DETAILED ACTION
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 § 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.
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) 1-5, 7, 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishibashi US 20240183358 in view of Reichle US 20060080982.
Ishibashi discloses:
1. A cooling fan assembly, comprising: a shroud (11, 12, 5) that includes an air-guiding plenum 11, a hollow, cylindrical barrel 5 having a sidewall 17 centered on a barrel axis, the sidewall having an inner diameter (see e.g. Fig 3), a motor-support structure 19, and stators 20 that span an annular region disposed between the barrel portion and the motor-support structure; a motor 40 supported by the motor support structure, the motor having a motor shaft that defines a central axis (see e.g. 0028, 0036), the central axis being coincident with the barrel axis (see e.g. Fig 4); and a fan 30 that is at least partially surrounded by the barrel (see e.g. Fig 3), the fan including a hub 31 that driven to rotate by the motor and centered on the central axis, and blades 32 that protrude from the hub and are arrayed around the central axis; wherein a projection-plane can be drawn perpendicular to the central axis and the projection-plane is upstream of the barrel-portion of the shroud, when the stators, the motor-support structure, and the barrel are projected onto the projection plane, the projection of at least one of the stators on the projection-plane corresponds to a first stator line that extends between the motor support structure and the barrel sidewall and a second stator line that extends between the motor support structure and the barrel sidewall, and a mid-chord line that is disposed between the first stator line and the second stator line and is equidistant from each of the first stator line and the second stator line, the chord line of the at least one of the stators intersects the projection of an inner diameter of the barrel at an outer-terminus point and intersects the projection of an outer portion of the motor-support structure at an inner-terminus point, a skew angle of the at least one stator is defined between a first radial line and a second radial line, the skew angle of the at least one stator is at least 70% of a stator average angular spacing, where the first radial line extends from the central axis to the outer-terminus point and the second radial line extends from the central axis to the inner-terminus point, and the stator average angular spacing corresponds to 360 degrees divided by the number of stators employed in the automotive cooling fan assembly (see e.g. Figs 4, 12).
Regarding the limitations “angular displacement from the inner-terminus point to the outer-terminus point is in same angular direction as a rotation direction of the fan”, it appears Ishibashi does not disclose these limitations.
However, Reichle discloses making a fan reversible such that the fan rotates in both directions.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to configure the fan of Ishibashi to be reversible as taught by Reichle to gain the benefit of enabling the fan to “blow away collected debris” as taught by Reichle in the abstract.
Ishibashi as modified above discloses (all references to Ishibashi unless noted otherwise):
2. The cooling fan assembly of Claim 1, wherein the skew angle of the at least one stator is at least 80% of the stator average angular spacing (see e.g. Figs 4 and 12 of Ishibashi).
3. The cooling fan assembly of Claim 1, wherein the skew angle of the at least one stator is at least 90% of the stator average angular spacing (see e.g. Figs 4 and 12 of Ishibashi).
4. The cooling fan assembly of Claim 1 wherein skew angle of the at least one stator is at least equal to the stator average angular spacing (see e.g. Figs 4 and 12 of Ishibashi).
5. The cooling fan assembly of claim 1, wherein at least one the stator has an aerodynamic cross-section (see e.g. Fig 7 of Ishibashi).
7. The cooling fan assembly of claim 1, wherein the at least one stator has a varying stagger angle along a chord line of the at least one stator (see e.g. Figs 3-4).
9. The cooling fan assembly of claim 1, wherein a cross section of the at least one stator has camber (see e.g. Fig 7 of Ishibashi).
Claim(s) 6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishibashi US 20240183358 in view of Reichle US 20060080982 in further view of Kobayashi US 20080193287.
Regarding claims 6 and 8, Ishibashi as modified above does not disclose the limitations of claims 6 and 8.
Kobayashi discloses:
6. The cooling fan assembly of claim 5, wherein a chord length of the cross section of the at least one stator is increased in regions where the stagger angle is increased (see e.g. Figs 1 and 4 wherein the width Wh in the axial direction is kept constant meaning the chord length decreases as the stagger angle decreases as shown in Fig 4).
8. The cooling fan assembly of claim 1, wherein the at least one stator has a decreasing stagger angle from a mid point of a chord line of the at least one stator to the point at which the chord line intersects the barrel (see e.g. Fig 2).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize stator blade skew angle and chord length characteristics as taught by Kobayashi in the stator blades of Ishibashi as modified above to gain the benefit of lower noise as taught by Kobayashi in e.g. the abstract.
Claim(s) 10, 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishibashi US 20240183358 in view of Reichle US 20060080982 in further view of Dygert US 20190211843.
Ishibashi as modified above does not disclose the limitations of claims 10 and 12.
Dygert discloses:
10. The cooling fan assembly of claim 1, wherein the at least one stator 30 intersects with an auxiliary support structure 36 that is configured to support the at least one stator (see e.g. Fig 4).
12. The cooling fan assembly of claim 1, wherein a mid-region of the at least one stator is mechanically connected to a mid-region of another stator (30 connected via 36 in a mid region as in e.g. Fig 4).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize control rings as taught by Dygert in the system of Ishibashi as modified above to gain the benefit of improve stall performance of the fan and further reduce stall recovery hysteresis in comparison to prior fans as taught by Dygert in 0029.
Claim(s) 1-5, 9-10, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsubakida US 6024536 in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art (AAPA).
Tsubakida discloses:
1. A cooling fan assembly, comprising: a shroud 10 that includes an air-guiding plenum (see e.g. annotated Fig 1 herein), a hollow, cylindrical barrel having a sidewall centered on a barrel axis (see e.g. annotated Figs 1-2 herein), the sidewall having an inner diameter (see e.g. annotated Figs 1-2 herein), a motor-support structure 20, and stators 21 that span an annular region disposed between the barrel and the motor-support structure; a motor 6a supported by the motor support structure, the motor having a motor shaft that defines a central axis, the central axis being coincident with the barrel axis [See e.g. “a fan including rotatable blades rotatable about a rotation axis, and a fan motor operably coupled to the rotatable blades for driving the fan” wherein the common sense of a person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously understand the rotation axis is the shaft of the motor. It is noted that skill, not the converse, is presumed on the part of those practicing in the art (In re Sovish, 226 USPQ 771) and a conclusion of obviousness can be made from "common sense" of the person of ordinary skill in the art without any specific hint or suggestion in a particular reference. (In re Bozek, 163 USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969).]; and a fan 6/6b that is at least partially surrounded by the barrel, the fan including a hub (see e.g. annotated Fig 2 herein) that driven to rotate by the motor and centered on the central axis, and blades 6b that protrude from the hub and are arrayed around the central axis; wherein a projection-plane can be drawn perpendicular to the central axis and the projection-plane is upstream of the barrel of the shroud, when the stators, the motor-support structure, and the barrel are projected onto the projection plane, the projection of at least one of the stators on the projection-plane corresponds to a first stator line that extends between the motor support structure and the barrel sidewall and a second stator line that extends between the motor support structure and the barrel sidewall, and a mid-chord line that is disposed between the first stator line and the second stator line and is equidistant from each of the first stator line and the second stator line, the chord line of the at least one of the stators intersects the projection of an inner diameter of the barrel at an outer-terminus point and intersects the projection of an outer portion of the motor-support structure at an inner-terminus point, angular displacement from the inner-terminus point to the outer-terminus point is in the same angular direction as a rotation direction of the fan, a skew angle of the at least one stator is defined between a first radial line and a second radial line [see e.g. the shift angle beta in Figs 4-5, and 14 wherein the 9 blades in Fig 14 is a 40 degree spacing and as in claim 5 the shift angle can be e.g. 60 degrees and see “The shift angle between the innermost portion (i.e. the radially inner end) and the outermost portion (i.e. the radially outer end) of the fixed blade is in a range of about 30.degree. to about 60.degree. in the rotation direction of the fan” in col 3 lines 4-7].
To any extent that Tsubakida is found lacking, AAPA discloses:
A cooling fan assembly, comprising: a shroud 18 that includes an air-guiding plenum 14, a hollow, cylindrical barrel 18 having a sidewall 22 centered on a barrel axis, the sidewall having an inner diameter (see e.g. Fig 6), a motor-support structure 26, and stators 80 that span an annular region disposed between the barrel portion and the motor-support structure; a motor 28 supported by the motor support structure, the motor having a motor shaft that defines a central axis (see e.g. 0035 of applicant’s specification), the central axis being coincident with the barrel axis (see e.g. Figs 4 and 6); and a fan 50 that is at least partially surrounded by the barrel (see e.g. Fig 6), the fan including a hub 52 that driven to rotate by the motor and centered on the central axis, and blades 54 that protrude from the hub and are arrayed around the central axis.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize a shroud as taught by AAPA in the system of Tsubakida as modified above to gain the benefit of attaching the fan to a rectangular radiator, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize a motor shaft as taught by AAPA in the system of Tsubakida as modified above to gain the benefit of rotating the fan.
PNG
media_image1.png
651
701
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
505
560
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Tsubakida as modified above discloses (All references to Tsubakida unless noted otherwise):
2. The cooling fan assembly of Claim 1, wherein the skew angle of the at least one stator is at least 80% of the stator average angular spacing [see Tsubakida e.g. the shift angle beta in Fig 14 wherein the 9 blades in Fig 14 is a 40 degree spacing and as in claim 5 the shift angle can be e.g. 60 degrees and see “The shift angle between the innermost portion (i.e. the radially inner end) and the outermost portion (i.e. the radially outer end) of the fixed blade is in a range of about 30.degree. to about 60.degree. in the rotation direction of the fan” in col 3 lines 4-7 of Tsubakida].
3. The cooling fan assembly of Claim 1, wherein the skew angle of the at least one stator is at least 90% of the stator average angular spacing ]see Tsubakida e.g. the shift angle beta in Fig 14 wherein the 9 blades in Fig 14 is a 40 degree spacing and as in claim 5 the shift angle can be e.g. 60 degrees and see “The shift angle between the innermost portion (i.e. the radially inner end) and the outermost portion (i.e. the radially outer end) of the fixed blade is in a range of about 30.degree. to about 60.degree. in the rotation direction of the fan” in col 3 lines 4-7 of Tsubakida].
4. The cooling fan assembly of Claim 1 wherein skew angle of the at least one stator is at least equal to the stator average angular spacing [see Tsubakida e.g. the shift angle beta in Fig 14 wherein the 9 blades in Fig 14 is a 40 degree spacing and as in claim 5 the shift angle can be e.g. 60 degrees and see “The shift angle between the innermost portion (i.e. the radially inner end) and the outermost portion (i.e. the radially outer end) of the fixed blade is in a range of about 30.degree. to about 60.degree. in the rotation direction of the fan” in col 3 lines 4-7 of Tsubakida].
5. The cooling fan assembly of claim 1, wherein at least one the stator has an aerodynamic cross-section (see 21 in Fig 15 of Tsubakida).
9. The cooling fan assembly of claim 1, wherein a cross section of the at least one stator has camber (see 21 in Fig 15 of Tsubakida).
10. (Original) The cooling fan assembly of claim 1, wherein the at least one stator intersects with an auxiliary support structure (see e.g. 23 in Fig 14 of Tsubakida) that is configured to support the at least one stator.
12. (Original) The cooling fan assembly of claim 1, wherein a mid-region of the at least one stator is mechanically connected to a mid-region of another stator (see e.g. 23 in Fig 14 of Tsubakida).
Claim(s) 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsubakida US 6024536 in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art (AAPA) in further view of Kobayashi US 20080193287.
Tsubakida as modified above does not disclose the limitations of claims 6-8.
Kobayashi discloses:
6. The cooling fan assembly of claim 5, wherein a chord length of the cross section of the at least one stator is increased in regions where the stagger angle is increased (see e.g. Figs 1 and 4 wherein the width Wh in the axial direction is kept constant meaning the chord length decreases as the stagger angle decreases as shown in Fig 4).
7. The cooling fan assembly of claim 1, wherein the at least one stator has a varying stagger angle along a chord line of the at least one stator (see e.g. Fig 2).
8. The cooling fan assembly of claim 1, wherein the at least one stator has a decreasing stagger angle from a mid point of a chord line of the at least one stator to the point at which the chord line intersects the barrel (see e.g. Fig 2).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize stator blade skew angle and chord length characteristics as taught by Kobayashi in the stator blades of Tsubakida as modified above to gain the benefit of lower noise as taught by Kobayashi in e.g. the abstract.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11, 13-14 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the pending claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS ANDREW FINK whose telephone number is (571)270-3373. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th 9-7.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mark Laurenzi can be reached on (571) 270-7878. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-270-4373.
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://pair-direct.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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Thomas Fink/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights