Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/103,851

SELF-PROPELLED ENGINE OVERSPEED CONTROL

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 31, 2023
Examiner
KANDAS, NICHOLAS R
Art Unit
3613
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Cnh Industrial Belgium N V
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
88 granted / 106 resolved
+31.0% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+22.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
128
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
50.4%
+10.4% vs TC avg
§102
29.6%
-10.4% vs TC avg
§112
18.2%
-21.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 106 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Election/Restrictions Claims 1-10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 12/22/2025. Applicants arguments against restriction are not persuasive. Applicant argues that there is no serious search burden because claims 1 and 11 partially overlap. Examiner disagrees, MPEP 817 includes paragraph 8.21 which indicates that a serious search and/or examination burden exists when “the inventions require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries).” In this case, the material that does not overlap between claim 1 and claim 11 would require a different field of search. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements filed on 1/31/2023 and 8/15/2024 have been fully considered. 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 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. Claim(s) 11-14, and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fay II (US 20210001923 A1) in view of Berg (US 9458842 B2) and in further view of Crull (US 3999386 A). Regarding claim 11, Fay II teaches an agricultural vehicle comprising: a chassis (14 “chassis” taught by figure 1); an engine mounted to the chassis (46 “engine” taught by figure 2); at least one ground drive system comprising: a respective ground drive pump (30 “left hydraulic pump” taught by figure 2) configured to be driven by the engine (taught by paragraph 3 “A left hydraulic pump is mounted on the chassis and driven by the engine”), one or more respective ground drive assemblies configured to support and selectively drive the chassis on a ground surface, each respective ground drive assembly comprising a respective drive wheel (22 “left wheel” taught by figure 2) and a respective drive wheel motor (26 “left hydraulic motor” taught by figure 2), and a respective hydraulic ground drive circuit configured to convey hydraulic fluid between the respective ground drive pump and the respective drive wheel motor (36 “hydraulic lines” taught by figure 2); a control system comprising a processor (taught by paragraph 54 “Controller 58 advantageously comprises a microprocessor”) and a memory that stores non-transient instructions that (taught by paragraph 54 “a programmable logic controller running resident software executing algorithms”), when executed by the processor, control the vehicle to: Fay II does not teach at least one auxiliary hydraulic system comprising: a respective auxiliary pump configured to be driven by the engine, a respective driven auxiliary mechanism configured to be operated by the respective auxiliary pump, a respective auxiliary hydraulic circuit configured to convey a respective auxiliary flow of hydraulic fluid between the respective auxiliary pump and the respective driven auxiliary mechanism, and a respective auxiliary hydraulic component located in the auxiliary hydraulic circuit. Berg teaches at least one auxiliary hydraulic system comprising: a respective auxiliary pump (170 “auxiliary hydraulic pump” taught by figure 2) configured to be driven by the engine (taught by column 8 lines 51-53 “The travel pump unit 122 may include an auxiliary hydraulic pump 170, which may also be driven by diesel engine 12”), a respective driven auxiliary mechanism configured to be operated by the respective auxiliary pump (146 “hydraulic motor” taught by figure 2), a respective auxiliary hydraulic circuit configured to convey a respective auxiliary flow of hydraulic fluid between the respective auxiliary pump and the respective driven auxiliary mechanism (130 “hydraulic line” taught by figure 2), and a respective auxiliary hydraulic component located in the auxiliary hydraulic circuit (168 “pressure regulator valve” taught in figure 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have incorporated the auxiliary hydraulic system of Berg into the agricultural vehicle of Fay II with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this incorporation because an auxiliary hydraulic system allows the vehicle to operate a hydraulic device besides the motor. Fay II does not teach measuring an engine rotation speed; compare the engine rotation speed to a threshold value; and upon determining that the engine rotation speed satisfies the threshold value: operate the respective auxiliary hydraulic component of at least one auxiliary hydraulic system to generate a respective braking torque at the respective auxiliary pump, and transmit each respective braking torque to the engine to bias the engine to operate at a decreased rotation speed. Crull teaches measuring an engine rotation speed; compare the engine rotation speed to a threshold value; and upon determining that the engine rotation speed satisfies the threshold value: operate the respective auxiliary hydraulic component of at least one auxiliary hydraulic system to generate a respective braking torque at the respective auxiliary pump, and transmit each respective braking torque to the engine to bias the engine to operate at a decreased rotation speed (taught by the abstract “an overspeed protection control for an engine which drives at least one pump and having valve means selectively operable to cause an increase in pressure in a circuit supplied by said pump and a resulting increase in load torque on the engine. Means responsive to the engine speed exceeding a predetermined value causes operation of the valve means”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have incorporated the overspeed protection control of Crull into the agricultural vehicle of Fay II, with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this incorporation because an engine’s speed can exceed maximum safe design limits and the overspeed protection control prevents this overspeed from occurring. Regarding claim 12, Fay II in view of Berg, and in further view of Crull teaches the agricultural vehicle of claim 11, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Fay II also teaches wherein the agricultural vehicle further comprises at least one driveline configured to mechanically connect the engine to each respective ground drive pump and each respective auxiliary pump, and the driveline comprises a gearbox having an input connected to the engine, a first output connected to each respective ground drive pump (48 “gearbox” taught by figure 2). Crull also teaches the auxiliary pump connected to a gearbox (140 “toothed gear” taught by figure 4) Regarding claim 13, Fay II in view of Berg, and in further view of Crull teaches the agricultural vehicle of claim 12, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Fay II also teaches wherein the driveline does not include a clutch between the engine and each respective ground drive pump (taught by figure 2). Regarding claim 14, Fay II in view of Berg, and in further view of Crull teaches the agricultural vehicle of claim 11, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Berg also teaches wherein operating the respective auxiliary hydraulic component of the at least one auxiliary hydraulic system comprises reconfiguring the respective auxiliary hydraulic circuit to direct hydraulic flow through the respective auxiliary hydraulic component (168 “pressure regulator valve” taught in figure 2). Regarding claim 17, Fay II in view of Berg, and in further view of Crull teaches the agricultural vehicle of claim 11, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Berg also teaches the respective auxiliary hydraulic component comprises a pressure relief valve (168 “pressure regulator valve” taught in figure 2). Regarding claim 18, Fay II in view of Berg, and in further view of Crull teaches the agricultural vehicle of claim 11, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Berg also teaches in at least one auxiliary hydraulic system: the respective auxiliary hydraulic circuit comprises: a delivery line connected between an output of the auxiliary pump and an input of the driven auxiliary mechanism (130 “hydraulic line” taught by figure 2), a return line connected between an input of the auxiliary pump and an output of the driven auxiliary mechanism (150 “hydraulic return line” taught by figure 2), a bypass valve located between the delivery line and the return line in fluid parallel with the driven auxiliary mechanism, wherein the bypass valve is movable between a respective open position in which pressurized hydraulic fluid in the delivery line is diverted to the return line to thereby disable operation of the driven auxiliary mechanism, and a respective closed position in which pressurized hydraulic fluid in the delivery line is not diverted to the return line to thereby enable operation of the driven auxiliary mechanism (144 “a three-way valve” taught by figures 2 and 3), and a control valve located in series between the auxiliary pump and the driven auxiliary mechanism, and movable between a respective closed position in which the control valve prevents hydraulic fluid from passing from the auxiliary pump to the driven auxiliary mechanism, and a respective open position in which the control valve allows hydraulic fluid to pass from the auxiliary pump to the driven auxiliary mechanism (166a “check valve” taught by figure 2), and the respective auxiliary hydraulic component comprises a pressure relief valve (168 “pressure regulator valve” taught in figure 2). Regarding claim 19, Fay II in view of Berg, and in further view of Crull teaches the agricultural vehicle of claim 18, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Berg also teaches operating the respective auxiliary hydraulic component of the at least one auxiliary hydraulic system comprises placing the bypass valve in the closed position, and placing the control valve in the closed position, to thereby direct hydraulic fluid from the delivery line through the pressure relief valve to the return line (taught by figure 2). Regarding claim 20, Fay II in view of Berg, and in further view of Crull teaches the agricultural vehicle of claim 11, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Fay II also teaches the agricultural vehicle comprises a windrower or a combine (taught by figure 1). Claim(s) 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fay II (US 20210001923 A1) in view of Berg (US 9458842 B2) and in further view of Crull (US 3999386 A) and Smith (US 12515591 B1). Regarding claim 15, Fay II in view of Berg, and in further view of Crull teaches the agricultural vehicle of claim 11, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Fay II does not teach the respective auxiliary pump of at least one auxiliary hydraulic system is connected to the engine by a clutch; and operating the respective auxiliary hydraulic component of the at least one auxiliary hydraulic system comprises engaging the clutch to cause the respective auxiliary pump to rotate in unison with the engine. Smith teaches the respective auxiliary pump of at least one auxiliary hydraulic system is connected to the engine by a clutch; and operating the respective auxiliary hydraulic component of the at least one auxiliary hydraulic system comprises engaging the clutch to cause the respective auxiliary pump to rotate in unison with the engine (taught by column 16 line 1-8 “The input shaft 844 of the hydraulic pump 832 is coupled (e.g., rotatably) with the inner race 840 of the sprag clutch 834 such that rotation of the inner race 840 (e.g., in unison with rotation of the outer race 838 when the engine 610 drives the outer race 838 and the inner race 840 in unison through the engine belt 806) also drives the hydraulic pump 832”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have incorporated the clutch of Smith into the agricultural vehicle of Fay II, with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this incorporation because a clutch enables control of power transmission. Regarding claim 16, Fay II in view of Berg, and in further view of Crull teaches the agricultural vehicle of claim 11, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Fay II does not teach the respective auxiliary pump of at least one auxiliary hydraulic system is connected to the engine by a clutch; and operating the respective auxiliary hydraulic component of the at least one auxiliary hydraulic system comprises: engaging the clutch to cause the respective auxiliary pump to rotate in unison with the engine, and reconfiguring the respective auxiliary hydraulic circuit to direct hydraulic flow through the respective auxiliary hydraulic component. Smith teaches the respective auxiliary pump of at least one auxiliary hydraulic system is connected to the engine by a clutch; and operating the respective auxiliary hydraulic component of the at least one auxiliary hydraulic system comprises: engaging the clutch to cause the respective auxiliary pump to rotate in unison with the engine, and reconfiguring the respective auxiliary hydraulic circuit to direct hydraulic flow through the respective auxiliary hydraulic component (taught by column 16 line 1-8 “The input shaft 844 of the hydraulic pump 832 is coupled (e.g., rotatably) with the inner race 840 of the sprag clutch 834 such that rotation of the inner race 840 (e.g., in unison with rotation of the outer race 838 when the engine 610 drives the outer race 838 and the inner race 840 in unison through the engine belt 806) also drives the hydraulic pump 832”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have incorporated the clutch of Smith into the agricultural vehicle of Fay II, with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this incorporation because a clutch enables control of power transmission. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS KANDAS whose telephone number is (571)272-5628. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 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, James A Shriver can be reached at (303)297-4337. 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. /NICHOLAS R. KANDAS/Examiner, Art Unit 3613 /JAMES A SHRIVER II/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3613
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 31, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594809
ELECTRIC WORK VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589788
GROCERY CONTAINMENT SYSTEM FOR LAST MILE OF ORDER FULFILLMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583306
BATTERY SUPPORT FRAME STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12565753
CONSTRUCTION MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12552486
Straddle-Type Vehicle
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+22.7%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 106 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month