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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 1 states “the skew angle of the at least one stator is at least equal to a stator average angular spacing”. Dependent claims 2-4 “wherein the skew angle of the at least one stator is at least 70%, 80%, or 90% of the stator average angular spacing. Thus, rather than further limiting claim 1, claims 2-4 actually attempt to broaden claim 1. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art (AAPA) in the specification in view of Ishibashi US 20240183358 as evidenced by Yapp US 5297931.
AAPA discloses:
1. 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; 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 (see e.g. Fig 6), 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 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.
AAPA does not disclose the skew angle of the at least one stator is at least equal to 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.
Ishibashi discloses 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 (see e.g. Fig 5), 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 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.
the skew angle of the at least one stator is at least equal to 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).
A simple substitution of one known stator blade arrangement (the stator blade arrangement of Ishibashi ) for another (the stator blade arrangement of AAPA) with the predictable result of guiding airflow through as fan has been held obvious as per MPEP 2143 I (B).
Additionally, Yapp provides evidence that the claimed arrangement is a known design variable for fan stator blades (see e.g. claim 6).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize the stator blade arrangement of Ishibashi in the system of AAPA as a simple substitution to gain the benefit of “the amount of air swirling at the whole of the outlet of the air blowing device can be reduced, and the static pressure efficiency can be improved. Further, when swirling is reduced, noise can be reduced” as taught by Ishibashi in 0061.
AAPA as modified above discloses (all references to AAPA unless noted otherwise):
2. The cooling fan assembly of Claim 1, wherein the skew angle of the at least one stator is at least 70% 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 80% 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 90% of 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 Fig e.g. 6 of AAPA and Fig 7 of Ishibashi).
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 (as best understood, see e.g. Figs 4 and 12 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 4 and 12 of Ishibashi).
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. Figs 4 and 12 of Ishibashi). .
9. The cooling fan assembly of claim 1, wherein a cross section of the at least one stator has camber (see Fig e.g. 6 of AAPA and Fig 7 of Ishibashi).
Claim(s) 10, 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art (AAPA) in the specification in view of Ishibashi US 20240183358 as evidenced by Yapp US 5297931 in view of Dygert US 20190211843.
AAPA 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 AAPA 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.
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.
Conclusion
See form PTO-892 for additional prior art made of record but not relied upon that is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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