(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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 03/25/2025 and 05/08/2025 and 12/29/2025 are 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 § 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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 7-8, 11-13,17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tsukamoto et al. (US PG Pub 2022/0103030).
As to independent claim 1, Tsukamoto et al. teaches a rotating electric machine comprising: a rotor (1) including a rotor core (10) configured to rotate about a rotation axis (C1), and a plurality of permanent magnets (20) disposed in magnet holes (11) provided in the rotor core (10); and a stator (5) including a stator core (50) radially outside the rotor (1), a first direction representing one axial direction of the rotation axis (C1) and a second direction representing another axial direction of the rotation axis (C1), the rotor core (10) including a first core section (A1) at least partially opposed to the stator core (50) in radial directions, and having substantially a same cross sectional shape perpendicular to the axial directions of the rotation axis (C1), and a second core section (A2) adjacent to an end of the first core section (A1) in the first direction, and having substantially a same cross sectional shape perpendicular to the axial directions of the rotation axis (C1) , the second core (A2) section being, in the first direction, at least partially ahead of a first end of the stator core (50) in the first direction, and having a magnetic resistance structure (11) with a lower magnetic permeability than the first core section (A1), the magnetic resistance structure (13) being formed in a magnetic pole section of the rotor (1) and radially outside the plurality of permanent magnets (20) as shown in figures 2-4 and see paragraphs [0029, 0031, 0047, 0061 and 0145].
As to claim 2/1, Tsukamoto et al. teaches wherein a center of the rotor core (10) in the axial directions shifts, in the first direction, from a center of the stator core (50) in the axial directions as shown in figure 12 see paragraphs [0123-0125].
As to claim 4/1, Tsukamoto et al. teaches further comprising: a third core (A3) section having the magnetic resistance structure (13) , being adjacent to an end of the first core section (A1) in the second direction, and having substantially a same cross sectional shape perpendicular to the axial directions of the rotation axis (C1) as shown in figure 1,7,12 and 14, see paragraphs [0061, 0145].
As to claim 5/2, Tsukamoto et al. teaches further comprising: a third core (A2) section having the magnetic resistance structure (13), being adjacent to an end of the first core section (A1) in the second direction, and having substantially a same cross sectional shape perpendicular to the axial directions of the rotation axis (C1) as shown in figures 1 and 5A, 5B.
As to claim 7/4, Tsukamoto et al. teaches wherein the end of the first core (A1) section in the first direction shifts, in the first direction, from the first end of the stator core (50) in the first direction, the end of the first core section (A1) in the second direction shifts, in the first direction, from a second end of the stator core (50) in the second direction, and a part of the third core section (A2) is, in the second direction, ahead of the second end of the stator core (50) in the second direction as shown in figures 2-4 .
As to claim 8/1, Tsukamoto et al. teaches wherein the magnetic resistance structure (13) is a void in the rotor core (10) as shown in figures 1,7, 12 and 14.
As to claim 11/4, Tsukamoto et al. teaches wherein the magnetic resistance structure (13) is a void in the rotor core (10) as shown in figures 1,7, 12 and 14.
As to claim 12/7, Tsukamoto et al. teaches wherein the magnetic resistance structure (13) is a void in the rotor core (10) as shown in figures 1,7, 12 and 14.
As to claim 13/8, Tsukamoto et al. teaches wherein when the rotor (1) is viewed along the rotation axis, the rotor core (10) has an outer circumferential end with a same cross-sectional shape perpendicular to the axial directions as shown in figure 15.
As to claim 17/1, Tsukamoto et al. teaches wherein the permanent magnets (20) are aligned in circumferential directions of the rotor core (10) and penetrate the rotor core (10) in the axial directions, and the permanent magnets (20) have same cross-sectional shapes orthogonal to the axial directions as shown in figures 2-4.
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.
Claim(s) 3,6, 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsukamoto et al. (US PG Pub 2022/0103030) as applied in claim 1 above, and further in view of Shinji (JP3395539).
As to claim 3/2, Tsukamoto et al. teaches wherein the end of the first core section (A1) in the first direction, in the first direction, from the first end of the stator core (50) in the first direction, and an end of the first core section (A1) in the second direction, in the first direction, from a second end of the stator core (50) in the second direction as shown in figures 2-4 and see paragraphs [0029, 0031, 0047, 0061 and 0145].
However Tsukamoto et al. teaches the claimed limitation as discussed above except the shifts of the rotor and stator in the axial directions.
Shinji teaches shifting the rotor (3) in the first axial direction from the stator core (2a) as shown in figure 1 and see paragraph [0014, 0021, 0066-0067], for the advantageous benefit of generating an axial magnetic attractive force that suppresses axial vibration of the rotor and rotating shaft, thereby reducing vibration and abnormal noise.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Tsukamoto et al. by using the shifts of the rotor and stator in the axial directions, as taught by Shinji, to generate an axial magnetic attractive force that suppresses axial vibration of the rotor and rotating shaft, thereby reducing vibration and abnormal noise.
As to claim 6/3, Tsukamoto et al. teaches further comprising: a third core (A2) section having the magnetic resistance structure (13), being adjacent to the end of the first core section (A1) in the second direction, and having substantially a same cross sectional shape perpendicular to the axial directions of the rotation axis (C1) as shown in figures 1 and 5A, 5B.
As to claim 9/2, Tsukamoto et al. wherein the magnetic resistance structure (13) is a void in the rotor core (10) as shown in figures 1,7, 12 and 14.
As to claim 10/3, Tsukamoto et al. wherein the magnetic resistance structure (13) is a void in the rotor core (10) as shown in figures 1,7, 12 and 14.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsukamoto et al. (US PG Pub 2022/0103030) as applied in claim 1 above, and further in view of Toyoda (JP06225507).
As to claim 15/1, Tsukamoto et al. teaches the claimed limitation as discussed above except wherein in the axial directions, the first core section has a same length as the stator core.
However Toyoda teaches wherein in the axial directions, the first core section (12) has a same length as the stator core (11) as shown n figure 1, for the advantageous benefit of providing the noise of electromagnetic vibrations quiet when a PWM electricity-feeding operation to a stator is controlled in a permanent magnet-type synchronous motor.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Tsukamoto et al. by using in the axial directions, the first core section has a same length as the stator core, as taught by Toyoda, to provide the noise of electromagnetic vibrations quiet when a PWM electricity-feeding operation to a stator is controlled in a permanent magnet-type synchronous motor.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsukamoto et al. (US PG Pub 2022/0103030) as applied in claim 1 above, and further in view of Fujisawa et al. (US PG Pub 2015/0108865).
As to claim 16/1, Tsukamoto et al. teaches the claimed limitation as discussed above except wherein the permanent magnets are ferrite magnets.
However Fujisawa et al. teaches the permanent magnets (21) are ferrite magnets as shown in figure 1 and see paragraph [0042-0043], for the advantageous benefit of realizing high torque of a composite torque rotating electric machine using permanent magnets having a low residual magnetic flux density.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Tsukamoto et al. by using the permanent magnets are ferrite magnets, as taught by Fujisawa et al., to realize high torque of a composite torque rotating electric machine using permanent magnets having a low residual magnetic flux density.
Claim(s) 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsukamoto et al. (US PG Pub 2022/0103030) as applied in claim 1 above, and further in view of Naka et al. (US PG Pub 20220216775).
As to claim 18/1, Tsukamoto et al. teaches the claimed limitation as discussed above except the compressor further comprising: a compression mechanism driven by the rotating electric machine.
However Naka et al. teaches a compression mechanism (3) driven by the rotating electric machine (2) as shown in figure 1, for the advantageous benefit of providing reliable fixes the rotor/stator with respect to the rotating shaft or casing in electrically insulated state.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Tsukamoto et al. by using a compression mechanism driven by the rotating electric machine, as taught by Naka et al., to provide reliable fixes the rotor/stator with respect to the rotating shaft or casing in electrically insulated state.
As to claim 19/18, Tsukamoto et al. in view of Naka et al. teaches the claimed limitation as discussed above except including the compressor.
However Naka et al. teaches including the compressor (1) as shown in figure 1, for the advantageous benefit of providing reliable fixes the rotor/stator with respect to the rotating shaft or casing in electrically insulated state.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Tsukamoto et al. in view of Naka et al. by using the compressor, as taught by Naka et al., to provide reliable fixes the rotor/stator with respect to the rotating shaft or casing in electrically insulated state.
, Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSE A GONZALEZ QUINONES whose telephone number is (571)270-7850. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 6:30-2:30 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, OLUSEYE IWARERE can be reached at (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 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.
/JOSE A GONZALEZ QUINONES/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834 September 18, 2026
Prosecution Insights