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.
Claims 1-3, 14 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kool et al (US 10673288 B2).
With respect to claim 1, Kool discloses an apparatus comprising: a magnetic component (fig. 2, magnetic component 20), wherein the magnetic component comprises: a first region composed of a first material having a relative permeability greater than or equal to 10 (cl. 4, ln 6-11 “In some embodiments, the relative permeability of the magnetic region may be greater than 100, and in some embodiments, the relative permeability of the magnetic region may be greater than 200”); a second region composed of a second material having a relative permeability less than or equal to 2 (col. 4, ln. 17-20 ““non-magnetic region” refers to a region where greater than 90 volume % of the region is non-magnetic. Further, the term “non-magnetic region” refers to a region having a relative permeability approximately equal to 1.”), wherein the magnetic component comprises alternating layers of the first region and the second region (fig. ,2, first region 20, second region 30); and an interface layer between each of the alternating layers of the first material and the second material (col. 10, ln 26-64 “The coating material may be disposed on the magnetic component by using different methods. Non-limiting examples of methods for disposing the coating on the magnetic component may include dip coating, spray coating, spin coating, slip casting, tape casting and lamination, and gel casting. In certain embodiments, the coating is disposed by spray coating a nitrogen stop-off material in a slurry form over the magnetic component.”); wherein the first material and the second material have elements diffuse into the interface layer at conditions associated with a manufacturing process (col. 11, ln 49-56 “In some embodiments, the difference in nitrogen content of the first region 20 and the second region 30 is achieved by selectively removing portions of the coating in one of the regions before the step of heat-treating, thus varying the surface coating area percentage or density of the coating in those regions. Portions of the coating may be selectively removed by different methods including, but not limited to, etching and grit blasting.”), wherein the manufacturing process is at least one of: a welding joining process; a brazing joining process; an additive manufacturing process; and a sintering process (col. 7-9, ln 65-4 “In some embodiments, a monolithic magnetic component may be manufactured by additive manufacturing. In some embodiments, a magnetic component is manufactured as a monolithic structure, prior to any sintering step. In certain embodiments, the monolithic magnetic component in its entirety is manufactured using a powder having the same composition as the starting material.”).
With respect to claim 2, Kool discloses the magnetic component is part of a rotor in an electric motor (col. 3 ln 39-43 “The term “magnetic component” as used herein refers to a magnetic part of any product, such as, for example, a rotor lamination of a motor”).
With respect to claim 3, Kool discloses the electric motor is a synchronous reluctance motor (SynRM) (col. 14, ln 34-37 “For example, a number of different types of synchronous reluctance machines, including a stator and a rotor shaft operationally disposed within the confines of the stator may be designed.”).
With respect to claim 14, Kool discloses a method comprising: forming at least one first region in a component (fig. 2, magnetic component 20), wherein the at least one first region is composed of a first material having a relative permeability greater than or equal to 10 (cl. 4, ln 6-11 “In some embodiments, the relative permeability of the magnetic region may be greater than 100, and in some embodiments, the relative permeability of the magnetic region may be greater than 200”); joining at least one second region to the at least one first region (col. 7-9, ln 65-4 “In some embodiments, a monolithic magnetic component may be manufactured by additive manufacturing. In some embodiments, a magnetic component is manufactured as a monolithic structure, prior to any sintering step. In certain embodiments, the monolithic magnetic component in its entirety is manufactured using a powder having the same composition as the starting material.”), wherein the at least one second region is composed of a second material having a relative permeability less than or equal to 2 (col. 4, ln. 17-20 ““non-magnetic region” refers to a region where greater than 90 volume % of the region is non-magnetic. Further, the term “non-magnetic region” refers to a region having a relative permeability approximately equal to 1.”), wherein the at least one second region is joined to the at least one first region using a manufacturing process that causes elements of the first material and the second material to diffuse into an interface layer that interfaces the at least one first region with the at least one second region (col. 11, ln 49-56 “In some embodiments, the difference in nitrogen content of the first region 20 and the second region 30 is achieved by selectively removing portions of the coating in one of the regions before the step of heat-treating, thus varying the surface coating area percentage or density of the coating in those regions. Portions of the coating may be selectively removed by different methods including, but not limited to, etching and grit blasting.”), wherein the manufacturing process that is at least one of: a welding joining process; a brazing joining process; an additive manufacturing process; and a sintering process; and incorporating the component into an electric motor (col. 7-9, ln 65-4 “In some embodiments, a monolithic magnetic component may be manufactured by additive manufacturing. In some embodiments, a magnetic component is manufactured as a monolithic structure, prior to any sintering step. In certain embodiments, the monolithic magnetic component in its entirety is manufactured using a powder having the same composition as the starting material.”).
With respect to claim 20, Kool discloses an electric motor comprising: a stator configured to generate electric fields (fig. 9, stator 108); and a rotor configured to rotate in response to the generated electric fields (fig. 9, rotor 106), wherein the rotor comprises: a plurality of first regions composed of a first material having a relative permeability greater than or equal to 10 (cl. 4, ln 6-11 “In some embodiments, the relative permeability of the magnetic region may be greater than 100, and in some embodiments, the relative permeability of the magnetic region may be greater than 200”); a plurality of second regions composed of a second material having a relative permeability less than or equal to 2 (col. 4, ln. 17-20 ““non-magnetic region” refers to a region where greater than 90 volume % of the region is non-magnetic. Further, the term “non-magnetic region” refers to a region having a relative permeability approximately equal to 1.”), wherein the rotor comprises alternating layers of the first region and the second region (fig. 11, layers 102); and an interface layer between each of the alternating layers of the first material and the second material (col. 11, ln 49-56 “In some embodiments, the difference in nitrogen content of the first region 20 and the second region 30 is achieved by selectively removing portions of the coating in one of the regions before the step of heat-treating, thus varying the surface coating area percentage or density of the coating in those regions.); wherein the first material and the second material have elements diffuse into the interface layer at conditions associated with a manufacturing process (col. 11, ln 49-56 “Portions of the coating may be selectively removed by different methods including, but not limited to, etching and grit blasting.”), wherein the manufacturing process is at least one of: a welding joining process; a brazing joining process; an additive manufacturing process; and a sintering process (col. 7-9, ln 65-4 “In some embodiments, a monolithic magnetic component may be manufactured by additive manufacturing. In some embodiments, a magnetic component is manufactured as a monolithic structure, prior to any sintering step. In certain embodiments, the monolithic magnetic component in its entirety is manufactured using a powder having the same composition as the starting material.”).
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 4-6, 9-10, 15-16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kool in view of Zhu et al (US 20180278100 A1).
With respect to claim 4, Kool teaches the above-mentioned limitations but does not teach “the first region comprises a concentration of silicon that is 1% to 10% in weight.”
Zhu teaches the first region comprises a concentration of silicon that is 1% to 10% in weight (paragraph 33 “the substrate may be a soft magnetic material such as electrical steel. The electrical steel may be a silicon steel. The silicon steel has a relatively high silicon content of about 0.1 to 7 wt. %, 2.5 to 4 wt. %, or 3 to 3.5 wt. %”).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to combine the rotor and magnetic components of Kool with the specific ratio of silicon in the magnetic sections of Zhu in order to better shape the magnetic characteristics of the magnetic sections, thereby improving the magnetic attraction of the rotor and increasing the efficiency of the motor.
With respect to claim 5, Kool teaches the above-mentioned limitations but does not teach “the second region comprises: a first concentration that is 16.5% to 26.5% in weight; a second concentration that is 0.001% to 0.26% in weight; and a third concentration that is 7% to 36% in weight.”
Zhu teaches the second region comprises: a first concentration that is 16.5% to 26.5% in weight (paragraph 33 “the substrate may be a soft magnetic material such as electrical steel. The electrical steel may be a silicon steel. The silicon steel has a relatively high silicon content of about 0.1 to 7 wt. %, 2.5 to 4 wt. %, or 3 to 3.5 wt. %”); a second concentration that is 0.001% to 0.26% in weight (see at least figures 4-10 and paragraph 59, areas X24 function to impede flux, the Examiner is interpreting the flux impediment of the rotor being achieved through a reduced concentration of silicon in the electric steel); and a third concentration that is 7% to 36% in weight (paragraph 33 “the substrate may be a soft magnetic material such as electrical steel. The electrical steel may be a silicon steel. The silicon steel has a relatively high silicon content of about 0.1 to 7 wt. %, 2.5 to 4 wt. %, or 3 to 3.5 wt. %”).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to combine the rotor and magnetic components of Kool with the specific ratio of silicon in the magnetic sections of Zhu in order to better shape the magnetic characteristics of the magnetic sections, thereby improving the magnetic attraction of the rotor and increasing the efficiency of the motor.
With respect to claim 6, Kool in view of Zhu teaches the above-mentioned limitations. Kool further teaches the first region comprises an additional concentration of aluminum that is 1% to 10% in weight (col. 8, ln 42-44 “In some embodiments, part of chromium may be substituted with up to 8 weight % aluminum.”).
With respect to claim 9, Kool teaches the first region comprises: a first concentration of carbon that is 0.001% to 1.5% in weight (col. 12, ln 16-19 “Further, a concentration of carbon in the first, second, and third regions may be controlled to be less than 0.05 weight % of the respective regions.”);
Kool does not teach “and a second concentration of manganese that is 0.001% to 2% in weight.”
Zhu teaches a second concentration of manganese that is 0.001% to 2% in weight (paragraph 33 “The steel may also or alternatively contain manganese, aluminum or both in the amount of about 0.1 to 0.5 wt. %”).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to combine the rotor and magnetic components of Kool with the specific ratio of manganese in the magnetic sections of Zhu in order to better shape the magnetic characteristics of the magnetic sections, thereby improving the magnetic attraction of the rotor and increasing the efficiency of the motor.
With respect to claim 10, Kool in view of Zhu teaches the above-mentioned limitations. Kool further teaches the first region comprises a third concentration of chromium in the first region that is 9% to 28% in weight (col. 8, ln 35-36 “the iron-based alloy has a composition of 20 weight % chromium”).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to combine the rotor and magnetic components of Kool with the specific ratio of chromium in the magnetic sections of Zhu in order to better shape the magnetic characteristics of the magnetic sections, thereby improving the magnetic attraction of the rotor and increasing the efficiency of the motor.
With respect to claim 15, Kool the above-mentioned limitations but does not teach “forming one or more bridges and one or more ribs that extend through second regions in the at least one second region and connect different first regions in the at least one first region to one another.”
Zhu teaches forming one or more bridges and one or more ribs that extend through second regions in the at least one second region and connect different first regions in the at least one first region to one another (fig. 4, bridge 326).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to combine the rotor and magnetic components of Kool with bridges in the rotor of Zhu in order to better shape the magnetic characteristics of the magnetic sections, thereby improving the magnetic attraction of the rotor and increasing the efficiency of the motor.
With respect to claim 16, Kool the above-mentioned limitations but does not teach “at least one first region comprises a concentration of silicon that is 1% to 10% in weight.”
Zhu teaches at least one first region comprises a concentration of silicon that is 1% to 10% in weight (paragraph 33 “the substrate may be a soft magnetic material such as electrical steel. The electrical steel may be a silicon steel. The silicon steel has a relatively high silicon content of about 0.1 to 7 wt. %, 2.5 to 4 wt. %, or 3 to 3.5 wt. %”).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to combine the rotor and magnetic components of Kool with the specific ratio of silicon in the magnetic sections of Zhu in order to better shape the magnetic characteristics of the magnetic sections, thereby improving the magnetic attraction of the rotor and increasing the efficiency of the motor.
With respect to claim 18, Kool teaches the at least one first region comprises: a first concentration of carbon that is 0.001% to 1.5% in weight (col. 12, ln 16-19 “Further, a concentration of carbon in the first, second, and third regions may be controlled to be less than 0.05 weight % of the respective regions);
Kool does not teach “and a second concentration of manganese that is 0.001% to 2% in weight.”
Zhu teaches a second concentration of manganese that is 0.001% to 2% in weight (paragraph 33 “The steel may also or alternatively contain manganese, aluminum or both in the amount of about 0.1 to 0.5 wt. %”).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to combine the rotor and magnetic components of Kool with the specific ratio of manganese in the magnetic sections of Zhu in order to better shape the magnetic characteristics of the magnetic sections, thereby improving the magnetic attraction of the rotor and increasing the efficiency of the motor.
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kool in view of Volbers (US 20170346351 A1).
With respect to claim 7, Kool teaches the above-mentioned limitations but does not teach “the first region comprises a concentration of cobalt that is 40% to 55% in weight.”
Volbers teaches the first region comprises a concentration of cobalt that is 40% to 55% in weight (claim 5, “45 wt %≦Co≦52 wt %”).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to combine the rotor and magnetic components of Kool with the specific ratio of cobalt in the magnetic sections of Volbers in order to better shape the magnetic characteristics of the magnetic sections, thereby improving the magnetic attraction of the rotor and increasing the efficiency of the motor
With respect to claim 17, Kool teaches the above-mentioned limitations but does not teach “the first region comprises a concentration of cobalt that is 40% to 55% in weight.”
Volbers teaches the at least one first region comprises a concentration of cobalt that is 40% to 55% in weight (claim 5, “45 wt %≦Co≦52 wt %”).).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to combine the rotor and magnetic components of Kool with the specific ratio of cobalt in the magnetic sections of Volbers in order to better shape the magnetic characteristics of the magnetic sections, thereby improving the magnetic attraction of the rotor and increasing the efficiency of the motor
Claims 8, 11, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kool in view of Hosek et al (US 9887598 B2)
With respect to claim 8, Kool teaches the above-mentioned limitations but does not teach “he first region comprises a concentration of nickel that is 40% to 55% in weight.”
Hosek teaches the first region comprises a concentration of nickel that is 40% to 55% in weight (col. 18 ln 35-39 “The iron-containing particles may comprise about 89 wt. % iron, about 10 wt. % aluminum, and about 0.25 wt. % carbon. The iron-containing particles may include silicon. The iron-containing particles may include at least one of aluminum, cobalt, nickel, and silicon” The Examiner is interpreting inclusion of nickel in the iron-containing particles as having a range from 40-60%).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to combine the rotor and magnetic components of Kool with the specific ratio of nickel in the magnetic sections of Hosek in order to better shape the magnetic characteristics of the magnetic sections, thereby improving the magnetic attraction of the rotor and increasing the efficiency of the motor
With respect to claim 11, Kool teaches the above-mentioned limitations but does not teach “the second region comprises: a first concentration of nickel that is 40% to 77% in weight; and a second concentration of chromium that is 10% to 35% in weight.”
Hosek teaches the second region comprises: a first concentration of nickel that is 40% to 77% in weight (col. 18 ln 35-39 “The iron-containing particles may comprise about 89 wt. % iron, about 10 wt. % aluminum, and about 0.25 wt. % carbon. The iron-containing particles may include silicon. The iron-containing particles may include at least one of aluminum, cobalt, nickel, and silicon” The Examiner is interpreting inclusion of nickel in the iron-containing particles as having a range from 40-60%); and a second concentration of chromium that is 10% to 35% in weight (col. 8, ln 35-36 “In some embodiments, the iron-based alloy has a composition of 20 weight % chromium”).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to combine the rotor and magnetic components of Kool with the specific ratio of nickel in the magnetic sections of Hosek in order to better shape the magnetic characteristics of the magnetic sections, thereby improving the magnetic attraction of the rotor and increasing the efficiency of the motor
With respect to claim 19, Kool teaches a second concentration of chromium that is 10% to 35% in weight ((col. 8, ln 35-36 “In some embodiments, the iron-based alloy has a composition of 20 weight % chromium”).).
Kool does not teach “the at least one second region comprises: a first concentration of nickel that is 40% to 77% in weight.”
Hosek teaches the at least one second region comprises: a first concentration of nickel that is 40% to 77% in weight (col. 18 ln 35-39 “The iron-containing particles may comprise about 89 wt. % iron, about 10 wt. % aluminum, and about 0.25 wt. % carbon. The iron-containing particles may include silicon. The iron-containing particles may include at least one of aluminum, cobalt, nickel, and silicon” The Examiner is interpreting inclusion of nickel in the iron-containing particles as having a range from 40-60%);
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to combine the rotor and magnetic components of Kool with the specific ratio of nickel in the magnetic sections of Hosek in order to better shape the magnetic characteristics of the magnetic sections, thereby improving the magnetic attraction of the rotor and increasing the efficiency of the motor
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kool in view of Hosek et al in further view of Decristofaro et al (US 20040150285 A1).
With respect to claim 12, Kool in view of Hosek teach the above-mentioned limitations but do not teach “the second region further comprises a third concentration of molybdenum that is 8% to 30% in weight.”
teaches the second region further comprises a third concentration of molybdenum that is 8% to 30% in weight (paragraph 58 “where "M" is at least one of Fe, Ni and Co, "Y" is at least one of B, C and P, and "Z" is at least one of Si, Al and Ge; with the proviso that (i) up to ten (10) atom percent of component "M" can be replaced with at least one of the metallic species Ti, V, Cr, Mn, Cu, Zr, Nb, Mo, Ta and W, a”).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to combine the rotor and magnetic components of Kool with the specific ratio of nickel in the magnetic sections of Hosek with the ratio of molybdenum of Decristofaro in order to better shape the magnetic characteristics of the magnetic sections, thereby improving the magnetic attraction of the rotor and increasing the efficiency of the motor
With respect to claim 13, Kool in view of Hosek teach the above-mentioned limitations but do not teach “the second region further comprises a third concentration of cobalt that is 10% to 35% in weight.”
Decristofaro teaches the second region further comprises a third concentration of cobalt that is 10% to 35% in weight (paragraph 58 “where "M" is at least one of Fe, Ni and Co, "Y" is at least one of B, C and P, and "Z" is at least one of Si, Al and Ge; with the proviso that (i) up to ten (10) atom percent of component "M" can be replaced with at least one of the metallic species Ti, V, Cr, Mn, Cu, Zr, Nb, Mo, Ta and W, a”).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to combine the rotor and magnetic components of Kool with the specific ratio of nickel in the magnetic sections of Hosek with the ratio of molybdenum of Decristofaro in order to better shape the magnetic characteristics of the magnetic sections, thereby improving the magnetic attraction of the rotor and increasing the efficiency of the motor
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RILEY OWEN STOUT whose telephone number is (571)272-0068. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-5:30pm EST.
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 at (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.
/R.O.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/CHRISTOPHER M KOEHLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights