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 .
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 depth of the inner convex portion at a radially outermost part must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. For examining purposes, the limitations of claim 3 will be construed as being taught by the prior art because the convex portions are practically identical to applicant’s claimed and disclosed convex portions.
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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-7, 10, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tokizawa (JP 2010284008) in view of Hirose (JPH 10322980).
1. Tokizawa teaches:
A stator core (title) for a rotary electric machine (title), comprising
a stator core 3 having a circular back yoke/rear band part 5 and teeth 4 protruding from the back yoke in a radial direction of the stator core (fig 1), wherein the stator core is formed by stacking core sheets 7 in multiple layers (fig 1), the core sheet has convex portions/slot-depth part 8 provided at predetermined intervals in a circumferential direction (figs 1), and
flat portions/base bend part 4b provided between adjacent convex portions (fig 2) in the circumferential direction (fig 2), each of the convex portions has a folded shape/chevron (figs 1-5) that is convex in a stacking direction (figs 1-5) and extends in the radial direction (figs 1-5), the convex portions are stacked and overlapping each other in the stacking direction (figs 1-5); but does not teach that a plate thickness of the convex portion is smaller than a plate thickness of the flat portion.
Hirose teaches that a plate thickness t1/t2 of the convex portion 4 is smaller than a plate thickness t0 of the flat portion 5 to reduce scrap in manufacturing the stator core during winding.
As a result, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the invention of Tokizawa was effectively filed to modify it such that a plate thickness of the convex portion is smaller than a plate thickness of the flat portion, as taught by Hirose so as to reduce waste during manufacturing.
2. Tokizawa in view of Hirose teach:
The stator core for the rotary electric machine according to claim 1, wherein thicknesses (of Hirose) of steel sheet material (of Tokizawa) forming the core sheet (of Hirose) are different between the convex portions (of Hirose) and the flat portions (of Hirose), a protrusion height of the convex portion (of Tokizawa) on an inner side in the radial direction is larger than a protrusion height of the convex portion (of Tokizawa) on an outer side in the radial direction (Tokizawa figs 2-5), and the convex portion protrudes from the flat portion at a radially outermost position of the back yoke (Tokizawa figs 2-5).
3. Tokizawa teaches:
The stator core for the rotary electric machine according to claim 2, wherein a concave surface portion on an opposite side of a convex surface portion of the convex portion is an inner convex portion, and a depth of the inner convex portion at a portion which is an outermost edge in the radial direction is equal to or larger than the plate thickness of the flat portion (since the convex portions and stator core of Tokizawa are practically identical, the limitations of claim 3 are being construed as being taught by Tokizawa, please see drawing objection above).
5. Tokizawa teaches:
The stator core for the rotary electric machine according to claim 1, wherein the core sheet includes a first sheet having the convex portions and being continuous in the circumferential direction (Tokizawa figs 2-5), and a second sheet having a portion of the first sheet excluding the convex portions (corresponding to the back band 5c, fig 5), the first sheet and the second sheet are overlapped with each other in the stacking direction (Tokizawa figs 2-5), and a plate thickness of the convex portion is smaller than a plate thickness of the flat portion (of Hirose fig 3).
6. Tokizawa teaches:
The stator core for the rotary electric machine according to claim 5, wherein the plate thickness of the convex portion is equal to the plate thickness of a part of the first sheet other than the convex portions (Tokizawa figs 2-5), and the plate thickness of the convex portion is smaller than the plate thickness of the flat portion (of Hirose fig 3).
7. Tokizawa teaches:
The stator core for the rotary electric machine according to claim 5, wherein the convex portions of the first sheet (figs 4 and 5) are provided in a range from an innermost edge (figs 4 and 5) in the radial direction to an intermediate position (figs 4 and 5) in the radial direction of the back yoke (figs 4 and 5), and portions which are both sides of the convex portions in the circumferential direction (figs 4 and 5) of the second sheet are continuous at the outermost edge (corresponding to the back band 5c, fig 5) in the radial direction (figs 4 and 5).
10. Tokizawa teaches:
The stator core for the rotary electric machine according to claim 1, wherein the core sheet has a yoke forming portion/rear band part 5 forming the back yoke and a teeth 4 forming portion forming the teeth, a rolled portion/back band inclined part 5c is provided at an edge of the yoke forming portion in the radial direction (figs 4 and 5) opposite to the teeth forming portion (figs 4 and 5), and a portion between the convex portions in the circumferential direction has a circular arc shape by the rolling portion in a plan view (figs 4 and 5).
11. Tokizawa teaches:
The stator core for the rotary electric machine according to claim 1, wherein the core sheet has a yoke forming portion/rear band part 5 forming the back yoke and a teeth forming portion forming the teeth, a rolled portion/back band inclined part 5c is provided at an edge of the yoke (figs 4 and 5) forming portion in the radial direction opposite to the teeth forming portion (figs 4 and 5), the rolled portion is provided at the edge excluding the convex portions (figs 4 and 5), and a portion between the convex portions in the circumferential direction (figs 4 and 5) has a circular arc shape by the rolling portion in a plan view (figs 4 and 5).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tokizawa in view of Hirose and in further view of Hashimoto (JP 2010130824).
8. Tokizawa teaches:
The stator core for the rotary electric machine according to claim 1, wherein the teeth of the stator core protrude inward from the back yoke in the radial direction of the stator core (figs 1-5); but does not teach that the convex portion has a flat shape at a top in a predetermined range in the radial direction including an innermost edge in the radial direction.
Hashimoto teaches that the convex portion/caulking part 10 has a flat shape 3A at a top (when flipped 180 degrees) in a predetermined range in the radial direction including an innermost edge/engaging hole 3o (the engaging hole is the innermost edge of the convex portion, fig 2b) in the radial direction (the Radial direction can be seen as the direction that the teeth 2T protrude, fig 1) to increase the strength of the coupling between laminations (abstract) which makes the motor more reliable.
As a result, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the invention of Tokizawa being effectively filed to modify it such that the convex portion has a flat shape at a top in a predetermined range in the radial direction including an innermost edge in the radial direction, as taught by Hashimoto so as to improve the reliability of the electric machine.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 9 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TERRANCE L KENERLY whose telephone number is (571)270-7851. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-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 Koehler can be reached at 5712723560. 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.
/TERRANCE L KENERLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights