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 specification is objected to because the paragraph numbering is not consecutive: the numbering proceeds from paragraph [0002] directly to paragraph [0004], and no paragraph [0003] is present. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
Regarding claim 4/1, claim 4 recites a portion protruding from the protruding part. Claim 1, from which claim 4 depends, recites an arm part protruding from the protruding part toward the bearing in the axial direction. It is unclear whether “a portion protruding from the protruding part” in claim 4 refers to the arm part already recited in claim 1 or requires an additional, distinct portion protruding from the protruding part, rendering the scope of claim 4 indefinite. For purposes of examination, and consistent with ¶[0049] of the specification (arm part 126 having tapered surface 126t), “a portion protruding from the protruding part” is interpreted as referring to the arm part.
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.
(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 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by YONEDA(US2019/0305633A1).
Regarding claim 1, Yoneda discloses a motor(motor 20; ¶[0031], FIG. 6) comprising:
a shaft(shaft 31; ¶[0033], FIG. 6);
a stator(stator 40 including stator core 41; ¶¶[0036]-[0037], FIG. 6);
a bearing disposed between the shaft and the stator(bearings 34, 35 held inside sleeve 81 radially between shaft 31 and stator core 41 fixed on the sleeve’s outer periphery; ¶¶[0033], [0037], FIG. 6);
and a rotor configured to rotate integrally with the shaft(rotor 30; ¶[0032], FIG. 6),
wherein the rotor includes a magnet(magnet 33 fixed to the inner peripheral surface of rotor case 32; ¶[0035])
and a cover fixed to the shaft and covering the magnet(rotor case 32 together with bush 37, held on shaft 31 via the bush; ¶¶[0034]-[0035], FIG. 6),
and the cover includes: a protruding part protruding toward the bearing in an axial direction(larger-diameter upper portion of bush 37 protruding from the rotor case center toward bearing 34; ¶[0034], FIG. 6);
and an arm part protruding from the protruding part toward the bearing in the axial direction(reduced-diameter lower cylindrical portion of bush 37 extending from the larger-diameter portion toward bearing 34; FIG. 6). The recited “cover” does not require a single integrally formed piece; the rotor case 32 and bush 37 are fixed together and rotate integrally with the shaft as a unitary cover assembly.
Regarding claim 5/1, Yoneda discloses the motor of claim 1.
Yoneda further teaches comprising a holding member configured to hold the shaft(sleeve 81 having a tubular shape extending in the direction of the central axis, holding bearings 34, 35 inside, the shaft 31 being rotatably supported with respect to the sleeve via the bearings; ¶[0033], FIG. 6),
wherein a length from an end part of the cover at one side in the axial direction to an end part of the magnet at the other side in the axial direction is longer than 1/2 of a length of the holding member in the axial direction(FIG. 6: the cover’s upper end, at bush 37 and rotor case 32, lies axially above the upper end of sleeve 81, and magnet 33 extends alongside a substantial portion of the sleeve, so the depicted length from the cover’s upper end to the magnet’s lower end clearly exceeds one half of the sleeve’s axial length).
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YONEDA(US2019/0305633A1) in view of YAMAZAKI(US2008/0232983A1).
Regarding claim 2/1, Yoneda discloses the motor of claim 1.
Yoneda does not explicitly teach wherein an end part of the shaft is exposed from the protruding part.
However, Yamazaki teaches a fan motor boss portion having a through hole at its central portion at which an upper end of the shaft is press-fitted and affixed, the shaft end being exposed at the top of the boss(boss 34, shaft 32; ¶[0040], Abstract, FIG. 1), the boss’s lower end surface supporting the inner ring of an adjacent ball bearing to determine the bearing’s axial position(¶[0032], bearing 41).
Yamazaki is analogous art from the same field of fan motors having a rotor boss fixed to a bearing-supported shaft. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the bush of Yoneda so the shaft is press-fitted in a through hole with its end part exposed from the bush, as taught by Yamazaki, a simple substitution of one known shaft-to-boss fixation for another.
One would be motivated to make this substitution so the protruding part can axially locate and support the inner ring of the adjacent bearing while the shaft is secured through the full axial extent of the boss(Yamazaki ’983, ¶[0032]), with predictable results. See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416 (2007).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YONEDA(US2019/0305633A1) in view of YAMASAKI(US2018/0337573A1).
Regarding claim 4/1, Yoneda discloses the motor of claim 1.
Yoneda does not explicitly teach wherein a portion protruding from the protruding part includes an inclined inner peripheral surface, and in a radial direction, an inner diameter of the inclined inner peripheral surface at the bearing side is greater than an inner diameter of the inclined inner peripheral surface at an end part side of the shaft.
However, Yamasaki teaches a fan motor shaft holder attached to a shaft(shaft holder 11, shaft 1a; ¶[0019], FIGS. 1-3), the holder’s inner peripheral surface at its lower end portion separating from the shaft’s outer surface such that, in the radial direction, its inner diameter at the lower side is greater than its inner diameter at the side of the shaft’s end part(FIGS. 2-3, the bore of holder 11 opening away from shaft 1a at the holder’s lower end).
Yamasaki is analogous art from the same field of fan motors having a rotor shaft holder fixed to a shaft. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the inner peripheral surface at the distal end of Yoneda’s arm part with such an inclined configuration separating from the shaft, as taught by Yamasaki.
One would be motivated to provide the depicted flared opening to guide the shaft into the holder’s through hole during attachment, with predictable results. See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416 (2007).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The closest prior art of Yoneda, Yamazaki, and Yamasaki does not teach or suggest “the protruding part includes an axially extending part extending in the axial direction and a radially extending part extending in a radial direction, and a thickness of the radially extending part in the axial direction is greater than a thickness of the axially extending part in the axial direction” in combination with the remaining limitations of claims 1 and 3.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
Kato (US2008/0175729A1) discloses an axial flow fan having a cup portion with a yoke, a shaft attached to a lid portion of the yoke, and ball bearings provided at an upper portion and a lower portion inside a bearing holding portion(¶¶[0031]-[0034], FIG. 1), and corresponds to JP 2008-175158 A discussed in the Background of the instant specification.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMED QURESHI whose telephone number is (571)-272-8310. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 AM - 6:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tulsidas Patel can be reached on 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 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://pairdirect. 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).
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Should you have questions on access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/MOHAMMED AHMED QURESHI/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights