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 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 19-23, 32, 33, 36, 38, and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bennett (PGPub 2014/0288763) in view of Gumpoltsberger (PGPub 2004/0220011).
Regarding claim 19, Bennett teaches a remotely controlled, skid-steered vehicle (remote or autonomous control discussed in para [0121]) comprising: a prime mover (engine 502); a steer motor 522 (see Figure 15); at least one left drive structure and at least one right drive structure (left and right tracks 12, 14); and a transmission (see Figure 15, para [0086]-[0089]). The transmission has an input (input shaft 530) configured to be rotatably driven by the prime mover (engine 502), a steer shaft 563 having a steer-gear (see Figure 15), wherein the steer shaft is configured to be rotatably driven by the steer motor 552. The left and right drive shafts 534 (seen in Figure 14) are epicyclically connected to both the input shaft and the steer shaft such that the left and right drive shafts are urged to rotate in the same direction by rotation of the wheel-ring and urged to rotate in opposite directions by rotation of the steer shaft (see para [0089]); wherein, the at least one left drive structure is configured to be rotatably driven by the left drive shaft and the at least one right drive structure is configured to be rotatably driven by the right drive shaft.
Bennett lacks a transmission having a wheel-ring, a wheel-drive-gear that is solid with the wheel-ring, and left and right drive shafts epicyclically connected to both the wheel-ring and the steer shaft, the left and right drive shafts urged to rotate in the same direction by rotation of the wheel-ring and urged to rotate in opposite directions by rotation of the steer shaft.
Gumpoltsberger teaches a transmission for a skid-steered vehicle (a vehicle having at least some steer by driving capability; see Figures 2 and 4, paragraphs [0045]-[0046], [0051]-[0054]) that differentially drives left and right drive structures using input from a prime mover and from a steering motor.) Specifically, Gumpoltsberger teaches a transmission comprising: a prime mover (para [0034], line 4) that drives an input shaft 6, a steer motor 28, a steering control structure 41 that provides commands to the steering motor 28, left and right drive structures (see Figure 4). The transmission includes an input 6 connected to the prime mover, a steering shaft 31 having a steer gear 33, 34, driven by the steer motor 28, a wheel-ring (interconnected ring gears 15, 16), and a wheel-drive gear (the wheel-drive gear is unnumbered in Figure 4, but is constituted by the bever gear that engages bevel gear 12 and is fixed to the outside surface of ring gears 4, 5, in Figure 4) that is solid with the wheel ring (interconnected ring gears 15, 16). Left and right drive shafts 7, 8, are epicyclically connected to both the wheel-ring and the steer shaft (see Figure 4). The left and right drive shafts are urged to rotate in the same direction by rotation of the wheel-ring and urged to rotate in opposite directions by rotation of the steer shaft, wherein the left drive structure is rotatable by the left drive shaft and the right drive structure is rotatably driven by the right drive shaft.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the transmission of Bennett to arrange the transmission with a wheel-ring solid with a wheel-drive-gear, as taught by Gumpoltsberger, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a compact transmission, with all of the functionality of the Bennett transmission, in a more compact arrangement having fewer exposed gears.
Regarding claim 20, Bennett teaches that the at least one left drive structure is a track and the at least one right drive structure is a track (tracks 12, 14, seen in Figure 16).
Regarding claims 21 and 32, Bennett teaches that the left and right drive shafts are rotatable at a nominal speed and wherein rotation of the steer shaft varies the speed of the left or right drive shaft upwardly or downwardly relative to the nominal speed, although it is not clearly stated what ratio the speed of the steering shaft varies the drive shaft speed. However, both references clearly show gearing that would produce a speed reduction between the steering shaft and output shafts and criticality of the claimed ranges has not been established. Also, Gumpoltsberger, in Figure 2, illustrates a steer ratio of approximately 2 (as seen in Figure 2, for example, gears 33 and 32 appear to have the same diameter and sun gear 19 at toothing 21 is approximately twice the diameter of gear 24, so the overall speed ratio is about 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a speed ratio between the steering and the output shafts of the combination within the broad range of between .5 and 3.5, in view of the teaching of Gumpoltsberger, in order to provide a speed reduction with gears that are compatibly sized.
Regarding claims 22 and 33, Bennett teaches that the vehicle is autonomous.
Regarding claim 23, Bennett teaches a steering control structure 520, the steering control structure configured to provide steering commands to the steer motor.
Regarding claims 36, 38, and 39, the combination teaches all of the features of claim 36 including a steering command interface that provides steering commands to the steering control structure, where the steering command interface is located remote from the vehicle (Bennett teaches wireless, remote and autonomous control of the drive and steering functions).
Claim(s) 24-27, 30, 31, and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bennett and Gumpoltsberger as applied to claims 19-23, 32, 33, 36, 38, and 39 above, and further in view of Gleasman (USPN 4,895,052)
Regarding claims 24-27, the transmission of both references further comprises a steer gear solidly carried by the steer shaft, rather than a steer-sprocket and steer-chain.
Gleasman teaches a steer by drive transmission having a steering motor 41 and steering shaft 22, 23, drivingly connected to a drive shaft 17 by a steer-sprocket 53, steer-chain 54, and a drive-steer-sprocket 57 on the drive shaft (see Figure 2, col 4, lines 3-11) and a steering gear 32. This arrangement is a preferred alternative to a steer-gear to idler to drive-steer-gear arrangement (embodiment of Figure 1) for rotatably coupling the steer-gear to the drive shaft.
It would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention use a steer-sprocket, steer-chain and drive-steer-sprocket combination in place of the intermediate shaft 572 and associated spur gears, in order to provide a compact, inexpensive and reliable drive connection between the steer-shaft and drive shaft.
Regarding claim 27 and 34, Gleasman teaches the drive-steer-gear and the drive steer-sprocket are configured to rotate opposite one another.
Regarding claims 30 and 31, the combination lacks an idler sprocket on an inter-shaft, however, idler sprockets, mounted on an inter-shaft separate from the drive or driven sprocket, are conventionally used in chain transmissions to maintain tension in the chain. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange the transmission with an idler sprocket on an inter-shaft, as is old and well known, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to maintain tension in the chain.
Claim(s) 28 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bennett, Gumpoltsberger, and Gleason as applied to claims 24-27, 30, 31, and 34 above, and further in view of Visscher (USPN 8,439,152),
Regarding claims 28 and 29, Bennett teaches high and low gears, but not associated with the transmission discussed above.
Visscher teaches a transmission that controls drive and steering of a skid-steer vehicle having an inter-shaft 38 that carries a high gear 50 and a low gear 52, contained within the transmission housing. A selector sleeve 54 is configured to operatively select at least the high gear or low gear.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide an inter-shaft with high and low gears and a selector sleeve that selects between high and low gears within the transmission, as taught by Visscher, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a compact transmission, that allows for high and low gear transition in a compact arrangement within the drive/steering transmission.
Claim(s) 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bennett, Gumpoltsberger, and Gleason as applied to claims 19-23, 32, 33, 36, 38, and 39 above, and further in view of Visscher (USPN 8,439,152),
The combination lacks high and low gears as part of the drive/steering transmission discussed above.
Visscher teaches a transmission that controls drive and steering of a skid-steer vehicle having an inter-shaft 38 that carries a high gear 50 and a low gear 52, contained within the transmission housing. A selector sleeve 54 is configured to operatively select at least the high gear or low gear.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide an inter-shaft with high and low gears and a selector sleeve that selects between high and low gears within the transmission, as taught by Visscher, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a compact transmission, that allows for high and low gear transition in a compact arrangement within the drive/steering transmission.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Bennett fails to teach right and left shafts epicyclically connected to both the input shaft and the steer shaft. The examiner disagrees. Bennet describes the drive arrangement of Figures 13-15 in paragraphs [0077]-[0090]. It describes, in para [0087], a drive input shaft 560 interacting with angle gears 574, 576, which then connect though left and right planetary gear assemblies 564, 566 that drive output shafts 534. Therefore, the drive arrangement does have an put shaft epicyclically connected to the left and right shafts. Paragraph [0089] describes the connection between steering input shaft and the left and right shafts and how the steering shaft input directs the left and right shafts in opposite directions for steering the vehicle.
Applicant argues that Gumpoltsberger fails to a wheel-drive-gear this is solid with the wheel-ring. The examiner disagrees. The rejection indicates that the wheel drive gear is the gear that engages or meshed with gear 12. As seen in Figure 4 of Gumpoltsberger, input shaft 6 is fixed to a first bevel gear 12. First bevel gear 12 meshes with an unnumbered bevel gear (the wheel0drive gear) on the radially outer side of wheel ring formed by integrally connected ring gears 4, 5. Therefore, Gumpoltsberger teaches a wheel-drive-gear that is solid with the wheel ring.
Applicant argues that the combination of Bennett and Gumpoltsberger is improper because applicant’s interpretation of Bennett would not operate. The examiner disagrees with applicant’s characterization of how Bennett and Gumpoltsberger work. Even if the description of the drive arrangement of Bennett is incomplete or misstated, Gumpoltsberger is believed to be adequately described and includes the elements that are not explicit in Bennett.
Regarding claims 21 and 32, applicant argues that the ratios claimed are not taught. However, the claimed ratio ranges appear to be consistent with the structure illustrated and the exact ratios are a matter or routine optimization. Applicant has not provided evidence that the claimed ratios are unobvious in view of the structure taught by the prior art.
Therefore, the rejection is being maintained.
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 Anne Marie M. Boehler whose telephone number is (571)272-6641. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 8-5pm.
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 on 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 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.
/ANNE MARIE M BOEHLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3611
Prosecution Insights