DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after May 19, 2022, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed 02/17/26 (hereinafter Response) including claim amendments have been entered. Examiner notes that claim 13 has been amended and claims 1-12, 15-17 and 21-23 have been cancelled, while all other claims are maintained as previously presented in the application. Applicant’s amendment necessitated a new ground(s) of rejections under 35 USC § 103 (details below). Accordingly, claims 13-14, 18-20 and 24-25 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/17/2026 (‘Remarks’, pages 5-9), regarding all claim rejections under 35 USC § 102 and 103 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
On page 6 of the argument, the applicant submits that claim 13 is now amended to introduce the limitation of previously presented claim 23 (dated 08/03/2023): “the drive shaft has a motor shaft portion in a region of the drive motor and a pump shaft portion in a region of the hydraulic pump, and the motor shaft portion has a greater diameter than the pump shaft portion.” The applicant contends that an apparent thickness difference in a schematic drawing does not meet the evidentiary standard for an express structural limitation requiring that “the motor shaft portion has a greater diameter than the pump shaft portion." The Examiner agrees and – in light of the amendment, the prior art rejection previously presented under -103 is withdrawn. However, in view of further consideration and based on the teaching of Yang Shenglin and/or that which is known in the art, the argument regarding claim 23 is moot because a new ground of rejection under 35 USC § 103 over the modified Haegele, in view of Yang Shenglin (details below) does not rely on the references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4.Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 13-14, 18-20 and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haegele et al (US Pub. 20150291209 A1; hereinafter, “Haegele”) in view of Henry et al. (US 20140105759 A1; hereinafter, “Henry”), in view of Domig et al. (US 20150191195 A1; hereinafter, “Domig”) and further in view of Yang Shenglin (CN109113988 A; hereinafter, “Yang”).
Regarding claim 13, Haegele discloses: a steering system [0001, fig. 1-4) for a utility vehicle (motor vehicle; ‘Title’), comprising:
at least one steering gear (10, fig. 1; [0029]) and;
at least one steering mechanism (“steering force assistance”; fig. 1 and [0003]) for steering at least one first vehicle wheel and for steering at least one second vehicle wheel, wherein the steering gear (10) is coupled to the steering mechanism [‘abstract’ discloses: “a ball nut, which is drivingly connected to the worm by way of the row of balls, and wherein the ball nut acts as a piston of a cylinder for steering force assistance (steering mechanism); thus, at least one first vehicle wheel and for steering at least one second vehicle wheel, wherein the steering gear is coupled to the steering mechanism];
at least one hydraulic pump (“reversible pump”; [0015]) for supplying the steering gear (10) with hydraulic fluid (“oil”; [0007 discloses: “the steering system has an electric motor for driving a pump to generate pressure in a pressure medium, in particular oil, to provide steering force assistance”]); and
at least one drive motor (“electric motor”; [0007]) which is provided independently of and/or separately (via torque sensor 25, [0030]) from a traction drive of the vehicle and which is coupled to the hydraulic pump (“reversible pump”; [0007]) in order to drive the hydraulic pump (“reversible pump”; [para. 0030 discloses that the signals of the torque sensor 25 can be used for controlling an electric motor (not illustrated) so as to be able to generate therewith the necessary, for example hydraulic, pressure for steering force assistance; thus, at least one drive motor which is provided independently of and/or separately from a traction drive of the vehicle and which is coupled to the hydraulic pump.)], wherein
in a mounted state, the steering gear (10), the hydraulic pump (“reversible pump”), and the drive motor (‘electric motor’) are configured as a structural unit [shown in fig. 1 drive motor, hydraulic pump and steering gear are positioned together to constitute a structural unit].
the drive motor (“electric motor; “title”) is coupled to the hydraulic pump (“reversible pump”) directly without a clutch [ para. 0007 discloses that the steering system has an electric motor for driving a pump to generate pressure in a pressure medium, thus, the drive motor is coupled to the hydraulic pump directly without a clutch.],
the drive motor (“electric motor”) and the hydraulic pump (“reversible pump”) have at least one common drive shaft (Drive shaft A; and annotated fig. 1 below),
the steering system has at least one first shaft bearing device (“groove bearing”, annotated fig. 1 below) and at least one second shaft bearing device (axial bearing 50; fig. 1 and [0072]), via which the drive shaft (drive shaft A) is at least partly supported in the mounted state [see figs. 1-2 where at least one first shaft bearing device and at least one second shaft bearing device via which the drive shaft A is at least partly supported in the mounted state.],
the drive shaft (drive shaft A; and annotated fig. 1 below) has an axial end (fig. 1-2 ) which, in the mounted state (figs. 1-2), the second shaft bearing device (axial bearing 50; fig. 1 and [0072]) is arranged at said axial end (fig. 1) of the drive shaft (A) but fails to explicitly teach that the drive shaft protrudes from a side of the hydraulic pump facing away from the drive motor; however,
Henry in another linear pump and motor systems and methods similar to Haegele teaches that the drive shaft protrudes (fig. 4F) from a side of the hydraulic pump (245, fig. 4F) facing away from the drive motor (205, fig. 3A).
Therefore, 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 second shaft bearing device, such that the drive shaft protrudes from a side of the hydraulic pump as taught by Henry into the invention of Haegele with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to advantageously provide a bearing at the exposed end of the shaft is a conventional design measure to support the shaft’s overhung load and maintain concentric alignment of rotating components, thereby providing improved operation and reliability [para.0004 of Henry].
Haegele as modified above further discloses the second shaft bearing device (axial bearing 50; fig. 1 and [0072]) and is the needle bearing or ball bearing, but fails to explicitly teach that a hydrodynamic plain bearing; however,
Domig in another plain bearing for a steering spindle similar to the modified Haegele above teaches that the second shaft bearing device is a hydrodynamic plain bearing [para. 0032 teaches that the plain bearing has an outer ring 1 which surrounds a longitudinal center axis 4 and can be mounted in a housing part of a steering column, in order to hold the plain bearing in a stationary manner with respect to the housing part; (see fig. 1 to 4)].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace a ball bearing of Domig into invention of the modified Haegele with a plain bearing in order to advantageously reduce friction and wear under high load conditions, as such bearing are well known for their fluid-film separation and durability in rotating shaft applications. The substitution involves no unexpected results and reflects predictable use of known bearing technology.
Haegele as modified above discloses a drive shaft, drive motor and pump, but fails to explicitly teach that the drive shaft has a motor shaft portion in a region of the drive motor and a pump shaft portion in a region of the hydraulic pump, and the motor shaft portion has a greater diameter than the pump shaft portion; however,
Yang in another in another electric oil pump assembly, steering system similar to the modified Haegele teaches that the drive shaft has a motor shaft portion (250, [0059]) in a region of the drive motor (200, [0068]) and a pump shaft (130, [0058])) portion in a region of the hydraulic pump (100, [0058])), and the motor shaft portion (250) has a greater diameter than the pump shaft portion (130; [ para. 0255 teaches: “when choosing which key to create the clearance groove, the selection can be based on the diameter of the shaft. If the diameter of the oil pump shaft 130 is smaller than the diameter of the motor shaft 250 (equivalent to motor shaft portion has greater diameter than the pump shaft portion), then the first key has a clearance groove in the middle; thus, the motor shaft portion has a greater diameter than the pump shaft portion.])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Haegele to incorporate the teaching of Yang and provide a predictable engineering refinement to configure the motor shaft portion with a greater diameter than the pump shaft portion, in order to advantageously accommodate higher torque loads at the motor end while minimizing inertia and optimizing flow dynamics at the pump end. Such a dimensional tailoring is well known in shaft design and would have been readily implemented by a person of ordinary skill in the art without requiring inventive insight. Accordingly, selecting among known configurations constitutes an obvious matter of design choice where the modification yields no new or unexpected result. See MPEP § 2144.04 (citing In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553 (CCPA 1975). Thus, prior art of record in combination shows the features as recited in the claim invention. Accordingly, rejection of claim 13 is retained and sustained.
PNG
media_image1.png
596
807
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig. 1 of Haegele.
Regarding claim 14, Haegele as modified above further teaches that the steering gear is a ball-and-nut power steering gear [‘Abstract’ and para. 0005 discloses that the ball nut acts as a piston of a cylinder for steering force assistance; thus, steering gear is a ball-and-nut power steering gear; also see fig. 1.]
Regarding claim 18, Haegele as modified above further teaches that the first shaft bearing device (“groove bearing”, annotated fig. 1 above) and the second shaft bearing device (axial bearing 50; fig. 1 and [0072]) form a hybrid bearing system [shown fig. 1, groove bearing and bearings 50, 54, 55 and bearing 41 forms a hybrid bearing system].
Regarding claim 19, Haegele as modified above further teaches that in the mounted state (fig. 1), the first shaft bearing device (‘groove bearing, annotated fig. 1 above) is arranged on the drive shaft (drive shaft A, annotated fig. 1 above). Haegele as modified above teaches the drive shaft, a drive motor for driving a pump to generate pressure in a pressure medium (46 and 47, as depicted in fig. 2 where the first bearing is positioned in between), but fails to teach the arrangement where the first shaft bearing device is arranged on the drive shaft between the drive motor and the hydraulic pump; however,
Henry teaches that the first shaft bearing device (ball screw nut assembly 120, [0029]) is arranged on the drive shaft between the drive motor (205, fig. 3A) and the hydraulic pump (245, fig. 4F).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to position the first shaft bearing device on the drive shaft between the drive motor and the hydraulic pump, as taught by Henry into the invention of the modified Haegele with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to advantageously optimize an arrangement that would have been an obvious matter of design choice to provide proper radial and axial support for the common drive shaft, minimizing shaft deflection and maintaining alignment between the motor and the pump, thereby translating rotation of a motor into linear motion to provide a proper pump action [‘Abstract’ of Henry]. Locating a bearing at the motor-pump interface was a well-known mechanical practice in integrated motor-pump assemblies to ensure smooth torque transmission and reduce vibration. Therefore, it would have been obvious to implement the bearing structure of claim 19 in the same manner as shown in reference to Henry to achieve predictable results using a known technique for a known purpose.
Regarding claim 20, Haegele as modified above further teaches that the first shaft bearing device (groove bearing; annotated fig. 1 above) is configured as a double-row grooved ball bearing [shown in fig. 1, groove bearings are positioned on a double-row grooved bearing and para. 0005 discloses that ball screw for receiving a row of balls; thus, a double-row grooved ball bearing]. See annotated fig. 1 of Haegele above.
Regarding claim 24, Haegele as modified above further teaches that the drive motor is an electric motor [para. 0007 discloses that the steering system has an electric motor for driving a pump.]
Regarding claim 25, Haegele as modified above further teaches that the hydraulic pump is a bidirectional hydraulic pump [ para. 0019 discloses that the pump is a reversible pump; thus, bidirectional].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
JP 2000211386 A to Koji discloses: this vehicle is provided with a running drive HST 21 comprising a variable capacity hydraulic pump and a fixed capacity hydraulic motor, a steering HST 22 comprising a variable capacity hydraulic pump and a variable capacity hydraulic motor, and differential gears interlockingly coupled to respective motor shafts of respective hydraulic motors.
US 6398521 B1 to Yorulmazoglu discloses: drive coupler 200 is configured to rotatably couple motor shaft 22 having a first diameter, to pump shaft 42 having a second diameter wherein the first diameter is greater or lesser than the second diameter.
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 extension fee 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 NABIN KUMAR SHARMA whose telephone number is (703)756-4619. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Friday: 8:00am - 5 PM 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, Koppikar, Vivek can be reached on 571-272-5109. 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.
/NABIN KUMAR SHARMA/Examiner, Art Unit 3612
/VIVEK D KOPPIKAR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3612
May 11, 2026
Prosecution Insights