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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-5, 8, 10, and 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loeffler et al. (US 2009/0260353) in view of Heindl (9,695,920) and Ornella et al. (9,932,028).
Regarding claims 1, 8, 10, and 12, Loeffler discloses a motor vehicle, comprising;
a chassis (see e.g., ¶0024 describing the vehicle’s frame supporting the drive);
a power source (see ¶0017 describing the vehicle’s prime mover as an engine, implicit to which is that a source of fuel is provided in conventional vehicles) supported on the chassis; a prime mover (engine) supported on the chassis and comprising a rotatable power shaft (20), wherein the prime mover is configured to translate energy stored in the power source (fuel) into rotational torque that is applied to the power shaft (20);
a hydraulic drive unit (e.g., hydraulic pump 27a) supported on the chassis and mechanically connected to the power shaft (20; see Fig. 2) to drive the hydraulic drive unit in series with the prime mover (see ¶0020 describing how the hydraulic drive can be only single pump 27a resulting in the prime mover and hydraulic drive to be arranged serially), wherein the hydraulic drive unit comprises a hydraulic circuit (28a, 29a) connecting a hydraulic motor (43) to the pump and an output shaft (46) connected to the power shaft through the hydraulic circuit, wherein this hydraulic unit (27a/43) includes a pair of hydraulic conduits (28a, 29a) extending directly and uninterruptedly between the motor and pump whereby hydraulic fluid of the hydraulic circuit is only permitted to flow through the pair of conduits (28a, 29a), the hydraulic motor (27a), and the pump (43; see ¶s 0023-0025 describing how the pump 43 and motor 27a are hydraulically interconnected; ¶0026 reciting that the drivetrain may a reservoir and/or accumulator, but does not specifically require either of these elements, therefore a device without these elements is disclosed and such a device reads upon the recited “directly and uninterruptedly” and “only permitted” claim language);
a transmission (42; see ¶0025 describing the reduction gearing in transmission 42) mechanically connected to the output shaft of the hydraulic drive unit and an output whereby the transmission (42) is connected in series (e.g., when only a single hydraulic pump 27a is used, see ¶0020) with hydraulic drive unit such that power is only transferrable from the prime mover to the transmission hydraulic (i.e.., there is no mechanical connection between the prime mover/engine and the gearbox 42 except the hydraulic circuits 28, see e.g., Fig. 1) to minimize a resistance of motion of the prime mover and increase an operational range of the vehicle (i.e., the structural arrangement of all the output from the prime mover passing through the hydraulic pump/motor 27/43 is substantially the same as the claimed structures, this same structural configuration necessarily also results in the recited benefits of minimized resistance to motion and increased range), the transmission configured to provide one or more gear reductions across the transmission (see ¶0025 describing how the drive unit 41 includes gears that provide user-selectable gear ratios); and
one or more traction elements (e.g., wheels, see last line of ¶0028) mechanically connected to the transmission and configured to react a force against a surface terrain in response to the operation of the prime mover (i.e., the engine drives the wheels through the hydraulic drive 27a/43 and gearing in the transmission 42).
Loeffler does not disclose that its prime mover is an electric motor or that the vehicle uses a differential to distribute it drive’s output to the vehicle wheels. Further, while Loeffler discloses that the vehicle has an engine (implicit to the operation of a conventional ICE vehicle is that the operation of the engine is controlled); a hydraulic drive unit (which can be used to selectively controlled to store, recover, and release stored power – see ¶0027-0028), and a transmission having gearing that has “user-selectable” gear ratios (see ¶0025), it does not explicitly recite that a control system is used to control these elements.
Heindl teaches another vehicle including a hydraulic drive unit (152; 140/142, see Fig. 4) has a prime mover (124) that drives the pump (140) to drive a rear wheel (136). The prime mover can be an electric motor (see Col. 5, lines 25-29). Heindl further teaches the well-known expedient of using a differential to split the power output from a drivetrain to power both wheels of an axle (see e.g., Fig. 1).
Ornella teaches another vehicle including a hydraulic drive unit (9) with a prime mover (4) that drives a pump (2) that powers a hydraulic motor (3) through a gearbox to drive a vehicle’s wheels (see Fig. 1). The vehicle includes a control system in signal communication with the prime mover, the hydraulic drive unit, and the transmission/gearbox to control the operation of these units in response to control inputs provided by an operator of the vehicle (see e.g., Col. 8, lines 34-51 describing how the controller provides commands to the drive train in response to driver requests).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to have modified the vehicle of Loeffler to have its prime mover as an electric motor and to distribute the output via a differential as taught by Heindl and to use a system controller to actively control the mechanical elements of the drivetrain as taught by Ornella to arrive at the claimed device with a reasonable expectation of success. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine them at least because the modification amounts to combining prior art elements according to known techniques to yield predictable results. Here, (1) the prior art included each element (as detailed above); (2) one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods (e.g., substituting an electric motor prime mover for an ICE prime mover; using two stub axles to a common transmission element – differential; and using a computerized controller to provide better control of drivetrain components), and in this combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately (e.g., transmitting rotational power from the prime mover to the vehicle’s drive wheels in a more controlled/optimized manner while using a different, well-known, type of prime mover for a vehicle); (3) one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (e.g., providing a “cleaner” power plant in the vehicle that has its sub-components of the drivetrain monitored and adjusted electronically in a vehicle having a single output shaft to drive two wheels).
Regarding claims 2-3 and 13-14, Loeffler further discloses that the hydraulic pump (27a) comprises a pump housing and a motive element positioned in the pump housing and mechanically connected to the power shaft (see ¶0020 providing that the pump can be a rotary vane pump or a reciprocating piston pump, implicit to which is that the moving element is housed in a pump housing).
Regarding claims 4-5 and 15-16, Loeffler further discloses that the hydraulic motor (43) comprises a motor housing and a drive element positioned in the motor housing and mechanically connected to the output shaft (see ¶0028 describing that the hydraulic motor is a conventional hydraulic pump/motor, which as recited at ¶0020 and discussed immediately above, can include a rotary drive element or a piston-based drive element).
Claims 7 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loeffler in view Heindl and Ornella as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of DuCharme (US 2007/0095587).
Regarding claims 7 and 18, while Loeffler discloses that the output from the hydraulic motor drives the vehicle’s wheels through a variable gear ratio transmission, it does not disclose that the transmission type is a CVT.
DuCharme teaches another vehicle drivetrain (10) where the wheels (28) are driven by a hydraulic motor (12) through a continuously variable transmission (22; see ¶s 0021-0025 describing that the main transmission 22 is a CVT with pulleys 54/38 interconnected by a V-belt 40).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to have modified the vehicle of the Loeffler combination to use a CVT as its gear-changing transmission as taught by DuCharme to arrive at the claimed device with a reasonable expectation of success. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine them at least because doing so constitutes a simple substitution of one known element (a CVT for a vehicle) for another (a generic selectable gear ratio gear train transmission) to obtain predictable results (e.g., -------a transmission that can more smoothly shift gears and which can more readily adjust the gear ratio to be applied to a given circumstance/driving condition).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 8 have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the base Loeffler reference requires a reservoir and therefore does not read upon the limitations recited in claim 19 (now included into the independent claims) that the circuit only flows through the conduits, pump, and motor. Applicant relies on paragraph 0020 of the base Loeffler reference where one embodiment’s description calls for a reservoir and ascribes that embodiment’s description to all of the disclosed embodiments. As discussed above, Loeffler also discloses another embodiment, described in paragraphs 0022-0028, generally denoted as a “hydraulic hybrid drive train.” The written disclosure of this embodiment, unlike the embodiment in paragraph 0020, recites that this hybrid embodiment “may also include” the high pressure accumulator and the low pressure reservoir 48. There is no reason to believe that these elements that “may” be included in the hybrid drive train are required or necessary elements and therefore their inclusion is reasonably interpreted to be optional.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2019/0193558 to Dvorak et al. discloses another vehicle including the well-known expedient of a hydrostatic transmission having a closed loop hydraulic system of a motor and pump connected by two fluid lines (see e.g.,. ¶0027).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVE CLEMMONS whose telephone number is (313)446-4842. The examiner can normally be reached on 8-4:30 EST Monday-Friday.
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, J Allen Shriver can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/STEVE CLEMMONS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618