Appeal 2006-3366
Application 10/864,041
frequencies, e.g. as recited by claims 1 and 20, and, a fortiori, by
preferred claims 12-15. Significantly, none of the prior art references
recognizes the viability of such a configuration for high-speed motors.
It is respectfully submitted that the lack of recognition of the synergy
of these factors is evidenced by the prior art's clear aversion to
machine designs incorporating these design parameters. Particular
devices constructed in accordance with the prior art can achieve some,
but not all, of these desirable characteristics. For example, the
Hendershot et al. reference alludes to the use of a large pole count, but
only for low speed devices. The Decristofaro et al. reference
discloses use of amorphous metal for stator construction, but does not
recognize the combination of high slot and pole count with low SPP
ratio afforded by applicant's design, despite the availability of the
Hendershot et al. reference well before the Decristofaro filing.
Rather, such machines are viable only in combination with the low
core losses afforded by amorphous and nanocrystalline materials. It is
thus submitted that it is surprising and unexpected, and known only in
light of applicant's own disclosure, that it is possible to attain all these
characteristics in a single device.
(Br. 31-32).
We find no express support for Appellant’s contention above since we
find no express limitation in the language of independent claim 1 for the
high pole counts and high excitation frequencies. Therefore, Appellant’s
argument is not persuasive. Additionally, we find no support and no
evidence in the record for Appellant’s argument to the “surprising and
unexpected results.” Additionally, we note that the “high-speed” aspect of
the invention, the “synergy” of the factors, and “high slot and pole count
with low SPP” are not found in the express limitations of independent claim
1 nor has Appellant shown how they are impliedly present. Nor has
Appellant provided evidence of unexpected results. Hence, we are left with
mere attorney speculation and conjecture which are at odds with the express
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013