DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: “ROTOR INCLUDING SIDE WALL COMPRISING A PLURALITY OF GROOVES”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 19 recites “a rotor assembly for an electric motor, the rotor assembly comprising: the rotor of claim 1; and the one or more magnets disposed proximate the inner surface of the side wall”. The claim limitation fails to specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed-specifically no further structural limitations of the rotor are provided. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-10 and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gotovac et al. (WO20230138783, “Gotovac”).
Re claim 1, Gotovac discloses a rotor for an electric motor, the rotor comprising:
a side wall rotatable about an axis of rotation R of a shaft of the electric motor (figs 8 & below, pg 12, 3rd para, side wall includes 27 & back yoke 1; discloses bearing 31 in fig 8 implying shaft connected to rotor), the side wall having an inner surface 7, the side wall to support one or more magnets 3 disposed proximate the inner surface 7, the side wall defining a space to at least partially receive a stator 21 of the electric motor (fig 8, pg 12, 3rd para), the side wall comprising a plurality of grooves 11 in the inner surface 7 (figs 4-6, pg 11, 2nd-3rd & 5th para, grooves of figs 4-5 or fig 6), the grooves 11 being oriented about circumferentially relative to the axis of rotation R (figs 4-5, pg 7, 5th-6th para).
PNG
media_image1.png
172
431
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re claim 2, Gotovac discloses claim 1 and further discloses one or more of the grooves 11 each define a corresponding plane about perpendicular to the axis of rotation (figs 5-6 & below).
PNG
media_image2.png
229
602
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Re claim 3, Gotovac discloses claim 1 and further discloses one or more of the grooves 11 each define a closed loop (figs 4-5, pg 7, 5th-6th para, says 11 can be parallel or spiral).
Re claim 4, Gotovac discloses claim 1 and further discloses the grooves 11 are about equally spaced from one another along the axis of rotation R (figs 5-6).
Re claim 5, Gotovac discloses claim 1 and further discloses the grooves 11 are about evenly distributed along a height of the side wall measured along the axis of rotation R (figs 5-6).
Re claims 7-10, Gotovac discloses claim 1 and further discloses the side wall has a thickness h2 measured radially relative to the axis of rotation (figs 5-6), and one or more of the grooves 11 each have a corresponding depth h1 being at most:
about 40% of the thickness of the side wall;
about 30% of the thickness of the side wall;
about 20% of the thickness of the side wall; and
about 10% of the thickness of the side wall (figs 5-6, pg 8, 3rd para, states depth h1 is 1-40% of h2).
Re claim 14, Gotovac discloses claim 1 and further discloses one or more of the grooves 11 each have a shape being one of about rectangular, about V-shaped, and about U-shaped (figs 5-6).
Re claim 15, Gotovac discloses claim 1 and further discloses the inner surface 7 of the side wall defines a cylinder (figs 1-3).
Re claim 16, Gotovac discloses claim 1 and further discloses the side wall comprises a backiron of the electric motor (fig 8, pg 8, 4th para).
Re claim 17, Gotovac discloses claim 1 and further discloses the side wall is to support the one or more magnets being permanent magnets 3 (figs 1-6 & 8, claim 1).
Re claim 18, Gotovac discloses claim 1 and further discloses one or more of the grooves 11 are at least partially filled with a material having a magnetic permeability being lower than a corresponding magnetic permeability of the side wall (figs 5-6, pg 6, 4th para & pg 8, 4th para, air or adhesive has mag. permeability lower than ferromagnetic material of 1).
Re claim 19, Gotovac discloses claim 1 and further discloses a rotor assembly for an electric motor (fig 8), the rotor assembly comprising: the rotor of claim 1; and the one or more magnets 3 disposed proximate the inner surface 7 of the side wall (figs 4-6 & 8).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Read et al. (WO2025022117, “Read”).
Re claim 6, Gotovac discloses claim 1 and further discloses the grooves 11 take up a fraction of a height of the side wall, the height measured along the axis of rotation (figs 5-6, 8 & below, 11 only on 1 so grooves make of approximately less than 50% of side wall height).
PNG
media_image3.png
233
359
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Gotovac discloses claim 1 but is silent with respect to the fraction being less than or equal to about 10%.
Read discloses reducing the number of grooves 30 increases strength of shaft 10 (figs 1 & 3, pg 9, 5th para).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to reduce the number of grooves in the side wall of Gotovac, as disclosed by Read, so that the fraction being less than or equal to about 10%, in order to increase the strength of the side wall while providing some reduction to eddy currents, as taught by Read (figs 1 & 3, pg 9, 5th para).
Additionally applicant provides no criticality with respect to the fraction being less than or equal to about 10%. Since the number of grooves is a result effective variable (increasing number decreases eddy currents& decreasing number increases strength of side wall, as taught by Read), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the fraction to be less than or equal to about 10%, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claims 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knorre et al. (EP2658095, “Knorre”, using machine translation).
Re claim 11, Gotovac discloses claim 1 but is silent with respect to:
one or more the grooves have a corresponding aspect ratio being less than or equal to about 1:1, the aspect ratio being a ratio of a corresponding width of a given groove measured along the axis of rotation to a corresponding depth of the given groove measured radially relative to the axis of rotation;
the one or more of the grooves have the corresponding aspect ratio being less than or equal to about 1:3; and
the one or more of the grooves have the corresponding aspect ratio being less than or equal to about 1:10.
Knorre discloses one or more the grooves 8 have a corresponding aspect ratio being less than or equal to about 1:1, the aspect ratio being a ratio of a corresponding width b of a given groove measured along the axis of rotation 5 to a corresponding depth t of the given groove measured radially relative to the axis of rotation;
the one or more of the grooves have the corresponding aspect ratio being less than or equal to about 1:3; and
the one or more of the grooves have the corresponding aspect ratio being less than or equal to about 1:10 (figs 1-2 & 4, [0021], says 0.3≤ b ≤3mm & 0.5≤ t ≤ 5mm, satisfies above limitations when b=0.5 mm & t=5 mm).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a groove size to reduce eddy currents, as taught by Knorre ([0021-0022]).
Conclusion
Takahashi et al. (US20070090708) discloses at least claim 1.
Kori (CN111555489) has U-shaped grooves.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5715. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 8:30-5pm 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, Seye Iwarere can be reached on (571)270-5112. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ERIC JOHNSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights