DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 05/08/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-13 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every objection and 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 02/10/2026.
The amendment filed 03/04/2024 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows:
The newly amended portions of paragraph [0035], i.e., on-piece construction, are not supported by the originally filed disclosure and are considered new matter.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-13 are 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.
Paragraph [0035] has been amended to read “The transmission casing 100 includes a casing body 110 that defines the transmission chamber R1 together with the transmission gear cover 80, and an extension portion 120 extending forward from a front end portion of the casing body 110. The casing body 110 and the extension portion 120 have a non-detachable integral structure (i.e., the casing body 110 and the extension portion are formed to have a one-piece construction). For example, the transmission casing 100 is an integrally molded product in which the casing body 110 and the extension portion 120 have an integral (one-piece) structure.” Merriam-Webster defines the term integral as “formed as a unit with another part”, which is broader than the newly amended limitations. As such, the newly amended claims contain new 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102 or 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102((a)(1) and 102(a)(2)) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Kopfler (US 20210331577 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kopfler discloses a power train (see Fig. 1; 1) comprising: a prime mover (9) having a drive output shaft (10, 70), the prime mover having a prime mover casing (casing of 9) constituting an outline of the prime mover; a transmission casing (see Fig. 2; 47) disposed side by side with the prime mover casing in a lateral direction (up/down direction in Fig. 2) intersecting an axial direction of the drive output shaft (left/right direction in Fig. 2) and defining a transmission chamber (chamber of 47); and a transmission including a transmission input shaft (21) disposed in parallel with the drive output shaft, and a plurality of gear trains (53; 61, 69; 62, 74) for shift stages that are always meshed and are disposed in the transmission chamber, the plurality of gear trains for shift stages being configured to shift and to output power that is input to the transmission input shaft, wherein the transmission casing includes: a casing body (body of 47) defining the transmission chamber (see Fig. 2); and an extension portion (51) extending in the lateral direction from the casing body and fixed to the prime mover casing (via 50) to define a housing chamber (chamber comprising 52) housing a portion of the drive output shaft protruding from the prime mover casing in cooperation with the prime mover casing (see Fig. 2), the casing body and the extension portion being integrally formed to have a non-detachable one-piece construction (see Fig. 2, wherein the body of 47 and 51 are integrally formed and are non-detachable). Additionally, “the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice.” In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965). The Examiner notes that paragraph [0035] discusses the integral design on the casing body 110 and the extension portion 120. However, the specification fails to disclose any criticality of the integral design. As such, it is appropriate to rely on legal precedent as a source of supporting rationale (see MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding claim 2, Kopfler discloses the prime mover (9) includes a rotating body (52) mechanically connected to the drive output shaft (10, 70) on an axially outer side relative to a bearing (48) supporting the drive output shaft, and the housing chamber defines a rotating body chamber (chamber comprising 52) that houses the rotating body.
Regarding claim 3, Kopfler discloses the rotating body (52) is a damper or a flywheel (see paragraph [0135], wherein 52 is disclosed as a torsional vibration damper).
Regarding claim 4, Kopfler discloses the transmission casing (47) defines an adjacent chamber (chamber comprising 20) disposed side by side in the axial direction (left/right direction in Fig. 2) with respect to the housing chamber (chamber comprising 52), and the adjacent chamber houses a power transmission body (75) for transmitting power to the transmission input shaft (21).
Regarding claim 5, Kopfler discloses the drive output (10, 70) shaft includes a connection shaft (70) connecting the power transmission body (75) and the rotating body (52), and the extension portion (51) is fitted with a bearing rotatably supporting the connection shaft (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 6, Kopfler discloses a clutch cover (54) attached to the transmission casing (47) and defining a clutch chamber (chamber where 23 is provided); and a clutch (23) configured to connect and disconnect the drive output shaft (10, 70) to or from the transmission input shaft (21), and the clutch being housed in the clutch chamber, wherein the transmission casing includes a partition wall (partition wall which the lead line of 51 indicates) defining the clutch chamber with the clutch cover (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 7, Kopfler discloses a bearing (bearing supporting 21) rotatably supporting the transmission input shaft (21), wherein the bearing is supported on the partition wall (partition wall which the lead line of 51 indicates).
Claim 8 and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kopfler (US 20210331577 A1) in view of Hashimoto (US 20170219076 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Kopfler fails to disclose an actuator that is disposed in one of the transmission chamber and the clutch chamber and is driven when a pressure medium is supplied; and a block constituting at least a part of a pressure circuit for applying pressure to the actuator via a pressure medium, wherein the block is supported on the partition wall. However, Hashimoto teaches an actuator (see Fig. 13; 500) that is disposed in one of the transmission chamber (chamber of 112) and the clutch chamber and is driven when a pressure medium is supplied (see paragraph [0043], wherein 500 is disclosed as hydraulic); and a block (480) constituting at least a part of a pressure circuit for applying pressure to the actuator via the pressure medium (see paragraph [0116], wherein hydraulic pump 482 is coupled to the steering hydraulic cylinder 622, for power steering by the steering wheel 9, and to a closed loop oil path 623, coupling the hydraulic pump 521 and the hydraulic motor 522 of the hydraulic mechanical transmission 500), wherein the block is supported on the partition wall (498). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Kopfler with a an actuator and a block, as taught by Hashimoto, to provide a hydraulic mechanical transmission in that shifted driving force based on hydraulic pressure and driving force from the engine can be combined to be output, without providing a planetary gear mechanism, so that a high driving force transmission efficiency can be achieved (see paragraph [0004]); to provide a hydraulic mechanical transmission which achieves high output while also having a large capacity (see paragraph [0005]); and to provide a higher output of the transmission case which can be achieved with the high efficiency, light weight, and low cost (see paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 10, Kopfler fails to disclose the casing body is to be attached to an oil cooler for cooling oil in the transmission chamber. However, Hashimoto teaches the casing body (see Fig. 13; 112) is configured to be attached with an oil cooler (235) for cooling oil in the transmission chamber (inherent function of an oil cooler). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Kopfler with an oil cooler, as taught by Hashimoto, to regulate the temperature of the transmission to prevent overheating which can lead to damage or failure of the transmission.
Regarding claim 11, Kopfler discloses the power train (1) is mounted on a vehicle (see Fig. 1; 77) having a pair of first drive wheels (78, 79) driven by the power train and a pair of second drive wheels (88, 89), the power train further comprising a transmission gear cover (see Fig. 2; 73) fastened to the transmission casing (47) and defining the transmission chamber together with the casing body (see Fig. 2), wherein the transmission includes a transmission output shaft (45) extending in the transmission chamber (see Fig. 2). Kopfler fails to disclose the pair of second drive wheels drivable by the power train together with the pair of first drive wheels. However, Hashimoto teaches the pair of second drive wheels (see Fig. 13; 3) drivable by the power train together with the pair of first drive wheels (4). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Kopfler with a pair of second drive wheels drivable by the power train together with the pair of first drive wheels, as taught by Hashimoto, to provide the vehicle with four wheel drive which allows for superior traction and control in challenging conditions like snow, mud, sand and steep terrain. As a result of the combination the following limitations would necessarily result: the casing body (Kopfler; body of 47) has a hole (Hashimoto; hole in 17 where 30 is provided) through which a second drive wheel side output shaft (Hashimoto; 30) for transmitting power from the transmission output shaft (Kopfler; 45) to the pair of second drive wheels (Hashimoto; 3) is inserted (Hashimoto; Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 12, Kopfler discloses the power train (1) is mounted on a vehicle (see Fig. 1; 77) having a pair of first drive wheels (78, 79) driven by the power train and a pair of second drive wheels (88, 89), the power train further comprising a differential mechanism (see paragraph [0147], wherein the output transmission 6…includes a differential) configured to distribute power transmitted from a transmission output shaft (45) extending in the transmission chamber (chamber of 47) to the pair of first drive wheels, wherein the differential mechanism is housed in the casing body (see paragraph [0147], wherein the differential here, is supported on both sides inside the transmission housing part 73). Kopfler fails to disclose the pair of second drive wheels drivable by the power train together with the pair of first drive wheels. However, Hashimoto teaches the pair of second drive wheels (see Fig. 13; 3) drivable by the power train (drive train of Fig. 13) together with the pair of first drive wheels (4). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Kopfler with a pair of second drive wheels drivable by the power train together with the pair of first drive wheels, as taught by Hashimoto, to provide the vehicle with four wheel drive which allows for superior traction and control in challenging conditions like snow, mud, sand and steep terrain.
Claim 9 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kopfler (US 20210331577 A1) in view of Wang (CN 108843773 A).
Regarding claim 9, Kopfler discloses the extension portion (51, 54) has a hole (hole through 51, 54 which 10, 70 passes) through which the drive output shaft (10, 70) is inserted. Kopfler fails to disclose a first seal member that seals the prime mover side in the axial direction and a second seal member that seals the clutch chamber side in the axial direction are disposed on an inner peripheral surface defining the hole of the extension portion. However, Wang teaches a first seal member and a second seal member (see Fig. 6; 53a, 53b). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Kopfler with a first and second seal, as taught by Wang, to provide a multi-lip seal that is dustproof and prevents leakage of lubricating oil (see page 8 lines 24-28). As a result of the combination, the following limitations would necessarily result: the first seal member (Wang; 53a) that seals the prime mover side (Kopfler; left side in Fig. 2) in the axial direction (Wang; left/right direction in Fig. 2) and a second seal member (Wang; 53b) that seals the clutch chamber side (Kopfler; right side in Fig. 2) in the axial direction are disposed on an inner peripheral surface defining the hole of the extension portion (Kopfler; 51, 54).
Regarding claim 13, Kopfler discloses the power train (1) is mounted on a vehicle (see Fig. 1; 77) having a vehicle body (body of 77) supporting the power train (see Fig. 1). Kopfler fails to disclose the transmission casing includes: a first fixing portion disposed on a side surface of the casing body opposite to a side surface on which the extension portion is disposed and fixing the transmission casing to the vehicle body; and a second fixing portion disposed on the extension portion and fixing the transmission casing to the vehicle body. However, Wang teaches the transmission casing (see Fig. 1; casing) includes: a first fixing portion (see Fig. 2; fixing portion on 50) that is disposed on a side surface of the casing body opposite to a side surface on which the extension portion (30) is disposed and fixes the transmission casing to the vehicle body; and a second fixing portion (fixing portion on 30) that is disposed on the extension portion and fixes the transmission casing to the vehicle body (see Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Kopfler with first and second fixing portions, as taught by Wang, to securely attach the transmission to the vehicle to prevent excessive movement of the gearbox which could lead to damage and failure.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/08/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding Applicant’s argument that Kopfler fails to disclose “the casing body and the extension portion being integrally formed to have a non-detachable one-piece construction”, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. First, the Examiner notes MPEP 2111.01 reads “Under a broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), words of the claim must be given their plain meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification. The plain meaning of a term means the ordinary and customary meaning given to the term by those of ordinary skill in the art at the relevant time”. In this instance, the specification fails to set forth any special definition of the term “integral”, and therefore must be given its ordinary and customary meaning. Merriam-Webster defines the term integral as “formed as a unit with another part”. As such, this definition will be applied to the claim term. Second, as can be seen in Fig. 2 of Kopfler, the casing body (body of 47) and the extension portion (51) are connected near lead line 47. While an element that could be considered a bolt is in the vicinity of this connection, there is nothing in the figure or the disclosure that indicates this bolt connects the elements 47 and 51. Additionally, in the normal operation of the transmission, having non-detachable element prevents catastrophic failure of the drive train. Therefore, the casing body and the extension portion are integrally formed to have a non-detachable one-piece construction.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JOSEPH BROWN whose telephone number is (313)446-6568. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs: 8:00am - 5:00pm 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, Minnah Seoh can be reached at 571-357-2384. 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.
/JOSEPH BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights