DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-4 of U.S. Application No. 19009019 filed on 01/03/2025 are presented for examination.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/03/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claims 1-2, 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (JP_S 4729207; Hereinafter “JP ‘07”) in view of Mase Akira (JP_S 59-204445; Hereinafter, “Akira”)
Regarding claim 1: JP ’07 discloses a rotor (1-3) comprising:
a rotor body (rotating field part 3) including a field coil (3a; fig. 1-2);
a shaft (4) fixed to the rotor body (3) and constituting a rotary shaft (as the shaft attached to the rotating field part 3);
a first molded body (mold assembly 24) that covers an outer peripheral surface of the shaft (on small diameter shaft portion 4s; fig. 3) protruding in a direction of the rotary shaft (4) from the rotor body (3a);
a slip ring (22a, 22b) installed on an outer peripheral surface of the first resin molded body (24); and
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a bus bar (23, 23’), one end of which is electrically connected to the slip ring (22) in the first molded body (24), and the other end (at connection 23a, and 23’a) of which protrudes from the first molded body (24) to be electrically connected (via leads 8, and 8’) to the field coil (3a), wherein the entire other end of the bus bar (23, 23’) protruding from the first molded body (24) is sealed by a second molded body (26) that is separate from the first molded body (fig. 3).
JP ’07 does not disclose that the first molded body is a first resin molded body, and the second molded body is a second resin molded body
Akira discloses that the first molded body is a first resin molded body (abstract, line 4), and the second molded body (8) is a second resin molded body (para [0003]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the first molded body, and the second molded body of JP ’07 from a resin material as disclosed by Akira to improve the centrifugal force resistance of the rotor.
Regarding claim 2/1: JP ’07 in view of Akira discloses the limitations of claim 1 and JP ’07 further discloses that the field coil (3a) includes a coil end portion (leads 8, 8’) at both end portions in the direction (the axial direction; fig. 3) of the rotary shaft (4) of the rotor body (3); and the coil end portion (8) on the first resin molded body (24) side is fixed by the second resin molded body (26).
Regarding claim 4: JP ’07 discloses a method of manufacturing a rotor (the rotor in fig. 1-3), comprising: integrating a slip ring (22a, 22b) and a bus bar (23, 23’) with a first molded body (24);
covering an outer peripheral surface of a shaft (4) with the first molded body (24); and fixing the shaft (4) constituting a rotary shaft to a rotor body (3), and causing the first molded body (24) to protrude in a direction of the rotary shaft from the rotor body (fig. 3), wherein:
one end of the bus bar (23, 23’) sealed in the first molded body (24) is electrically connected to the slip ring (22a, 22b) installed on an outer peripheral surface of the first molded body (24), and the other end of the bus bar protruding from the first molded body (24) is electrically connected (via leads 8, 8’) to a field coil (3a) provided in the rotor body (3); and the entire other end (23a, 23’a) of the bus bar (23, 23’) protruding from the first molded body (24) is sealed by a second molded body (26) that is separate from the first resin molded body (fig. 3).
JP ’07 does not disclose that the first molded body is a first resin molded body, and the second molded body is a second resin molded body.
Akira discloses that the first molded body is a first resin molded body (abstract, line 4), and the second molded body (8) is a second resin molded body (para [0003]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the first molded body, and the second molded body of JP ’07 from a resin material as disclosed by Akira to improve the centrifugal force resistance of the rotor.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3/2/1 is 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 AHMED ELNAKIB whose telephone number is (571)270-0638. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00AM-4:00PM. 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, Tulsidas Patel can be reached at 571-272-2098. 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.
/AHMED ELNAKIB/ Primary Examiner,
Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights