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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/25/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS. —Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 24-25 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claims 24-25 depend from cancelled claim 16, the claims do not further limit an existing claim and are therefore incomplete. Applicant may cancel the claims, amend the claims to place the claims in proper dependent form, rewrite the claims in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claims complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
Claims 24-25 are also 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. As the dependency of the claims is uncertain, the scope cannot be determined (see related 35 USC 112d discussion above).
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claims 11, 17, 21, and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwiatkowski et al. US 20180058821 A1 in view of Despres-Nadeau US 20160347137 A1.
Regarding independent claim 11, Kwiatkowski et al. discloses [an off-road vehicle 10 comprising: a frame 14; an engine; a ground engaging member 60, 62;] (Fig. 1 & 3; Paragraph 0018 & 0020) [a first trailing arm RA and a second trailing arm RA, wherein each of the trailing arms have at least one housing 250] (Fig. 11; Paragraph 0026) and wherein, [within each housing is a drive belt 268, the drive belt drivingly coupled to the engine and a rear ground engaging member.] (Fig. 3 & 11; Paragraph 0028)
Kwiatkowski et al. does not disclose a first trailing arm support member and a second trailing arm support member associated with the first trailing arm, wherein each trailing arm support is coupled to the at least one housing; and a first support hub and a second support hub affixed to the frame, wherein the first support hub and the second support hub support the first trailing arm.
Despres-Nadeau teaches [a first trailing arm support member 422 and a second trailing arm support member 422,] (Fig. 24A; As shown in Fig. 24A, Despres-Nadeau illustrates a first trailing arm support member 422 and a second trailing arm support member 422, wherein each trailing arm support is coupled to the at least one housing.) [wherein each trailing arm support is coupled to the at least one housing; and a first support hub 424 and a second support hub 424 affixed to the frame, wherein the first support hub and the second support hub support the first trailing arm;] (Fig. 22 & 24A; As shown in Fig. 22 & 24A, Despres-Nadeau illustrates wherein each trailing arm support is coupled to the at least one housing; and a first support hub 424 and a second support hub 424 affixed to the frame, wherein the first support hub and the second support hub support the first trailing arm.) [at least a first trailing arm support member 422 coupled on one end to a driven shaft 426 and on an opposite end to housing associated with the ground engaging member, wherein a second end of the first trailing arm support member is coupled to a driven shaft coupled to a primary drive belt;] (Fig. 24A of Despres-Nadeau; Paragraph 0145 of Despres-Nadeau; As shown in Fig. 24A, Despres-Nadeau illustrates the trailing arm support member 422 with one end being pivotally coupled to the housing of the trailing arm 350 and the opposite end being pivotally connect to the shaft 426 via a ball bearing.) [wherein the first trailing arm support member 422 is coupled to the driven shaft via a bearing assembly and/or bushing assembly;] (Fig. 24A of Despres-Nadeau; Paragraph 0145 of Despres-Nadeau; Despres-Nadeau discloses that the trailing arm support member 422 is pivotally connected to the torsion bar 426 through a ball joint which is a type of bearing.) [wherein the second trailing arm support member 422 coupled on one end to a pivot and on an opposite end to the housing associated with the ground engaging member;] (Fig. 24A of Despres-Nadeau; Paragraph 0145 of Despres-Nadeau; As shown in Fig. 24A, Despres-Nadeau illustrates the trailing arm support member 422 with one end being pivotally coupled to the housing of the trailing arm 350 and the opposite end being pivotally connect to the driven shaft 426 via a ball bearing.) [a shock 352 connected to one or both of the first and trailing arm support members.] (Paragraph 0134 o of Despres-Nadeau; Fig. 24A of Despres-Nadeau)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to additionally use the trailing arm support and hub configuration of Despres-Nadeau with the off-road vehicle of Kwiatkowski et al. with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for more robust and stable mounting of the trailing arms to the frame, thus improving structural integrity and enhancing vehicle drivetrain performance in off-road conditions.
Kwiatkowski et al., as modified, does not explicitly disclose the first trailing arm support member and the second trailing arm support member associated with the first trailing arm. However, according to MPEP 2144.04 (VI) (B) (In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960)), the mere duplication of known elements does not confer patentability unless it produces a new and unexpected result. In this case, Despres-Nadeau already discloses a trailing support arm support member that is associated with a trailing arm. The extension of this configuration to include a second trailing arm support member that is associated the trailing arm would have been an obvious design choice for one of ordinary skill in the art, as it merely duplicates an existing structure without introducing an unexpected benefit. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify trailing arm support member configuration to include an additional support member to improve load distribution and stability without yielding an unexpected result.
Regarding claim 17, Kwiatkowski et al., as modified, already discloses all of the claimed limitations, including the trailing arms arrangement recited in the rejection of claim 11 above.
Regarding claim 21, Kwiatkowski et al., as modified, discloses all of the claimed limitations above, including [wherein the first trailing arm RA includes a drive element drivingly coupled to a first half-shaft and a driven element drivingly coupled to the drive element via the drive belt 268.] (Fig. 11 of Kwiatkowski et al.; As shown in Fig. 11, Kwiatkowski et al. illustrates wherein the first rear trailing arm RA includes a drive element 262 drivingly coupled to the first half-shaft and a driven element 266 drivingly coupled to the drive element via the drive belt 268.)
Regarding claim 24, Kwiatkowski et al., as modified, already discloses all of the claimed limitations, including the second trailing arm pivot connection recited in the rejection of claim 11 above.
Regarding claim 25, Kwiatkowski et al., as modified, already discloses all of the claimed limitations, including the shock component recited in the rejection of claim 11 above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 5-10, 22, and 26 allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 1 recites the limitation an off-road vehicle comprising: a frame; an engine; a rear ground engaging member; and a first rear trailing arm and a second rear trailing arm, wherein each of the trailing arms have at least one housing and wherein, within each housing is a drive belt, the drive belt drivingly coupled to the engine and a rear ground engaging member; and a transaxle, wherein the transaxle includes a first half-shaft and a second half-shaft extending laterally from the transaxle, wherein the first half-shaft is coupled to the first rear trailing arm via a first constant velocity (CV) joint, and wherein the second half-shaft is coupled to the second rear trailing arm via a second CV joint, wherein the transaxle is located forward of the engine and rearward of a seating area. The closest prior art, Kwiatkowski et al. US 20180058821 A1 and Despres-Nadeau US 20160347137 A1, discloses an off-road vehicle comprising: a frame; an engine; a rear ground engaging member; and a first rear trailing arm and a second rear trailing arm, wherein each of the trailing arms have at least one housing and wherein, within each housing is a drive belt, the drive belt drivingly coupled to the engine and a rear ground engaging member; and a transaxle, wherein the transaxle includes a first half-shaft and a second half-shaft extending laterally from the transaxle, wherein the first half-shaft is coupled to the first rear trailing arm via a first constant velocity (CV) joint, and wherein the second half-shaft is coupled to the second rear trailing arm via a second CV joint, wherein the transaxle is located rearward of a seating area, but does not disclose the transaxle being in front of the engine.
Claim 22 contains the limitation of an off-road vehicle comprising: a frame; an engine; a rear ground engaging member; a first rear trailing arm and a second rear trailing arm, wherein each of the trailing arms has at least one housing and wherein, within each housing is a drive belt, the drive belt drivingly coupled to the engine and a rear ground engaging member; a first half-shaft and a second half-shaft extending laterally from a transaxle, wherein the first half-shaft is coupled to the first rear trailing arm via a first constant velocity (CV) joint, and wherein the second half-shaft is coupled to the second rear trailing arm via a second CV joint; and a first support hub and a second support hub affixed to the frame, wherein the first support hub and the second support hub are positioned on opposite sides of the first trailing arm to support the first trailing arm; and a first trailing arm support member and a second trailing arm support member associated with the first trailing arm, wherein each trailing arm support is coupled to the at least one housing, wherein the first support hub includes a protrusion that is configured for connection to the first trailing arm support member and wherein the second support hub includes a protrusion that is configured for connection to the second trailing arm support member. The closest prior art, Kwiatkowski et al. US 20180058821 A1 and Despres-Nadeau US 20160347137 A1, discloses the elements of the off-road vehicle above, but does not disclose wherein the first support hub and the second support hub are positioned on opposite sides of the first trailing arm to support the first trailing arm.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/25/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 11, Applicant argues (Page 1 of Remarks) that neither Kwiatkowski et al. nor Despres-Nadeau teaches or suggests the limitation “wherein a second end of the first trailing arm support member is coupled to a driven shaft coupled to a primary drive belt.” Applicant specifically contends that the Office Action improperly relied on Despres-Nadeau’s link 422 and torsion bar 426, even though the claim requires coupling to a driven shaft rather than a torsion bar. Applicant therefore asserts that the cited references fail to teach the amended limitation. This argument is not persuasive. Kwiatkowski discloses a belt-driven. This argument is not persuasive. Kwiatkowski discloses a belt-driven drivetrain including a primary drive belt that transmits torque to driven drivetrain components within the trailing arm assembly, which naturally requires a driven shaft coupled to the drive belt for transmitting rotational power. Despres-Nadeau teaches coupling a trailing arm support member to a structural member associated with the suspension assembly. Although Despres-Nadeau discloses coupling a torsion bar rather than explicitly to a driven shaft, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to couple the support member to a driven shaft within Kwiatkowski’s belt-driven system as a predictable variation for integrating structural support with drivetrain components while maintaining torque transmission and suspension support, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mohamed Medani whose telephone number is (703)756-1917. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 am - 5:30 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, Valentin Neacsu can be reached at (571) 272-6265. 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.
/Mohamed M Medani/Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/VALENTIN NEACSU, Ph.D./Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611
Prosecution Insights