DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is in response to the claims filed 8/13/2025.
Claims 1-10 are presented for examination. Preliminary amendment is acknowledged.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/21/2025 and 11/13/2025 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 § 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) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2019-201521 to the IHI Corporation (hereinafter “Ihi”) in view of Krais et al in US Patent Application Publication 2023/0013463 (hereinafter “Krais”).
Regarding claim 1, Ihi discloses an electric compressor, comprising: a housing (cooling jacket 3, motor casing 5) that includes a stator 23 having a cylindrical shape in an inner peripheral portion; a rotary shaft 21 that is disposed inside the housing and that includes a rotor 22 facing the stator; a compressor wheel that is fixed to one side of the rotary shaft in an axial direction (Fig. 1); and a cooling water flow path 11 that is provided outward of the stator in a radial direction of the housing, Ihi is silent to the cooling water flow path includes a plurality of first cooling water flow paths that are provided along a circumferential direction of the housing and that are provided at an interval in the axial direction, and a second cooling water flow path that is provided along a bending direction bent by a predetermined angle with respect to the circumferential direction of the housing and that connects end portions of the plurality of first cooling water flow paths to each other. Krais teaches an analogous electric compressor, notably a compressor with cooling features in the housing like Ihi. Specifically, Krais teaches a cooling fluid passage configuration including water flow paths that are provided along a circumferential direction of the housing and that are provided at an interval in the axial direction (see Fig. 2 and 3 showing grooves around the stator housing 2 that are water cooling flow paths), and a second cooling water flow path that is provided along a bending direction bent by a predetermined angle with respect to the circumferential direction of the housing and that connects end portions of the plurality of first cooling water flow paths to each other (see the spiraled or angled sections of the cooling flow path around the housing in Fig. 2). Krais teaches that such a configuration improves the fluid-mechanical transition between cooling zones of the stator housing (paragraph [0048]) and it creates a larger heat transfer area for the cooling fluid per unit length (Abstract), which improves cooling performance. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified to have modified the electric compressor Ihi by forming cooling channels in the shape taught by Krais in order to improve cooling performance, as taught by Krais, and the result would have been predictable.
Regarding claim 2, Ihi as modified by Krais comprises the electric compressor according to claim 1, wherein among the plurality of first cooling water flow paths (longitudinal direction zone 26 in Krais Fig. 3), the first cooling water flow paths disposed on one side of the housing in the axial direction are disposed over an entire region of the housing in the circumferential direction (Krais Fig. 2) and are provided with an inlet portion (see Krais inlet 9) of cooling water at an end portion, and among the plurality of first cooling water flow paths, the first cooling water flow paths disposed on the other side of the housing in the axial direction are disposed over the entire region of the housing in the circumferential direction and are provided with an outlet portion (see Krais outlet 10) of cooling water at an end portion.
Regarding claim 3, Ihi as modified by Krais comprises the electric compressor according claim 2, wherein the first cooling water flow paths provided with the inlet portion and the first cooling water flow paths provided with the outlet portion are disposed to face a coil end of a stator coil constituting the stator (see Ihi’s stator coil 25 for the stator 23 in Fig. 1)
Regarding claim 4, Ihi as modified by Krais comprises the electric compressor according claim 1, wherein a passage cross-sectional area in the first cooling water flow paths and a passage cross-sectional area in the second cooling water flow path are the same as each other (see Fig. 2 of Krais showing widths of circumferentially extending cooling passages being the same as the angled or spiraling sections of cooling passages). Even assuming, in arguendo, that the cooling passages taught by Krais weren’t shown as having the same cross-sectional area, the Court has held that mere changes of relative dimensions of a device existing in the prior art does not patentably distinguish over the prior art. See MPEP 2144.
Regarding claim 5, Ihi as modified by Krais comprises the electric compressor according to claim 1, wherein a plurality of the second cooling water flow paths are provided and are disposed at an interval in a direction inclined by a predetermined angle with respect to the axial direction of the housing (see Krais Fig. 2; the flow paths have some angle).
Regarding claim 6, Ihi as modified by Krais comprises the electric compressor according to claim 1, wherein the first cooling water flow paths and the second cooling water flow path are provided with convex portions on inner surfaces (necessarily so, the housing is cylindrical and the cooling paths are on the outside of the housing).
Regarding claim 7, Ihi as modified by Krais comprises the electric compressor according to claim 1, wherein the housing is provided with a convex portion or a concave portion on an outer surface of the plurality of first cooling water flow paths and the second cooling water flow path on an outer side in the radial direction (necessarily so, the radially inner side of the cover that covers the cooling flow paths is concave as it is the inside of a cylinder).
Regarding claim 8, Ihi as modified by Krais comprises the electric compressor according to claim 1, wherein a plurality of the second cooling water flow paths are disposed at an interval in the axial direction of the housing, and a passage cross-sectional shape of the second cooling water flow paths has a quadrilateral shape with unequal sides (necessarily so, see Krais Fig. 2; the cooling flow paths have a cross-sectional shape taken along the direction of flow that is a rectangle, which is a quadrilateral with unequal sides).
Regarding claim 9, Ihi as modified by Krais comprises the electric compressor according to claim 2, wherein a passage cross-sectional area in the first cooling water flow paths and a passage cross-sectional area in the second cooling water flow path are the same as each other (see Fig. 2 of Krais showing widths of circumferentially extending cooling passages being the same as the angled or spiraling sections of cooling passages). Even assuming, in arguendo, that the cooling passages taught by Krais weren’t shown as having the same cross-sectional area, the Court has held that mere changes of relative dimensions of a device existing in the prior art does not patentably distinguish over the prior art. See MPEP 2144.
Regarding claim 10, Ihi as modified by Krais comprises the electric compressor according to claim 3, wherein a passage cross-sectional area in the first cooling water flow paths and a passage cross-sectional area in the second cooling water flow path are the same as each other (see Fig. 2 of Krais showing widths of circumferentially extending cooling passages being the same as the angled or spiraling sections of cooling passages). Even assuming, in arguendo, that the cooling passages taught by Krais weren’t shown as having the same cross-sectional area, the Court has held that mere changes of relative dimensions of a device existing in the prior art does not patentably distinguish over the prior art. See MPEP 2144.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Relevant Prior Art:
DE102016216019 discloses an insert for a cooling jacket of an electric machine with turbulators, or small bumps or protrusions in the cooling flow path, which improve cooling performance.
FR3070558 discloses an electric machine with a cooling flow path having circumferential and axially extending regions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELDON T BROCKMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3263. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-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, Court Heinle can be reached at (571) 270-3508. 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.
/ELDON T BROCKMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
Prosecution Insights