Appeal No. 2005-0648
Application No. 09/824,980
Appealed independent claim 1 distinguishes from Kliman, inter
alia, by requiring that the stator of the here claimed switched
reluctance motor comprises a plurality of circumferentially-
spaced stator segment assemblies that include a stack of stator
plates forming a stator segment core and winding wire wound
around the stator segment core. In patentee’s switched
reluctance motor, the stator is disclosed simply as comprising a
laminated iron stator rather than a plurality of
circumferentially-spaced stator segment assemblies as defined by
appealed claim 1. According to the examiner, “[i]t would have
been obvious to modify Kliman by making the stator of segment
assemblies having the shape taught by Nishiyama so that the
winding may be formed easily (col. 4, line 49)” (answer, page 4).
The appellants’ nonobviousness position is focused on the
examiner’s above proposed combination of Kliman and Nishiyama.
In the appellants’ view, this combination would not have been
obvious because Kliman is directed to a switched reluctance motor
wherein a drive circuit energizes the stator windings as a
function of the sensed rotor position whereas Nishiyama is
directed to a synchronous reluctance motor wherein the windings
are energized at a controlled frequency. In this regard, the
appellants contend that switched reluctance motors with non-
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007