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 1-7, 10-12, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hikida et al. US 20210261186 A1 in view of Cai et al. US 20180244305 A1 and Washnock et al. US 20190351932 A1
Regarding independent claim 1, Hikida et al. discloses [a vehicle steering system comprising: a first intermediate gear 27 fixed to a first pinion 26, the first intermediate gear and the first pinion aligned along a first axis of rotation, the first pinion engaged with the ring gear;] (Annotation of Fig. 7; Paragraph 0055-0056) [a second intermediate gear 27 fixed to a second pinion 26, the second intermediate gear and the second pinion aligned along a second axis of rotation different than the first axis of rotation, the second pinion engaged with the first intermediate gear.] (Annotation of Fig. 7; Paragraph 0055-0056; As shown in the annotated Fig. 7 below, Hikida et al. illustrates a second intermediate gear 27 fixed to a second pinon 26 and is aligned along a second rotation of axis that is different from the first rotation axis. Additionally, the second pinon engages with a ring gear 9 which further engages with the first pinon 26 of the first intermediate gear 27. Thus, indirectly engaging the second pinon with the first intermediate gear.)
PNG
media_image1.png
782
958
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 7 of Hikida
Hikida et al. does not disclose the vehicle steering system comprising; a worm gear; a ring gear fixed to an end of the worm gear; a ball nut surrounding a portion of the worm gear, the ball nut including ball bearings and ball guides; and a motor fixed to a third pinion, the third pinion engaged with the second intermediate gear or a third intermediate gear, the motor to rotate the worm gear to translate the ball nut.
Cai et al. et al. teaches [the vehicle steering system 20 comprising; a worm gear 46;] (Fig. 1; Paragraph 0013) [a ring gear 114 fixed to an end of the worm gear;] (Fig. 1; Paragraph 0020; As shown in Fig. 1, Cai et al. illustrates wherein a ring gear 114 is fixed to an end portion of the worm gear 46.) [a ball nut 58 surrounding a portion of the worm gear, the ball nut including ball bearings 62 and ball guides 60;] (Fig. 1; Paragraph 0014) and [a sector gear 68, 70 engaged with the ball nut, the sector gear to rotate as the ball nut translates.] (Fig. 1; Paragraph 0016)
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 worm gear, ring gear, ball nut, and sector gear configuration of Cai et al. with the steering system of Hikida et al. with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for conventional recirculating ball steering operation by translating rotation of the worm gear into motion of the ball nut and sector gear, thus improving load transfer, durability, and steering functionality
Hikida et al., as modified, does not disclose a motor fixed to a third pinion, the third pinion engaged with the second intermediate gear or a third intermediate gear, the motor to rotate the worm gear to translate the ball nut.
Washnock et al. teaches [a motor 402 fixed to a third pinion 416, the third pinion engaged with the second intermediate gear or a third intermediate gear, the motor to rotate the worm gear to translate the ball nut.] (Fig. 4; Paragraph 0037)
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 motor configuration of Washnock et al. with the steering system of Hikida et al. with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for electric power assistance by driving the worm gear though the gear train, thus reducing effort and improving steering responsiveness.
Regarding claim 2, Hikida et al., as modified, discloses all of the claimed limitations above, including [a fourth pinion fixed to the third intermediate gear,] (Annotated Fig. 7 of Hikida et al.; As shown in the annotation of Fig. 7 above, Hikida et al. illustrates a fourth pinion 26 fixed to the third intermediate gear 27.) [wherein the third pinion is engaged with the third intermediate gear,] (Fig. 4 of Washnock et al.; Paragraph 0037 of Washnock et al.) and [wherein the fourth pinion is engaged with the second intermediate gear.] (As shown in the annotation of Fig. 7 above, Hikida et al. illustrates a fourth pinion 26 that is engaged with a gear wheel 9 which is further connected to the second intermediate gear 27.)
Regarding claim 3, Hikida et al., as modified, discloses all of the claimed limitations above, including [a bearing journal 34b for the second intermediate gear 27 and the second pinion 26, the bearing journal positioned at least one of within a circumference of the second intermediate gear or on a side of the second intermediate gear opposite the second pinion.] (Fig. 8 of Hikida et al.; Paragraph 0060-0061 of Hikida et al.; As shown in Fig. 8, Hikida et al. illustrates wherein the bearing journal 34b is positioned on a side of the intermediate gear 27 opposite to the second pinion 26.)
Regarding claim 4, Hikida et al., as modified, discloses all of the claimed limitations above, including [wherein the bearing journal is a first bearing journal,] (Fig. 8 of Hikida et al.; Paragraph 0060-0061 of Hikida et al.) [further including a second bearing journal 34a for the second intermediate gear 27 and the second pinion 26, the second bearing journal positioned on an opposite side of the second intermediate gear from the first bearing journal.] (Fig. 8 of Hikida et al.; Paragraph 0060-0061 of Hikida et al.; As shown in Fig. 8, Hikida et al. illustrates wherein the bearing journal 34a is positioned on an opposite side of the second intermediate gear 27 from the first bearing journal 34b.)
Regarding claim 5, Hikida et al., as modified, discloses all of the claimed limitations above, including [a third bearing journal 25a for the second intermediate gear 27 and the second pinion 26, the third bearing journal positioned between the second intermediate gear and the second pinion.] (Fig. 9 of Hikida et al.; Paragraph 0099-0100)
Regarding claim 6, Hikida et al., as modified, discloses all of the claimed limitations above, including [a bearing journal 34b for the first intermediate gear 27and the first pinion 26, the bearing journal positioned on a side of the first pinion opposite the first intermediate gear.] (Fig. 8 of Hikida et al.; Paragraph 0060-0061 of Hikida et al.; As shown in Fig. 8, Hikida et al. illustrates wherein the bearing journal 34b is positioned on a side of the intermediate gear 27 opposite to the first pinion 26.)
Regarding claim 7, Hikida et al., as modified, discloses all of the claimed limitations above, including [wherein the bearing journal is a first bearing journal,] (Fig. 8 of Hikida et al.; Paragraph 0060-0061 of Hikida et al.) [further including a second bearing journal 34a for the first intermediate gear and the first pinion, the second bearing journal positioned between the first intermediate gear and the first pinion.] (Fig. 8 of Hikida et al.; Paragraph 0060-0061 of Hikida et al.; As shown in Fig. 8, Hikida et al. illustrates wherein the bearing journal 34a is positioned on an opposite side of the first intermediate gear 27 from the first bearing journal 34b.)
Regarding claim 10, Hikida et al., as modified, discloses all of the claimed limitations above, including [wherein the end of the worm gear is a first end of the worm gear, further including an input shaft 76 to couple a steering shaft of a vehicle to a second end of the worm gear.] (Fig. 1; Paragraph 0017; Cai et al. discloses an input shaft 76 that is directly connected to the second end section 54 of a worm shaft 46 along the axis of rotation A. The input shaft extends from the second end of the worm shaft and is responsive to rotation of a steering wheel, thus functioning to couple the vehicle’s steering shaft to the worm gear. Cai further explains that a lost motion connection 82 allows a small degree of relative motion between the input shaft and the worm shaft, while a torsion bar 84 interconnects them to bias against the motion, which demonstrates that the worm gear has a first end and a second end coupled to the steering shaft through the input shaft.)
Regarding claim 11, Hikida et al., as modified, discloses all of the claimed limitations above, including [wherein the second axis of rotation is parallel to the first axis of rotation.] (Fig. 7 of Hikida et al.; As shown in Fig. 7, Hikida et al. illustrates wherein the second axis of rotation is parallel to the first axis of rotation.)
Regarding claim 12, Hikida et al., as modified, discloses all of the claimed limitations above, including [wherein the worm gear 46 and the ring gear 114 are aligned along a third axis of rotation A parallel to the first axis of rotation,] (Fig. 1 of Cai et al.; As shown in Fig. 1, Cai illustrates the worm gear 46 and the ring gear 114 forming a third axis of rotation that would be parallel to the first rotation axis of Hikida et al.) and [wherein the motor 402 and the third pinion 416 are aligned along a fourth axis of rotation 502 parallel to the third axis of rotation.] (Fig. 5 of Washnock et al.; Paragraph 0041 of Washnock et al.; As shown in Fig. 5, Washnock et al. illustrates wherein the motor 402 and the third pinion 416 are aligned along a fourth axis of rotation 502 that would be parallel to the third axis of rotation A of Cai et al.)
Regarding claim 21, Hikida et al., as modified, discloses all of the claimed limitations above, including [wherein a first engagement between the first pinion and the ring gear provides a first gear reduction,] (Fig. 7 of Hikida et al.; As shown in Fig. 7, Hikida et al. illustrates a first engagement between the first pinion 26 and the ring gear 9, which forms a first gear reduction.) [a second engagement between the second pinion and the first intermediate gear provides a second gear reduction,] (Fig. 7 of Hikida et al.; As shown in Fig. 7, Hikida et al. illustrates a second engagement between the second pinion 26 and the ring gear 9, which forms a second gear reduction.) and [a third engagement between the third pinion and the second intermediate gear or the third intermediate gear provides a third gear reduction.] (Fig. 7 of Hikida et al.; As shown in Fig. 7, Hikida et al. illustrates a third engagement between the third pinion 26 and the ring gear 9, which forms a third gear reduction.)
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hikida et al. in view of Cai et al., Washnock et al. and further in view Hauck EP 2019021 A1 (page/line numbering used for foreign references below corresponds to the machine-translation preceding the original patent, as attached to the prior Office Action – note page numbers of the translation are marked as TP-1, TP-2, etc.).
Regarding claim 8, Hikida et al., as modified, does not disclose wherein the first intermediate gear and the second pinion are aligned along a geometric plane, and wherein the second intermediate gear and the first pinion are positioned on a same side of the geometric plane.
Hauck teaches [wherein the intermediate gear and the pinion are aligned along a geometric plane,] (Annotation of Fig. 3; As shown in the annotation of Fig. 3 below, Hauck illustrates wherein the intermediate gear 3 and the pinion 12 are aligned along a geometric plane.) and [wherein the second intermediate gear and the first pinion are positioned on a same side of the geometric plane.] (Annotation of Fig. 3; As shown in the annotation of Fig. 3 below, Hauck illustrates wherein another intermediate gear 5 and another pinion 8 are aligned along another geometric plane.)
PNG
media_image2.png
378
662
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 3 of Hauck
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 geometric plane alignment of Hauck with the steering system of Hikida et al., as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for improved spatial organization and meshing consistency of the gears, thus enhancing packaging efficient and reducing misalignment stresses in the steering system.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hikida et al. in view of Cai et al., Washnock et al. and further in view Saruwatari JP 2008254624 A (page/line numbering used for foreign references below corresponds to the machine-translation preceding the original patent, as attached to the prior Office Action – note page numbers of the translation are marked as TP-1, TP-2, etc.).
Regarding claim 9, Hikida et al., as modified, does not disclose [wherein the first intermediate gear includes a first diameter, and wherein the second intermediate gear includes a second diameter smaller than the first diameter.]
Saruwatari teaches [wherein the first intermediate gear includes a first diameter, and wherein the second intermediate gear includes a second diameter smaller than the first diameter.] (Fig. 1; As shown in Fig. 1, Saruwatari illustrates wherein a first intermediate gear 84 has a larger diameter than a second intermediate gear 85.)
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 different diameter configurations of Saruwatari with the steering system of Hikida et al., as modified, with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for optimization of torque transmission and packaging efficiency within the steering system, thus improving performance while reducing space requirements.
Claims 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hikida et al. in view of Cai et al.
Regarding claim independent 13, Hikida et al. discloses [an apparatus comprising: a first gear set including a pinion 19 of a motor 6 engaged with a first intermediate gear 27;] (Annotated Fig. 6; Paragraph 0052-0054; As shown in annotated Fig. 6 below, Hikida et al. illustrates the output shaft 18 of the motor 6 being linked to the pinion 19. This pinion is directly engaged with the first intermediate gear 27.) [a second gear set including a pinion 26 of the first intermediate gear engaged with a second intermediate gear 27;] (Fig. 7; As shown in Fig. 7, Hikida et al. illustrates the pinion 26 of the first intermediate gear 27 being directly connected to a ring gear 9. The ring gear is further engaged with the pinion 26 of the second intermediate gear 27. Therefore, indirectly engaging the pinion 26 of the first intermediate gear 27 with the pinion 26 of the second intermediate gear 27.) [and a third gear set including a pinion of the second intermediate gear engaged with the ring gear or a third intermediate gear.] (Fig. 7; As shown in Fig. 7, Hikida et al. illustrates the pinion 26 of the second intermediate gear 27 being directly connected to the ring gear 9. The ring gear is further engaged with the pinion 26 of the third intermediate gear 27. Therefore, indirectly engaging the pinion 26 of the second intermediate gear 27 with the pinion 26 of the third intermediate gear 27.)
PNG
media_image3.png
916
910
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 6 of Hikida et al.
Hikida et al. does not disclose a worm gear fixed to a ring gear and a fourth gear set including a ball nut engaged with a portion of the worm gear, the ball nut to translate as the worm gear rotates.
Cai et al. teaches [a worm gear 46 fixed to a ring gear 114] (Fig. 1; Paragraph 0020; As shown in Fig. 1, Cai et al. illustrates wherein a ring gear 114 is fixed to an end portion of the worm gear 46.) and [a fourth gear set including a ball nut 58 engaged with a portion of the worm gear, the ball nut to translate as the worm gear rotates.] (Fig. 1; Paragraph 0016)
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 worm gear, ring gear, and ball nut configuration of Cai et al. with the steering system of Hikida et al. with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for conventional recirculating ball steering operation by translating rotation of the worm gear into motion of the ball nut, thus improving load transfer, durability, and steering functionality.
Regarding claim 14, Hikida et al., as modified, further discloses all of the claimed limitations above, including [a fifth gear set when the pinion of the second intermediate gear is engaged with the third intermediate gear,] (Fig. 7 of Hikida et al.; As shown in Fig. 7, Hikida et al. illustrates the pinion 26 of the second intermediate gear 27 being directly connected to the ring gear 9. The ring gear is further engaged with the pinion 26 of the third intermediate gear 27. Therefore, indirectly engaging the pinion 26 of the second intermediate gear 27 with the pinion 26 of the third intermediate gear 27) [the fifth gear set including the third intermediate gear 27 and a pinion 26 of the third intermediate gear, the pinion of the third intermediate gear engaged with the ring gear 9.] (Fig. 7 of Hikida; As shown in Fig. 7, the pinion 26 of the third intermediate gear 27 being directly engaged with the ring gear 9.)
Regarding claim 15, Hikida et al., as modified, further discloses all of the claimed limitations above, including [a first bearing 34b disposed between the first gear set and the second gear set; a second bearing 34a disposed on an opposite side of the second gear set relative to the first bearing.] (Fig. 6; Paragraph 0060-0061)
Regarding claim 16, Hikida et al., as modified, further discloses all of the claimed limitations above, including [wherein the first intermediate gear and the pinion of the first intermediate gear are aligned along a first axis of rotation,] (Fig. 6 of Hikida et al. As shown in Fig. 6, Hikida et al. illustrates wherein the first intermediate gear 27 and the pinion 26 of the first intermediate gear are aligned along a first axis of rotation.) [wherein the ring gear and the worm gear are aligned a second axis of rotation parallel to the first axis of rotation.] (Fig. 1 of Cai et al.; As shown in Fig. 1, Cai illustrates the worm gear 46 and the ring gear 114 forming a second axis of rotation that would be parallel to the first rotation axis of Hikida et al.)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 17-19 allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 17 recites the limitation wherein a placement of the second axis of rotation and the third axis of rotation is orbital relative to the first axis of rotation. The closest prior art, Hikida et al. US 20210261186 A1, discloses a first, second, and third axis of rotation, but does not disclose wherein a placement of the second axis of rotation and the third axis of rotation is orbital relative to the first axis of rotation.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendment filed 12/10/2025 (hereinafter Response) including claim amendments have been entered. Examiner notes that claims 3 and 6 have been amended. In light of amendments, all objections have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 12/10/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Hikida discloses a rack-and-pinion steering system and that Cai discloses a recirculating ball steering system, asserting that substituting Cai’s worm gear, ring gear, ball nut, and sector gear configuration into Hikida would change the principle of operation and render Hikida unsatisfactory for its intended purpose. This argument is not persuasive. Hikida is relied upon for its motor-driven gear relationships, while Cai is relied upon for a known worm gear and recirculating ball steering configuration. The rejection does not require bodily incorporation or wholesale replacement of Hikida’s system, but rather the predictable substitution of one known steering gear mechanism for another known steering gear mechanism performing the same general function of converting rotary input into steering output. Both rack-and-pinion and recirculating ball systems were well-known alternatives in the art for achieving steering actuation. Substituting one known mechanism for another to obtain predictable steering functionality does not alter the fundamental principle of operation of providing motor-assisted torque transmission through a gear train.
Applicant argues that Hikida’s gears are part of a reaction force mechanism rather than a steering gear, and therefore cannot correspond to the claimed intermediate gears and pinions. This argument is not persuasive. The claims recite structural relationships between intermediate gears, pinions, and axes of rotation, and do not require that the gears perform a particular steering-force function. Hikida discloses gears that are fixed together, aligned along defined axes, and engaged in torque transmission, which meets the claimed structural limitations under the broadest reasonable interpretation. The fact that Hikida’s gears also transmit reaction force does not negate their structural relationship to the claimed intermediate gears and pinions.
Applicant argues that Hikida already discloses a motor and that would have been no reason to replace or modify Hikida’s motor arrangement using Washnock, asserting that the rejection relies on impermissible hindsight. This argument is not persuasive. Washnock is relied upon for teaching a motor fixed to a pinion that drives a worm gear in an electric power steering configuration. The modification does not require elimination of Hikida’s motor, but rather the application of a known motor-to-worm gear drive arrangement to achieve predictable torque transmission in a steering assist system. Electric power steering systems commonly employ motors driving gear trains, including worm gear arrangements, and the references are in the same field of endeavor. Combining known motor drive configurations from analogous steering systems to improve torque delivery represents a predictable design choice and does not rely on knowledge gleaned from applicant’s disclosure.
Applicant argues that Hikida’s element 34a and 34b are rolling bearings and therefore cannot constitute “bearing journals,” asserting that a bearing journal must be cylindrical shaft portions rotating within a stationary housing. This argument is not persuasive. The claims recite a bearing journal for supporting the intermediate gear and pinion but do not limit the bearing journal to a particular bearing type or require a plain bushing configuration. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, a bearing journal encompasses a shaft portion that is supported for rotation by a bearing structure. In Hikida, the shaft portion support within bearings 34a and 34b defines the rotational support region for the gears and pinions. Although Hikida utilizes rolling element bearings rather than plain bushings, the claimed language does not require a specific bearing construction, but only a journaled support structure for rotating components.
Applicant argues that Hauck does not discloses a ring gear engaged with a pinion and therefore cannot meet the limitations of claim 8. This argument is not persuasive. Claim 8 depends from claim 1, and the ring gear limitation is met by the combination of Hikida in view of Cai and Washnock. Hauck is relied upon solely for teaching the geometric plane alignment of gears and pinion, specifically that certain gears are aligned along a geometric plane and positioned on the same side of that plane. A reference does not need to disclose all limitations of the claim independently when relied upon in combination with other references. Hauck’s disclosure of planar alignment of gear components addresses the specific additional limitation of claim 8, while the remaining limitations are met by the base combination.
Applicant argues that claim 13 is allowable for at least the same reasons present with respect to claim 1. This argument is not persuasive. As discussed above, the combination of Hikida and Cai represents the predictable substitution of known steering gear configurations without changing the fundamental principle of motor-assisted steering operation. Claim 13 recites structural gear relationships that are met by the combined teachings of Hikida and Cai, and the reasoning supporting the combination remains applicable.
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.
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/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611