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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
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) 1-6, 13 and 14 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gersten et al. (US 20220200406) in view of Niesen et al. (DE 102021123310).
1. Gersten et al. teach:
A rotor (1) for an electrical machine (for electric motor, see title), comprising:
a rotor arm/rotor support (2) with a radial outer dimension (outer shell 4 is the outer dimension, figs 1 & 2);
a balancing disk/oil guiding disk 21 (the details of the balancing disk have not been disclosed …that being said, the oil guiding disk is being construed as a balancing disk…still further, the prior art disk appears to be the same structure as the claimed and disclosed disk of applicant) with a radial inner dimension (the radially inner dimension sits on the outer surface of the rotor arm, figs 1 & 2); but does not teach a connection arrangement with an outer contour on a side of the rotor arm and an inner contour on a side of the balancing disk; wherein the outer contour and the inner contour correspond to one another for axial and radial support; and wherein the connection arrangement for radial support has a first contour section with a radial connection dimension deviating from the outer dimension and the inner dimension.
Niesen et al. teach that a connection arrangement/retaining ring 3 with an outer contour (the radially inner surface of the retaining ring that rests against the groove 4 is the outer contour, fig 4) on a side of the rotor arm/groove 4 (the groove is a part of the rotor arm, fig 4) and an inner contour (the radially outer surface of the retaining ring that rests against the inner side of the collar 9 is the inner contour, fig 4) on a side of the balancing disk 7; wherein the outer contour and the inner contour correspond to one another for axial and radial support (fig 4); and wherein the connection arrangement for radial support has a first contour section (annotated fig 4 below) with a radial connection dimension (annotated fig 4 below) deviating from the outer dimension and the inner dimension annotated fig 4 below) to stably secure the rotor body to the shaft which prolongs the life of the motor.
PNG
media_image1.png
162
618
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
568
696
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As a result, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the invention of Gersten et al. was effectively filed to modify it with a connection arrangement with an outer contour on a side of the rotor arm and an inner contour on a side of the balancing disk; wherein the outer contour and the inner contour correspond to one another for axial and radial support; and wherein the connection arrangement for radial support has a first contour section with a radial connection dimension deviating from the outer dimension and the inner dimension, as taught by Niesen et al. so as to prolong the service life and reliability of the motor.
2. Gersten et al. in view of Niesen et al. teach:
The rotor according to claim 1, wherein the connection arrangement (of Niesen et al.) has an interference fit (snap rings are interference fit onto the shaft prior to the snap activation feature, MPEP 2112) on the first contour section (of Niesen et al.).
3. Gersten et al. in view of Niesen et al. teach:
The rotor according to claim 2, wherein the interference fit is configured to guarantee a predetermined minimum pressure (the minimum pressure is an inherent feature due to the press-fit, MPEP 2112).
4. Gersten et al. in view of Niesen et al. teach:
The rotor (1) according to claim 1, wherein the connection arrangement (6) extends over an axial region corresponding to an axial dimension of the balancing disk (5) and the first contour section (7) extends over an axial sub-region.
5. Gersten et al. in view of Niesen et al. teach:
The rotor according to claim 1, wherein the connection arrangement (of Niesen et al.) has an inner side (the side that faces the oil guiding disk, Niesen et al. fig 4) axially facing a rotor body (of Niesen et al.) and an outer side (the side that faces away from the oil guiding disk, Niesen et al. fig 4) axially facing away from the rotor body (4), and the first contour section (of Niesen et al.) is arranged on the outside.
6. Gersten et al. in view of Niesen et al. teach:
The rotor according to claim 1, wherein the connection arrangement (of Niesen et al.) extends over an axial region (groove 4 is an axial region, Niesen et al. fig 4) corresponding to an axial dimension of the balancing disk (of Niesen et al.), the connection arrangement (of Niesen et al.) bas a second contour section (the sides of the groov 4 of Niesen et al. represent the second contour section, Niesen et al. fig 4) for axial support, and the second contour section (of Niesen et al.) is arranged centrally on the axial region (Niesen et al. fig 4).
13. Gersten et al. teach:
The rotor (1 of Gersten et al.) according to claim 1, wherein the balancing disk (21 of Gersten et al.) has at least one recess/cutouts (19) defining a fluid channel (see para 0096 and fig 2).
14. Gersten et al. in view of Niesen et al. teach:
An electric machine (see Gersten et al. title), comprising the rotor (1 of Gersten et al.) according to claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7-12 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