.png
620
685
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
514
483
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
382
533
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Horii fails to disclose a number of the second diffusion oil passages is set to be greater than a number of the first diffusion oil passages.
However, those skilled in the art would recognize that the above limitations do not involve any inventive concept. They would merely depend on how many diffusion oil passages one decides to include on the end plate. Furthermore, the instant specification fails to disclose any unexpected results obtained from the fact that a number of the second diffusion oil passages is set to be greater than a number of the first diffusion oil passages.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the structure of Horii, such that a number of the second diffusion oil passages is set to be greater than a number of the first diffusion oil passages, in promote the directional flow of oil in the cooling structure.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horii and in view of Hazeyama (US 20190036387).
As to claim 7, Horii discloses the rotor structure according to claim 1.
Horii fails to disclose the rotor core has a skew angle of 0 degrees.
Hazeyama discloses the rotor core has a skew angle of 0 degrees.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the structure of Horii with the rotor core has a skew angle of 0 degrees, to maximize torque and starting capabilities.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
should be directed to ETHAN N VO whose telephone number is (571)270-7593. The examiner can
normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30am - 5pm.
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,
Christopher M Koehler can be reached on 571 272 3560. 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.
/ETHAN NGUYEN VO/
Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/CHRISTOPHER M KOEHLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights