DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 December 30, 2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2 – 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “each different modular fan drive configuration” in the first paragraph of the body of the claim. It is unclear as to whether Applicant intends the limitation to refer to each of the ‘different modular fan drive configurations’ previously set forth in the claim, or whether Applicant intends to refer to ‘modular fan drive configurations’ other than those previously set forth. For the purposes of this Office Action, Examiner will interpret the limitation as “each of the different modular fan drive configurations.”
Claim 2 further recites the limitation “each different mount adapter configuration” in the second paragraph of the body of the claim. It is unclear as to whether Applicant intends the limitation to refer to each of the ‘different mount adapter configurations’ previously set forth in the claim, or whether Applicant intends to refer to ‘mount adapter configurations’ other than those previously set forth. For the purposes of this Office Action, Examiner will interpret the limitation as “each of the different mount adapter configurations.”
Claim 2 further recites the limitation “a first plural subset of the different mount adapter configurations” in the third paragraph of the body of the claim. It is unclear as to whether Applicant intends the limitation to refer to, and further define, the ‘plural subsets of different mount adapter configurations’ previously set forth in the claim, or whether Applicant intends to set forth a ‘plural subset of different mount adapter configurations’ which is separate and independent from the ‘plural subsets of different mount adapter configurations’ previously set forth. For the purposes of this Office Action, Examiner will interpret the limitation as “a first plural subset of the plural subsets of the different mount adapter configurations.”
Claim 2 further recites the limitation “a second plural subset of the different mount adapter configurations” in the fourth paragraph of the body of the claim. It is unclear as to whether Applicant intends the limitation to refer to, and further define, the ‘plural subsets of different mount adapter configurations’ previously set forth in the claim, or whether Applicant intends to set forth a ‘plural subset of different mount adapter configurations’ which is separate and independent from the ‘plural subsets of different mount adapter configurations’ previously set forth. For the purposes of this Office Action, Examiner will interpret the limitation as “a second plural subset of the plural subsets of the different mount adapter configurations.”
Claim 3 recites the limitation “each mount adapter of the first plural subset of the different mount adapter configurations each has a second end for threaded attachment ...” Examiner notes that claim 2 previously recites that the ‘second plural subset of the different mount adapter configures has a second end.’ Therefore, it is unclear as to whether Applicant intends the limitation to refer to the ‘second end of the first plural subset’ previously set forth in claim 2, or whether Applicant intends to set forth an additional ‘second end of the first plural subset’ which is separate and independent from the ‘second end of the first plural subset’ previously set forth. For the purposes of this Office Action, Examiner will interpret the limitation as “the second end of each mount adapter of the first plural subset of the different mount adapter configurations comprises a threaded attachment ...”
Claim 6 recites the limitation “wherein each respective mount adapter configurations of one or more of the second plural subset of the different mount adapter configurations further comprise a respective flange section comprising ...” The limitation is indefinite for several reasons. First, the claims do not previously recite the ‘second plural subset of the different mount adapter configurations’ as having a plurality of ‘mount adapter configurations.’ Therefore, it is unclear as to Applicant intent regarding ‘each respective mount adapter configuration.’ Secondly, Examiner notes that claim 2 previously sets forth a single ‘second plural subset of the different mount adapter configurations.’ Therefore, it is generally unclear as to Applicant’s intent regarding “one or more” of the ‘second plural subset of the different mount adapter configurations.’ Finally, claim 2 further sets for the ‘second plural subset of the different mount adapter configuration’ comprising a ‘flange section.’ Therefore, it is unclear as to whether Applicant intents the limitation to refer to, and further define, the ‘flange section’ of the ‘second plural subset of the different mount adapter configurations’ previously set forth in claim 2, or whether Applicant intends the limitation to set forth a second ‘flange section’ of the ‘second plural subset of the different mount adapter configurations’ which is separate and independent from the ‘flange section’ previously set forth. For the purposes of this Office Action, Examiner will interpret the limitation as “the flange section of each mount adapter of the second plural subset of the different mount adapter configurations comprises ...”
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 3 recites the limitation ‘the second end of each mount adapter of the first plural subset of the different mount adapter configurations comprises a threaded attachment to a respective subset of threaded type engine block mount configurations.’ Examiner has been unable to find support for the limitation in the originally filed specification. Examiner notes that claim 2 previously recites that the ‘second end of the first plural subset be threaded to connected to a threaded fan assembly.’ Examiner has been specifically unable to find support for the ‘second end of the first plural subset’ to be both threaded for connection to a ‘threaded fan assembly’ and comprise a ‘threaded attached’ for connection to a ‘subset of threaded type engine block mount configurations.’
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 4 – 17 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Regarding claim 2, Examiner’s closest art, Roczniak (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2012/0164002, cited in IDS), teaches a system of interchangeable parts adapted for assembly in different modular configurations to respectively replace different fan drive configurations (abstract), comprising: a plurality of fan drives, each of the fan drives having a common front attachment mode (figure 1, element 20 being the ‘fan drive’ and element 72 being the ‘front attachment mode’; paragraphs 39 - 40); a plurality of mount adapters (figure 1, element 30 being the ‘mount adapter’; paragraph 40); and a plurality of fan adapters (figure 1, element 260 being the ‘fan adapter’; paragraph 50).
However, Roczniak does not teach the plurality of mount adapters including a plural subsets of different mount adapter configurations, wherein a first plural subset of the plural subsets of the different mount adapter configurations each having a second end threaded to connect to a threaded fan assembly of one or more of the different fan drive configurations, and a second plural subset of the plural subsets of the different mount adapter configurations each having a second end comprising a flange section adapted to bolt to at least one respective fan assembly type of two or more fan assembly types at a plurality of radially arranged bolt points, as recited by claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER BESLER whose telephone number is (571)270-5331. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10:30 am - 7:30 pm (EST).
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, Thomas Hong can be reached at (571) 272-0993. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER J. BESLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726