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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 8/19/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-16, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shioiri et al. (US Pub 2011/0192245 A1) in view of Hamer et al. (US Pub 2013/0264034 A1). Shioiri discloses:
Re claim 1, a drive unit lubrication and cooling system (fig. 1) comprising: a housing (2) enclosing an electric motor/stator (20) and a drive gear (7) for a drive train (3-7) of an electric vehicle (fig. 1); coolant/lubricant fluid within the housing in contact with the drive gear (par [0069]); a baffling system (11); a lower sump (9) disposed at a bottom of the housing, the lower sump configured to accumulate a portion of the coolant/lubricant fluid that has passed through windings of the electric motor/stator (par [0068]), the lower sump underlying a lowest peripheral portion of the drive gears (fig. 1); an upper sump (8 and 14d shown in fig. 15) disposed above the electric motor/stator and drive gear (right fig. 1: 8 is above a majority portion of 20 and drive gear), the upper sump being non-pressurized (no pump is positioned in the upper sump for pressurization; spec does not disclose the oil being moved towards 8a,c due to an active pressurized source) and accumulating coolant/lubricant fluid moved from the lower sump to the upper sump by rotating component agitation of the drive gear (par [0077]) and guided from a space (passages 13 and 14 up to 14d; fig. 1 shows the space defined by the flow path of the fluid being splashed upward from the lower sump to the upper sump) between the drive gear and the housing into the upper sump by the baffling system (fig. 3).
Re claims 2, 12, wherein the baffling system extends between the lower sump and the upper sump (fig. 1).
Re claims 3, 13, further comprising: a one-way check valve (fig. 15: 26) within the upper sump at an inlet (14d) to the upper sump configured to admit the coolant/lubricant fluid from the baffling system into the upper sump and to inhibit return of the coolant/lubricant fluid from the upper sump into the baffling system (fig. 15 shows 26 would allow for fluid to travel upward and prevent fluid from traveling back down).
Re claims 8, 18, further comprising: a heat exchanger (the structural housing portion of 2 adjacent to 8 would inherently absorb heat and disperse heat from the hot fluid) fitted to the upper sump and configured to disperse heat from the coolant/lubricant fluid accumulated in the upper sump.
Re claims 9, 19, wherein the drive unit lubrication and cooling system is configured such that movement of the coolant/lubricant fluid through the space between the housing and the drive gear lubricates multiple gears of the drive train including the drive gear (par [0068]; oil sticks to the gearwheel of 7 as it rotates and the oil is then transferred to other gearwheel along the gear train).
Re claims 10, 20, wherein no pump is required to move the coolant/lubricant fluid from the lower sump to the upper sump (fig. 1 shows oil is transferred via the rotation of 7, not by any electric fluid motor).
Re claim 11, a method of lubricating and cooling a drive unit (fig. 1), the method comprising: enclosing, by a housing (2), an electric motor/stator (20) and a drive gear (7) for a drive train (3-7) of an electric vehicle (fig. 1); providing coolant/lubricant fluid within the housing in contact with the drive gear (par [0069]); accumulating, in a lower sump (9) disposed at a bottom of the housing, a portion of the coolant/lubricant fluid that has passed through windings of the electric motor/stator (par [0068]), the lower sump underlying a lowest peripheral portion of the drive gear (fig. 1); accumulating, in a non-pressurized upper sump (8 and 14d shown in fig. 15; no pump is positioned in the upper sump for pressurization; spec does not disclose the oil being moved towards 8a,c due to an active pressurized source) disposed above the electric motor/stator and drive gear (right fig. 1: 8 is above a majority portion of 20 and drive gear), a portion of the coolant/lubricant fluid moved from the lower sump to the upper sump by rotating component agitation of the drive gear (par [0077]) and guided from a space between the drive gear and the housing into the upper sump by a baffling system (11).
Shioiri does not disclose:
Re claims 1, 11, one or more electronically-controlled exit valves, each positioned at an exit at a lower portion of the upper sump into the housing, each exit disposed over ends of the windings of the electric motor, the one or more electronically-controlled exit valves configured to selectively release the coolant/lubricant fluid accumulated in the upper sump to flow by gravity alone over the ends of the windings of the electric motor/stator into the lower sump.
Re claims 4, 14, further comprising: a drive controller configured to control the one or more electronically-controlled exit valves.
Re claims 5, 15, wherein the drive controller is configured to control the one or more electronically-controlled exit valves based on heat generation by the windings of the electric motor/stator.
Re claims 6, 16, wherein the drive controller is configured to use signals from one or more temperature sensors disposed proximate to the windings of the electric motor/stator to control the one or more electronically- controlled exit valves.
However, Hamer teaches a lubricating arrangement for an electric motor (10) comprising:
Re claims 1, 11, one or more electronically-controlled exit valves (70 is described a solenoid valve), each positioned at an exit (68) at a lower portion (68 is shown at the lower radially inner portion of 62) of the upper sump (62) into the housing, each exit disposed over ends of the windings of the electric motor (fig. 1 shows the outlet 68 above the windings while fig. 7 shows the valve 70 positioned at the outlet 68), the one or more electronically-controlled exit valves configured to selectively release the coolant/lubricant fluid accumulated in the upper sump to flow by gravity alone over the ends of the windings of the electric motor/stator into the lower sump (controller 88 selectively open/close the valve to release the fluid over the windings as shown in figs. 1-2 and 7-8; Shioiri discloses a gravity-only feed system from 8 to 20).
Re claims 4, 14, further comprising: a drive controller (88) configured to control the one or more electronically-controlled exit valves.
Re claims 5, 15, wherein the drive controller is configured to control the one or more electronically-controlled exit valves based on heat generation by the windings of the electric motor/stator (par [0039]).
Re claims 6, 16, wherein the drive controller is configured to use signals from one or more temperature sensors disposed proximate to the windings of the electric motor/stator to control the one or more electronically-controlled exit valves (par [0038]).
It would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ an electronically-controlled valve, as taught by Hamer, to better manage the oil flow rate and optimize cooling.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/19/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 10-12 of the Remarks, Applicant argues the prior art does not disclose a non-pressurized upper sump. Shiori differential ring gear 7 and passage member 10 function as a pump. Shioiri contains no electronically-controlled valve and does not suggest selectively gating a gravity discharge of an accumulated reservoir. On pages 12-13, Applicant argues Hamer is supplied with a pressurized coolant. Hamer has no upper sump, lower sump, and nothing accumulates to be released by gravity alone.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. While Shiori describes rotation of the differential ring gear 7 would agitate the oil in the lower sump and produces a pump effect at connection part 13c, see paragraphs [0077,85,92,112,125], no pump is used. The oil from lower sump is thrown up into the upper sump from a force generated by the rotating gear 7. The oil in 8 would flow downward, due to gravity, towards the supply holes 8b,c. The oil in 8 is not moved by an active pressurized force within 8 to drive it towards 8b,c. The figures show the floor of 8 is sloped downward to allow oil to naturally flow down towards 8b,c.
The pump effect at the interface between 7 and 13 happens outside of the upper sump. Shiori operates in the same manner as Applicant’s lubrication system where a drive gear flings the oil upward and guided by a baffling system. Force applied to the oil in the lower sump so that I could move to the upper sump against the force of gravity. Once in the upper sump, no pressurized force is applied to the oil other than the force of gravity. If Applicant insist that the engagement between the gear and the baffle of Shiori leads to a pressurized upper sump, then the current claims would also be rejected under New Matter because Applicant’s system would also have a pressurized upper sump.
Hamer teaches an electronically-controlled exit valve 70. Employing a valve would allow for oil to accumulate more within the upper sump of Shiori because oil is blocked and selectively allowed to flow therethrough.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
On pages 13-14, Applicant argues the combination would have no reasonable expectation of success. Hamer’s solenoid valve is designed to meter pressurized coolant and to seat and unseat under a specific pressure. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant’s cited Hamer paragraphs [0028,35,36] do reveal the solenoid valve is activated under a specific coolant pressure. Rather, the valve is activated based on electrical currents flowing through the coil 76.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
On page 14, Applicant argues the proposed modification of the valve of Hamer would impair Shioiri’s own principle of operation because Shiori requires a continuous pressure-drive feed of oil upward. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Shioiri’s continuous feed is for directing oil upward into the upper sump, whereas the taught valve is positioned as the exit of the upper sump for allowing oil to exit the upper sump. Employing the valve at the exit does not teach away from the continuous feed into the upper sump.
On pages 14-15, Applicant argues the combination reflects impermissible hindsight. Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MINH D TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)270-3014. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, 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.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Robert Hodge can be reached at (571) 272-2097. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Minh Truong/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights