www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`
`15/567,892
`
`10/19/2017
`
`YOShinOl‘i TAKEOKA
`
`20296.0112USWO
`
`1050
`
`53148
`
`759°
`
`02/21/20”
`
`HAMRE, SCHUMANN, MUELLER & LARSON RC.
`45 South Seventh Street
`Suite 2700
`
`MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-1683
`
`WEILAND' HANS R'
`
`ART UNIT
`3763
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`02/21/2019
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`
`following e—mail address(es):
`PTOMail@hsml.eom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`Off/09 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`15/567,892
`Examiner
`HANS R WEILAND
`
`Applicant(s)
`TAKEOKA et al.
`Art Unit
`AIA Status
`3763
`Yes
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing
`date of this communication.
`|f NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 10/17/2018.
`[:1 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a). This action is FINAL.
`
`2b) C] This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)[:] Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Expat/7e Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`E] Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are rejected.
`
`[:1 Claim(s) _ is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[j Claim(s)
`9
`* If any claims have been determined aflowabte. you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`10)[:] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11). The drawing(s) filed on 10/17/2018 is/are: a). accepted or b)[:] objected to by the Examiner.
`
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12). Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a). All
`
`b)D Some”
`
`C)D None of the:
`
`1.[:] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.[:] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3.. Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`2) E] Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date_
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) C] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) CI Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20190212
`
`

`

`Application/Control Num ber: 15/567,892
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Pa ge 2
`
`DEI'AILED ACTION
`
`1.
`
`The presentapplication, filed on or after March 1 6, 201 3, is being examined underthe
`
`first inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Claim Objections
`
`2.
`
`Claim 2 is objected to because of thefollowing informalities: Claim 2 reads “the motor
`
`drive device of claim 1, a compressor” it should read “the motor drive device of claim 1, further
`
`comprising a compressor” to correct a grammatical error. Appropriate correction is required.
`
`3.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C.112(f):
`
`Claim Interpretation
`
`(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. —An element in a claim fora combination may be
`expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of
`structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the
`corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents
`thereof.
`
`The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
`
`An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing
`a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and
`such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts
`described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
`
`4.
`
`The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the
`
`plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by
`
`one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also
`
`commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when
`
`35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 1 12, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
`
`As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following
`
`three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth
`
`paragraph:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/567,892
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page3
`
`(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for
`
`“means” that is a generic placeholder(also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having
`
`no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
`
`(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional
`
`language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or
`
`another linking word or phrase, such as "configured to" or "sothat"; and
`
`(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholderis not modified by sufficient
`
`structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
`
`Use of the word “means” (or“step”) in a claim with functional language creates a
`
`rebuttable presumption thatthe claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C.
`
`112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is
`
`interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when
`
`the claim limitation recites sufficientstructure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited
`
`function.
`
`Absence of the word “means” (or“step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that
`
`the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C.
`
`112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35
`
`U.S.C.
`
`1 12(f) or pre-A IA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation
`
`recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the
`
`recited function.
`
`Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being
`
`interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as
`
`otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do
`
`not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre -AlA
`
`35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/567,892
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page4
`
`5.
`
`This application includes one or more claim limitations thatdo not use the word “means,”
`
`but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth
`
`paragraph, becausethe claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholderthat is coupled with
`
`functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the
`
`generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
`
`“PWM on ratio increasing-reducing unit” and “drive unit” in claim 1.
`
`Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or
`
`pre-A IA 35 U.S.C. 1 12, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the
`
`corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and
`
`equivalents thereof.
`
`lf applicant does not intendto havethis/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C.
`
`112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim
`
`limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112,
`
`sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2)
`
`present a sufficientshowing thatthe claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform
`
`the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA
`
`35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
`
`6.
`
`The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 1 12
`
`(a) IN GENERAL—The specification shall contain a written description of the
`inv ention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise,
`and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it
`is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode
`contemplated by the inventororjoint inventor of carrying out the invention.
`
`The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-A IA 35 U.S.C. 112:
`
`The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the
`manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to
`enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/567,892
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page5
`
`connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the
`inventor of carrying out his invention.
`
`7.
`
`Claim 1-7 are rejected under35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), first
`
`paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. Th e claim(s) contains
`
`subject matterwhich was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably
`
`convey to one skilled in the relevant art thatthe inventoror ajoint inventor, or for pre -A|A the
`
`inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim
`
`1 recites the predetermined speed is the average speed of the one past rotation. How ever the
`
`body of the specification does not appear to support the predetermined speed being the
`
`average speed as the predetermined speed is defined as set in advance perpage 9 line 17-21
`
`of the specification. Which does not appear to equate to the average speed of a previous
`
`rotation as recited in the specification in page 8 line 20 through page 9 line 10. As such based
`
`on the examiner’s reading of the specification there does not appearto be support forthe
`
`predetermined speed being an average speed of a past rotation.
`
`8.
`
`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 matterwhich 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 thesubject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
`
`9.
`
`Claims 1-7 are rejected under35 U.S.C. 1 12(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second
`
`paragraph, as being indefinitefor failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject
`
`matter w hich the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the
`
`invention.
`
`10.
`
`Claim 1 recites a predetermined speed is the average speed of one past rotation, it is
`
`unclear from the wording of the claim how a predetermined speed, which by definition would be
`
`decided in advance, could be an average speed as of a past rotation which would not be
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/567,892
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page6
`
`decided until the rotation is complete, which would not be predetermined. As such it is unclear if
`
`the predetermined speed should be a preset speed or an average speed of a past rotation.
`
`Additionally as the past rotation is not furtherdefined the past rotation could be any rotation that
`
`the motor has previously completed, as such a past rotation could any rotation that happened to
`
`have an average speed that equaled a predetermined speed would meet the limitations of the
`
`claims. Claims 2-7 are rejected for theirdependency from claim 1.
`
`11.
`
`Claim limitations “PVVM on ratio increasing-reducing unit” and “drive unit” invokes 35
`
`U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. How ever, the written description fails
`
`to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed
`
`function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The disclosure is
`
`devoid of adequate structure that performs the functions in the claim, the specification states the
`
`claimed function of a PVVM on ratio increasing reducing unit in page 9 line 1 1 -17, howeverno
`
`specific structure is tied to the increasing-reducing unit, Similarly a drive unit function is
`
`disclosed on page 10 line 9t through page 11 line 3 but with no specific structure tied to the
`
`drive unit, becausethe structure has not been identified in the specification for performing the
`
`claimed function, the two “units” are interpreted forthe purposes of applying priorart as any
`
`know n structure capable if implementing the stated function which may be hardware, software
`
`or a combination of the two. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C.
`
`112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 1 12, second paragraph.
`
`Applicant may:
`
`(a)
`
`Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation
`
`under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
`
`(b)
`
`Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what
`
`structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any
`
`new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/567,892
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page7
`
`(c)
`
`Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure,
`
`material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing
`
`any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
`
`|f applicant is of the opinion thatthe written description of the specification already
`
`implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links
`
`them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure,
`
`material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
`
`(a)
`
`Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the
`
`corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly
`
`links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without
`
`introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
`
`(b)
`
`Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are
`
`implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the
`
`claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01 (0)
`
`and 2181.
`
`12.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`13.
`
`In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AlA 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 for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the priorart
`
`relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
`
`14.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 w hich 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
`inv ention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the
`claimed invention and the prior art aresuch that the claimed invention as awhole would have
`been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/567,892
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page8
`
`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.
`
`15.
`
`Claim 1 and 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Sano et al. (JP 2004-254460) in view of Oomuraetal. (Us Patent 6,153,993).
`
`Regarding claim 1, Sano discloses (Figure 1-6) a motor drive device comprising: a
`
`brushless DC motor (motor 6 is a brushless DC motor per paragraph 0011 of the machine
`
`translation provided with the 6/20/2018 IDS) configured to drive a load (compressor 8), the
`
`brushless DC Motor including a stator having a three phase winding (three phase per paragraph
`
`0011); a speed controller (comparison unit 21 compares rotation speed instruction N1 with
`
`actual rotational speed N w hich in turn controls the PWM signal per paragraph 0021 ) co nfigured
`
`to decide a pulse width modulation (PWM) ON ratio (the PWM signal is controlled based on the
`
`comparison between the speeds N and N1 in the comparison circuit 21 per paragraph 0021) for
`
`performing PWM control on the brushless DC motor (6);
`
`a PWM ON ratio increasing-reducing unit (PWM duty set part 18 and calculating means
`
`19 and memory means 20 functions are executed by a microcomputerthat construes PWM
`
`controlling circuit 12 per paragraph 0013) configured to increase or reduce the PWM ON ratio
`
`(PWM duty) in accordance with a driving speed (the PWM duty set part outputs a PWM duty set
`
`point signal based in the outputof the speed controller/ comparison circuit 21 which controls the
`
`output based on the rotational speed N per paragraph 0021 ) of the brushless DC motor (6); and
`
`a drive unit (base driver 5) configured to perform the PWM control to drive the brushless
`
`DC motor (base driver 5 controls the invertercircuit 4 which in turn controls the brushless motor
`
`6 per paragraph 0010 and 0011) in accordance with the PWM ON ratio decided by the PWM
`
`ON ratio increasing-reducing unit (drive 5 dives the motor 6 based on the PWM signal per
`
`paragraph 0022),
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/567,892
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page9
`
`a position detector (position detection circuit 9) configured to detect a rotational positio n
`
`of a rotor based on an induced voltage generated in the three-phase winding of stator (per
`
`paragraph 0012);and
`
`a speed detector (speed detector circuit 22) configured to calculate a current driving
`
`speed (N) of the brushless DC motor and a speed from a past rotation (any speed from a
`
`previous rotation would be a past rotation thus any calculates speed could become a past
`
`speed once it is in the past) from the position detected by the position detector (9),
`
`w herein the PWM ON ratio increasing-reducing unit (18, 19, 20) sets the PWM ON ratio
`
`to a ratio equal to or low er than the PWM ON ratio decided by the speed controller in an interval
`
`in which the driving speed of the brushless DC motor is low erthan a predetermined speed (per
`
`figures 5 and 6 and paragraph 0025 and 0026 the predetermined duty is corrected to a lower
`
`PWM duty ratio in the intervals land V l as seen in figure 6 when the predetermined speed is
`
`less than 35rps), and sets the PWM ON ratio to a ratio equal to or higher than the PWM ON
`
`ratio decided by the speed controller in an interval in which the driving speed is higherthan the
`
`predetermined speed (the PWM duty is not corrected and is equal to the average in intervals I-
`
`V l in figures 6 when the predetermined speed is higherthan 35rps per paragraphs 0024 and
`
`0026), and the predetermined speed is the average speed of the one past rotation (whenever
`
`the average speed of a previous rotation was 35rps this limitation would be met).
`
`How everSano is silent as to the brushless DC Motor including a permanent magnet; Or
`
`the speed detector calculating an average speed of one past rotation from the position detected
`
`by the position detector.
`
`Oomura teaches a brushless DC motor that has a permanent magnet and a stator
`
`having a three phase winding (Per Col. 2 line 65 through col 3 line 2). Oomura additionally
`
`tac hes a speed detector (speed detection circuit 53) the speed detectorcalculating an average
`
`speed of one past rotation from the position detected by the position detector (the time of one
`
`revolution of the motor calculates the average speed of one past rotation per Col. 13, line 57
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/567,892
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page 10
`
`through Col. 14, line 7 w hich can be calculated in addition to the speed between a current
`
`position and a previous position).
`
`It w ould have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was
`
`effectively field to have modified the motor of Sano to be a permanent magnet motor as taught
`
`by Oomura doing so would provide a known type of magnet in a three phase brushless motor
`
`suitable for PWM control as taught by Oomura (Per Col. 2 line 65 through col 3 line 2).
`
`Additionally it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
`
`w as effectively field to have calculated the average speed of a previous rotation in the speed
`
`detector unit as taught by Oomura, doing so would provide a know n method for calculating the
`
`speed of one complete rotation to determine the average speed of a brushless DC motor as
`
`taught by Oomura (Col. 13, line 57 through Col. 14, line 7).
`
`Regarding Claim 6, Sano as modified discloses the claim limitations of claim 1 and
`
`Sano further discloses the position detector (9) is further configured to detect a zero-cross point
`
`by comparing the induced voltage and a reference voltage for the zero-cross point of the
`
`induced voltage (per paragraph 0011), and Oomurafurther discloses that the Speed detector
`
`(57) the speed detector is furtherconfigured to detect a zero-cross point detection interval,
`
`w hich is between the zero-cross point and a next zero-cross point of a plurality of zero-cross
`
`points detected during the one past rotation (the time period between positions is calculated per
`
`Col. 13 line 57 though Col. 14 line 7), so as to calculate the average speed of the one past
`
`rotation from a sum of the zero-cross point detection interval.
`
`Regarding Claim 7, Sano as modified discloses the claim limitations of claim 6 and
`
`Sano further discloses an interval in which a current value of the zero-cross pointdetection
`
`interval is larger than an average of a plurality of the zero-cross point detection interval of the
`
`one past rotation (as the interval and the past rotation are not further defined any rotation in
`
`w hich the average speed was a predetermined speed, such as 35rps, would meet this
`
`limitation) corresponds to the interval in which the driving speed (N) of the brushless DC motor
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/567,892
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page 11
`
`is lower than the predetermined speed (perfigures 5 and 6 and paragraph 0025 and 0026 the
`
`predetermined duty is corrected to a lower PWM duty ratio in the intervals land Vlas seen in
`
`figure 6 when the predetermined speed is less than 35rps which would be the average speed
`
`for any one previous rotation when the motor is controlled to 35 rps), and an interval in which
`
`the current value of the zero-cross point detection interval is smaller than the average of the
`
`plurality of the zero-cross point detection interval of the one past rotation corresponds to the
`
`interval in which the driving speed of the brushless DC motor is higher than the predetermined
`
`speed (the PWM duty is not corrected and is equal to the average in intervals l-Vl in figures 6
`
`w hen the predetermined speed is higherthan 35rps per paragraphs 0024 and 0026).
`
`16.
`
`Claim 2-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sano et
`
`al. (JP 2004-254460) in view of Com ura et al. (Us Patent 6,153,993) and M ihara et al. (US
`
`Patent Application Publication US 2011/0154839 A1).
`
`Regarding Claim 2, Sano discloses the claim limitations of claim 1 , and Sano further
`
`discloses a refrigerator comprising the motor drive device according to claim 1 (motor 6 drives a
`
`compressor 8 of a refrigeration device per paragraph 0002 of the machinetranslation provided
`
`w ith the 6/20/2018 IDS), a compressor (8), wherein the motor drive device is configured to drive
`
`the compressor (8) in a refrigeration cycle.
`
`How ever Sano is silent as to a refrigeration cycle formed by sequentially connecting the
`
`compressor, the condenser, the decompressor, the evaporator, and the compressor, and the
`
`motor drive device is configured to start up while a pressure difference is left between an inlet
`
`side and an outlet side of the compressor.
`
`Mihara teaches (figures land 4) a refrigerating apparatus with a refrigeration cycle
`
`formed by sequentially connecting a compressor (compressor 1 1 ), a condenser (gas cooler46),
`
`a decompressor (reducing means 62A or 628 which are an expansion valve of or a capillary
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/567,892
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page 12
`
`tube reducing means per paragraph 01 99), an evaporator (either of evaporators 63A or 63B),
`
`and the compressor (compressor 11 is connected in a refrigerantcircuit with the other
`
`components through refrigerant circuit 1), and starts up while a pressure difference is left
`
`between an inlet side and an outlet side of the compressor (pressure in the refrigerant circuit is
`
`not equalized as it is kept in check by check valve 90 to improve the start properties of the
`
`compressor per paragraph 0194).
`
`It w ould have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in art at the time the invention
`
`w as effectively filed to have modified generic refrigerator of Sano to include the refrigerantcycle
`
`of with the pressure difference maintaining device as taught by Mihara doing sowould provide a
`
`known refrigerant circuit that could keep a high pressure on a high pressure side of the
`
`refrigerant circuit even when the compressorstops to improve start properties as recognized by
`
`Mihara (per paragraph 0057).
`
`Regarding Claim 3, Sano as modified discloses the claim limitations of claim 2 and
`
`Mihara further discloses the pressure difference is setto not less than 0.05 MPa (high pressure
`
`is maintained per paragraph 0057 and the high pressure side of the refrigerant circuit 1
`
`including the condenser/gas cooler 46 and the reducing means 62A and 62B can be kept per
`
`paragraph 0192 and per paragraphs 0079 and 0081 the high pressure side is about 12Mpa and
`
`the low pressure side is about 4Mpa which would have a difference of about 8mpa)
`
`.
`
`Regarding claims 4 and 5, Sano as modified discloses the claim limitations of claim 2
`
`and 3 respectively and Miharafurther discloses (figure 1 and 4) a valve (check valve 90 in
`
`regulator 91) provided between the compressor (1 1 ) and the condenser (46), wherein the valve
`
`is controlled to be closed in a manner such thatthe pressure difference is left between the inlet
`
`side and the outlet side of the compressor when the compressor is stopped and is opened when
`
`the compressor is operated (per paragraph 01 87 refrigerant flows through the check valve 90
`
`w hen the compressor 11 is in operation and prevents refrigerant from flowing back per
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/567,892
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page 13
`
`paragraph 0192 such that the pressure on the high pressureside including the check valve 90 is
`
`kept per paragraph 0192).
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`17.
`
`Applicant’s arguments, see page 6, filed 10/17/2018, with respectto the rejection(s) of
`
`c|aim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the
`
`rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of
`
`rejection is made in view of Sano et aI. (JP2004-254460) in view of Oomura et aI. (Us Patent
`
`6,1 53,993) where Oomura disclose a specific construction of a brushless DC motor and
`
`methods for calculating the speed based on the position detector signal.
`
`Conclusion
`
`18.
`
`Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this
`
`Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTIONIS 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 extension fee pursuant to 37
`
`CFR 1 .136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action.
`
`In no event,
`
`how ever, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this
`
`final action.
`
`1.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
`
`should be directed to HA NS R. WEILA ND w hose telephone number is (571 )272-9847. The
`
`examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 6-3 EST and alternating Fridays.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/567,892
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page 14
`
`Examiner interviews are available viatelephone, 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.govfinterviewpractice.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
`
`supervisor, Len Tran can be reached on 571 -272-11 84. The fax phone numberfor the
`
`organization wherethis 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 (PA IR) system. Status information for published applications
`
`may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PA IR. Status informationfor unpublished
`
`applications is availablethrough Private PA IR only. For more information about the PA IR
`
`system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private
`
`PA IR system, contactthe Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197(toll-free). If you
`
`w ould like assistancefrom a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the
`
`automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CA NA DA) or 571 -272-1000.
`
`/HA NS R WEILA ND/
`
`Examiner, Art Unit 3763
`
`/CHRISTOPHER RZERPHEY/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
`
`