Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/130,189

ELECTRIC VEHICLE POWERTRAIN ASSEMBLY

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 03, 2023
Examiner
KNUTSON, JACOB D
Art Unit
3611
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Rivian Ip Holdings, LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
824 granted / 1043 resolved
+27.0% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+21.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
1079
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
45.9%
+5.9% vs TC avg
§102
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
§112
25.9%
-14.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1043 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 . 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 27 – 29, 32 – 35, 37, and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frohnmayer et al. (US 2016/0229289 A1) in view of Son (KR 20050060873 A). For claim 27, Frohnmayer et al. discloses a system comprising: a housing 810 [configured to house a gearset 823, 825, 826, 828 and to interface to an electric motor 880 having a motor shaft 822] (fig. 8); a motor bearing 844 [engaged with the motor shaft] (page 4, paragraph [0048]); but does not explicitly disclose a retention plate comprising a semi-circular shape extending partially around the motor shaft to retain the motor bearing against the housing. Son discloses a bush 20; [a semicircular fixing ring 40 that supports both sides of the bush and has a fixing ball 41 formed on both ends to be caught on a groove 11 of a stabilizer bar 10] (page 5, lines 13 – 15). 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 semicircular fixing rings and grooves of Son with the system of Frohnmayer et al. with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for reducing overall unwanted movement of the bearing, thus reducing overall vibration and replacement costs. For claim 28, Frohnmayer et al. modified as above discloses the system [wherein the retention plate is affixed to the housing] (indirectly). For claims 29 and 35, Frohnmayer et al. modified as above discloses the system [wherein the retention plate maintains a position of the motor bearing and reacts axial loads on the motor shaft] (page 5, lines 13 – 15, of Son). For claim 32, Frohnmayer et al. modified as above discloses the system wherein: the gearset comprises [a motor gear 823 affixed to the motor shaft] (page 4, paragraph [0042]), an intermediate gear 825, 826, and a drive gear 828; and [the retention plate allows an axial stack up of the intermediate gear and the motor gear to be reduced relative to a four-bearing arrangement 840, 840] (intended use, capable). For claim 33, Frohnmayer et al. modified as above discloses the system [wherein the retention plate forms an azimuthal open area] (fig. 1 of Son). For claim 34, Frohnmayer et al. modified as above discloses a system comprising: a motor gear 823 [affixed to a motor shaft 822] (page 4, paragraph [0042]) [engaged with a motor bearing 844] (page, paragraph [0048]); an intermediate gear 825, 826 [engaged with the motor gear] (page 4, paragraph [0042]); but does not explicitly disclose a retention plate that retains the motor bearing, wherein the retention plate comprises a semi-circular shape extending partially around the motor shaft. Son discloses a bush 20; [a semicircular fixing ring 40 that supports both sides of the bush and has a fixing ball 41 formed on both ends to be caught on a groove 11 of a stabilizer bar 10] (page 5, lines 13 – 15). 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 semicircular fixing rings and grooves of Son with the system of Frohnmayer et al. with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for reducing overall unwanted movement of the bearing, thus reducing overall vibration and replacement costs. For claim 37, Frohnmayer et al. modified as above discloses the system [wherein the retention plate maintains alignment of the motor bearing] (page 5, lines 13 – 15, via groove and fixing ball of Son). For claim 40, Frohnmayer et al. modified as above discloses the system wherein a motor 880 comprises the motor shaft, and [wherein the retention plate is affixed to a housing 810 to which the motor is affixed] (indirectly). Claims 30, 31, and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frohnmayer et al. (US 2016/0229289 A1) in view of Son (KR 20050060873 A), and further in view of Nishikawa et al. (CN 109515143 A). For claim 30, Frohnmayer et al. modified as above does not explicitly disclose the system wherein the motor bearing is a mid-bearing along the motor shaft. Nishikawa et al. discloses a motor/generator 12 comprising a motor shaft 34; [three groups of bearings 36, 38, 40 supporting the motor shaft] (fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to alternatively use the three bearings of Nishikawa et al. in place of the two bearings of Frohnmayer et al. modified as above with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for improved support of the motor shaft and providing low friction under fluctuating speeds, thus reducing overall maintenance and replacement costs. For claim 31, Frohnmayer et al. modified as above discloses the system [wherein the mid-bearing is one of three and only three bearings along the motor shaft] (in view of the modification above, fig. 2 of Ito et al.). For claim 36, Frohnmayer et al. modified as above does not explicitly disclose the system wherein the motor bearing is a mid-bearing along the motor shaft, and wherein the mid-bearing is one of three and only three bearings along the motor shaft. Nishikawa et al. discloses a motor/generator 12 comprising a motor shaft 34; [three groups of bearings 36, 38, 40 supporting the motor shaft] (fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to alternatively use the three bearings of Nishikawa et al. in place of the two bearings of Frohnmayer et al. modified as above with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for improved support of the motor shaft and providing low friction under fluctuating speeds, thus reducing overall maintenance and replacement costs. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 21 – 26 are allowed. Claim 38 and 39 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fails to disclose: For claim 21 – 26: a portion of a wheel gear is within the inner radius of the semi-circular shape; For claim 38 – 39: the semi-circular shape forms an open area; and a portion of the intermediate gear is within the open area. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jacob D. Knutson whose telephone number is (571)270-5576. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am - 4:00 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. /JACOB D KNUTSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3611
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 03, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 29, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 03, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12583504
STEERING MECHANISM, STEERING SYSTEM, VEHICLE, AND CONTROL METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12565261
MOTOR DRIVEN POWER STEERING SYSTEM OF REDUNDANCY STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12565258
RUDDER SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12559162
STEERING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12559163
CONTROLLER FOR ROTARY ELECTRIC MACHINE, AND ELECTRIC POWER STEERING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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
79%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+21.0%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1043 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month